***************************************************************** 02/06/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.31 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 US: Up in flames 2 US: [EMMAS] Tenet Exposes Bush's Misleading on WMD 3 US: [smygo] No "Silver Bullet" 4 US: AJC: Bush bullied CIA in order to dupe us 5 AU SMH: CIA passes the buck on Iraq war threat 6 AU SMH: Now it's a battle for the truth 7 The Age: Iraq threat was limited, troops told - Iraq 8 AU SMH: Another inquiry but Blair holds out 9 BBC: Nuclear scandal still begs questions 10 BBC: Powell says nuclear ring broken 11 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Set to Name Iraq 12 US: Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: No imminent threat? 13 US: KR Washington Bureau: What went wrong with Iraq intelligence? 14 ThisisLondon: Ex-defence secretary blasts Blair 15 UK Independent: What we were told, what we know now and the unresolv 16 Washington Post: Bush Stands Firmly Behind His Decision to Invade Ir 17 Washington Post: In Response to Criticism, Tenet Reveals CIA Success 18 Washington Post: Tenet Defends CIA's Analysis Of Iraq as Objective, 19 Washington Post: Missed Signals On WMD? 20 Scotsman.com: 45 minutes is a long time in politics 21 US: Spectator.co.uk: The great whitewash 22 WAR.WIRE: North, South Korea agree to cooperate to resolve nuclear c 23 Korea Herald: U.S. banking on N.K. nuclear dismantlement 24 Daily Times: North, South Korea agree to cooperate 25 US: Seattle Post-Intelligencer: 'Fog' lets McNamara tell his side of 26 US: Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: House needs to tighten its ethics rule 27 US: NWI: Analysis: Is Bill Richardson a Good Fit for John Kerry? - 28 US: U.S. Newswire: World Energy Council to Hold Briefing Friday at 29 PAKISTAN NUKES - Much noise over full drums 30 IPS-English PAKISTAN: Pardon of father of N-bomb good thing, 31 NEWS24: 'SA part of nuke underworld' 32 Las Vegas SUN: Bush Names Panel to Study Iraq Intel Woes 33 Las Vegas SUN: Parties Want Pakistan Nuke Leaks Probed 34 AU SMH: Malaysia caught up in nuclear trade web 35 AU SMH: Investigators may be able to question Khan 36 Guardian Unlimited: Malaysia Is Caught in Nuclear Probe 37 The Economic Times: 'Nuke issue not internal to Pak' - 38 Washington Post: U.N. Nuclear Chief Warns of Global Black Market 39 US: yaledailynews.com: Through the Fog, 11 points on War 40 US: SF Chronicle: McNamara speaks Berkeley's language / He declares 41 Daily Times: Pakistan’s nuclear leak: Indian FM says it is not an in 42 Daily Times: Libya paid $50m for N-blueprints from Khan network 43 Daily Times: Pakistan will help UN investigate Iran 44 Daily Times: US satisfied with N-investigations, says Rashid 45 Indian Express: Pardon of Khan an internal matter - US 46 Indian Express: Pak deadlier than Osama, Saddam - US media 47 Japan Times: Pakistan and the nuclear bazaar 48 BulletinWire News: India's new toys 49 Halliburton: FG Probes Theft of Radio Active Materials NUCLEAR REACTORS 50 US: Brattleboro Reformer: State files evacuation summary 51 US: NRC: NRC to Hold Public Meeting in Connecticut on License Renewa 52 US: NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request for Decommissi 53 US: NRC: Indiana Michigan Power Company, Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plan 54 US: Deseret news: NRC will listen to some nuclear site concerns 55 BBC: British Energy warnings 'ignored' 56 US: toledoblade.com: Activist groups ask for NRC briefing on Davis-B 57 US: Toronto Star: More delays plague Pickering restart 58 US: Daily Press: Dominion to expand storage of used nuclear fuel at 59 US: Brattleboro Reformer: VY may not need temporary buildings NUCLEAR SAFETY 60 [DU-WATCH] US Soldier: "Sometimes it is a soldiers duty to tell 61 [DU-WATCH] Mossad mulled killing Vanunu 62 [DU-WATCH] Iraq: Japanese Troops Carry Dosimeters 63 US: [RADFOOD] Wegmans Cancels Irrad. Meat! 64 US: [DU-WATCH] U.S. Planned to Nuke the Moon to Terrorize 65 [du-list] DU news stories 66 US: Guardian Editorializes on Food Irradiation 67 [DU-WATCH] Dosimeters in Iraq - what kind of fools are these 68 US: [du-list] "One Half Life to Live": NL Uranium Health Article 69 [du-list] a new book on d.u.: Depleted Uranium: deadly, 70 US: [du-list] Three Minutes to Midnight: Audio and Video Now 71 [DU-WATCH] Veteran wins pensions tribunal over DU 72 [DU-WATCH] Gulf veterans hail urnaium poisoning ruling 73 [DU-WATCH] Legal case for GWS to collapse in UK/Fewer Veteran 74 [DU-WATCH] Baby is Gulf War Syndrome Victim 75 [du-list] Depleted Uranium: Deadly, Dangerous and 76 [du-list] DU in the news - 7th Feb 04 - URANIUM: CONTROVERSIES 77 [du-list] More UK Parliamentry questions on DU munitions 78 [du-list] Medact report on the Legality of DU weapons 79 EUpolitix: Nuclear safety laws delayed 80 AGI: URANIUM: CONTROVERSIES ON CORPORAL MELIS' DEATH 81 US: NBC: Weapons Lab Employees' Compensation Mess NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 82 Las Vegas SUN: Berkley worries new energy committee chair will help 83 NRC: In the Matter of Louisiana Energy Services, L.P. (National 84 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Backer in line to flex muscle 85 Las Vegas RJ: State adds transportation expert to anti-Yucca team 86 Las Vegas RJ: Yucca opponents sway lawmaker from Minnesota 87 Las Vegas SUN: Business leader warns of Yucca nuclear waste perils 88 US: Las Vegas SUN: Lawmakers welcome anti-nuke help 89 Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Cost/benefit analysis on Yucca needed 90 The Sun News: U.S. delays conversion plant work until '05 91 US: IEER: Comments on proposed uranium enrichment plant in N.M. 92 Pahrump Valley Times Barton: Lawmaker seen as pro Yucca Mountain 93 Pahrump Valley Times: Nevada adds to its YMP legal team NUCLEAR WEAPONS US DEPT. OF ENERGY 94 Salt Lake Tribune: Company seeking funding for uranium recycling pro 95 Tennessean: Oak Ridge's nuclear waste heading west 96 Rocky Mountain News: Flats cleanup firm fined 97 Knox News: Officials investigate nuke-alarm 'tampering' 98 Knox News: Research reactor at ORNL back in action 99 DenverPost.com: Flats cleanup contractor is fined 100 Paducah Sun: Find may force DOE to expand tests for beryllium - OTHER NUCLEAR 101 Google News Alert - nuclear 102 Google News Alert - nuclear 103 Google News Alert - nuclear 104 Google News Alert - nuclear 105 Google News Alert - nuclear 106 Google News Alert - nuclear ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Up in flames Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 00:06:33 -0600 (CST) http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/1887/sw188712.htm WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION Up in flames: the credibility of the whole political establishment GLEN RANGWALA is a politics lecturer at Newnham College, Cambridge. He exposed the government's February 2003 dossier as based on a student's outdated thesis. He spoke at an anti-war meeting the day the Hutton report was released. I'M CONSIGNING the Hutton report to my stock of dodgy dossiers. I want to go over the lies the government told to show that this wasn't just about one report by the BBC. The whole government case for the war on Iraq was flawed. After 11 September 2001, to get support for the war in Afghanistan, Tony Blair said in Oman, "There will be no war on Iraq unless we show there is conclusive evidence that links it with 11 September." Geoff Hoon told journalists, "This is not a prelude to a wider war. Our objectives are linked solely to the events of 11 September. There is no evidence linking Iraq to the events of 11 September." The government is now saying we've got our objectives limited to Iraq, to removing weapons of mass destruction. Tony Blair said on 3 April 2002, "We know that Saddam has stockpiles of major amounts of chemical and biological weapons." Jack Straw said, "Iraq poses a threat to the world because of its manufacture and development of weapons of mass destruction." They went into Iraq in March last year claiming to expect to find the weapons right there, waiting for them. Soldiers have been sent in with their chemical protection suits and they have found there's nothing there. So they started changing their story. Tony Blair wrote in the News of the World, "But for this military action Saddam Hussein and his sons would still be in absolute control, free to continue the butchery and repression of their people." He began justifying the war in human rights terms. Then they claim they haven't found the weapons yet, but they will find them. They sent in a group of Americans led by David Kay. For the last 12 years Kay staked his reputation on the claim that Iraq had a major stockpile of chemical and biological weapons, and was developing nuclear weapons. Kay said, "We're not going to find a smoking gun-we're going to find a smoking arsenal." Those were his words. Eight months later he resigned saying that he doesn't believe there are any weapons in Iraq. Anyone who's been to Iraq in the last couple of months will have seen the walls lined with slogans. They say, "Death to the Americans", "Americans go home". Donald Rumsfeld said, "Over a certain period of months Iraqis will have their people selected by the Iraqi people." Then they start saying if the Iraqis do get a vote they might actually choose somebody who's popular in Iraq, and that would be somebody who essentially doesn't like us. Patricia Hewitt made a big thing at the time of the conflict how this was going to be a big thing in bringing liberation for the women of Iraq. The people in power are allied with fundamentalist parties. They dominate the interim governing council that the US has installed. They brought in a decree in December annulling female rights in matters of marriage, divorce, inheritance, matters of child custody. Tony Blair said he was going to bring in the United Nations to run Iraq after the invasion. There hasn't been a single UN member of staff in Iraq in the last few months. Tony Blair said, "The oil revenues which people falsely claimed we wanted to seize should be put in a trust fund for the Iraqi people administered through the UN." That's rubbish. The US and Britain are making decisions about the Iraqi economy. They're allowing Iraq's oil revenues to be used to give massive contracts to US companies. The government's lies have been exposed. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Return to index ***************************************************************** 2 [EMMAS] Tenet Exposes Bush's Misleading on WMD Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 23:23:35 -0600 (CST) =============================== THE DAILY MIS-LEAD < http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1672570&l=17043 > =============================== TENET EXPOSES BUSH'S MISLEADING ON WMD In a stunning blow to the president's credibility, CIA Director George Tenet said this morning that intelligence "analysts never said there was an imminent threat" from Iraq before the war. His comments are consistent with various warnings sent to the White House from the intelligence community that specifically told the president his claims that Iraq definitely had chemical/biological and nuclear weapons were unsubstantiated. Tenet's comments call into question whether the Bush Administration was knowingly ignoring intelligence and misleading the country by claiming definitively that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was therefore an "imminent," "immediate," "urgent" and "mortal" threat to the American people. Though the White House has claimed it never said Iraq was an imminent threat, the record proves otherwise. When White House communications director Dan Bartlett was asked before the war whether Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat, he responded, "Of course he is." When White House spokesman Scott McClellan was asked why NATO (and thus the United States) should support Turkey's request for defensive troops, he responded, "This is about an imminent threat." When White House spokesman Ari Fleischer was asked whether the invasion of Iraq was because Iraq was an imminent threat, he responded, "Absolutely." The president also used other language aimed at misleading Americans into thinking that U.S. intelligence definitively knew Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that threatened America - even though the intelligence community told the president it had no such evidence. The president said before the war that Iraq was an "urgent threat" and a "grave threat" to "any American." In his speech informing Americans that the invasion had started, the President said Iraq "threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder." These comments were echoed by other top Administration officials. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said on September 19, 2002 that "no terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq." And Vice President Cheney called Iraq a "mortal threat," and said "there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction...to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." And Secretary of State Colin Powell, in pressing for U.N. support, said definitively that Iraq possessed "deadly weapons programs" that "are real and present dangers to the region and to the world." Visit Misleader.org for more about Bush Administration distortion. --> < http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1672570&l=17044 > =========================================================== ################################################################# " Social and economic well-being will become a reality only through the zeal, courage, the non-compromising determination of intelligent minorities, and not through the mass." Emma Goldman To SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE to the emmasdance list send email to with the message subscribe/unsubscribe emmasdance. [No subject is needed.] "If I can not dance, I want no part in your revolution." Emma Goldman ################################################################# ***************************************************************** 3 [smygo] No "Silver Bullet" Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 01:21:45 -0600 (CST) News & Views for Anarchists & Activists: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo No 'Silver Bullet' By Marsha Rosenbaum AlterNet January 28, 2004 Last week it was "WMD" all over again in the President's State of the Union message. This time the unsubstantiated claims and wrongheaded policy were aimed at America's schoolchildren in this latest effort to get them to "just say no" to illegal drugs. Citing recent declines in illegal drug use among teenagers, and couched in loving and caring rhetoric, Bush credited random drug testing with the reduction. He then proposed an additional $23 million for schools opting to use, as Drug Czar John Walters touts, this "silver bullet." Immediately following, HR 3720 was introduced in the House by Rep. John Peterson (R-5th/PA), providing grants under the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act to schools that institute random drug testing of all students. These proposals are based on shaky assumptions and political whim rather than sound research. Thoughtful investigations instead reveal that random drug testing does not deter drug use, and that it alienates students. Last year's large federally funded survey that showed declines in illegal drug use also compared schools with and without drug testing. It turned out there was no difference in illegal drug use among students in drug testing v. non-drug testing schools. Aside from imparting misinformation about the deterrent value of testing, since only 5 percent of American schools currently utilize drug testing, Bush's crediting these programs for reductions in use is putting the cart before the horse. As drug testing is currently practiced, students must be observed (by a teacher or other adult) as they urinate to be sure the sample they produce is their own. The collection of a specimen is a humiliating, invasive violation of privacy. For an adolescent (as well as most adults), this experience is especially embarrassing. Testing can have the unanticipated effect of keeping students from participating in after-school, extracurricular programs the very same activities that would fill their time during the peak teenage drug-using hours of 3-6 PM. A Tulia, Texas student summed it up when she said, "I know lots of kids who don't want to get into sports ... because they don't want to get drug tested. That's one of the reasons I'm not into any [activity]. I'm on medication, so I would always test positive, and then they would have to ask me about my medication, and I would be embarrassed. And what if I'm on my period? I would be too embarrassed." School districts across our country are in a financial crisis, with cuts further threatening the quality of education in America. The millions of dollars proposed for random drug testing could be used more wisely, having a real rather than symbolic impact on high school drug abuse. School administrators in Dublin, Ohio, for example, calculated that their $35,000 per year drug testing program was not cost-efficient. Of 1,473 students tested, at $24 each, 11 tested positive, for a total cost of $3,200 per "positive" student. They cancelled the program, and with the savings were able to hire a full-time counselor and provide prevention programs for all 3,581 students. Random drug testing may provide a false sense of security among school officials and parents who believe the program will let them know which students abuse drugs. In fact, testing will detect a tiny fraction of users, many of them without problems, and miss too many who are in trouble. If we are truly intent on helping students, we should listen to drug abuse professionals who know that detection of problems requires careful attention to signs such as truancy, erratic behavior, and falling grades. Some will argue that students need drug testing to help them say "no." But in 2003, the "State of Our Nation's Youth" survey found that, contrary to popular belief, most teens are not pressured to use drugs. The same survey found, much to the surprise of many parents (myself included), that 75 percent of teenagers actually enjoy spending time with their parents, and feel they have a good relationship with them. Indeed, it's relationships built on trust, with parents, teachers and other caring adults, that accounts for the well being of teenagers. Drug testing actually has the effect of undermining parental influence, forcing adults to say, in essence, "I don't trust you," to their teenagers. As young adults, teens need to know we expect them to learn how to take responsibility for their health. They need science-based drug education, counseling, and support. If they don't learn make wise decisions about alcohol and other drugs in high school, how will they enter the post-high school world as responsible adults? Random drug testing may seem a panacea, but it is fraught with social, emotional and financial problems. Before we leap into another program (like DARE) that uses our teenagers as guinea pigs, we should carefully examine the many repercussions, pitfalls and alternatives to random student drug testing. Marsha Rosenbaum, PhD, is a medical sociologist who directs the Safety First project of the Drug Policy Alliance in San Francisco. -- Dan Clore Now available: _The Unspeakable and Others_ http://www.wildsidepress.com/index2.htm http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1587154838/thedanclorenecro Lord Werdgliffe & Necronomicon Page: http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9879/ News & Views for Anarchists & Activists: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo "It's a political statement -- or, rather, an *anti*-political statement. The symbol for *anarchy*!" -- Batman, explaining the circle-A graffiti, in _Detective Comics_ #608 Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: smygo-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 4 AJC: Bush bullied CIA in order to dupe us [ The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 2/5/04 ] • E-mail: jbookman@ajc.com The latest line from Secretary of State Colin Powell and others is that the Iraq war was such a just cause that we would have invaded even if we had known beforehand that no weapons of mass destruction existed. To some, that might sound like a feeble effort to downplay a massive intelligence failure. I think it's more than that. I think it's the truth. In effect, the Bush administration is now admitting that WMD were never the reason for the war. They chose to invade Iraq not to protect us from anthrax or nuclear attack, but because they hoped that an invasion would inspire new respect for U.S. power and would allow us to use Iraq as a base from which to transform the entire Arab world. In the fall of 2002, however, administration officials recognized that honesty was not the best policy. Americans would never support an unprovoked war based on some grandiose ambition and dubious strategic benefit. If Bush officials wanted war, they needed to terrorize the American public into supporting it, and they seized upon the CIA's assessment of Iraqi WMD as the perfect tool for achieving that goal. But first, the intelligence agencies had to be whipped into playing along. While the CIA believed that Saddam Hussein possessed WMD, it had also concluded that his stockpiles posed little danger to us or the rest of the world. That widely held view was captured perfectly in remarks by Powell on Feb. 24, 2001: "Frankly, [sanctions] have worked," Powell told an Egyptian press conference. "[Saddam] has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors." To get its war, the administration had to transform what it knew to be a minor, contained annoyance into a threat big enough to scare the American people. The solution it hit upon was ingenious: They fabricated a link between Saddam and Osama bin Laden. Once again, though, the "realists" at the CIA posed a problem. They knew that no such link existed, and they naively thought their job was to be honest about what they knew. So, CIA Director George Tenet told Congress that it was highly unlikely that Saddam would ever give WMD to terrorists, and CIA analysts confirmed that Saddam and bin Laden were far from allies and, in fact, hated and distrusted each other. That was true, but back then, the administration was more interested in fear than truth. It began a campaign to force the CIA to toe the company line, a campaign focused in the Pentagon and Vice President Dick Cheney's office. Pressure was exerted in private, including visits by Cheney to cross-examine analysts at CIA headquarters. It took place in public, as well, as mouthpieces in the conservative press attacked the CIA as Saddam-loving apologists. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld even created a whole new intelligence office to reinterpret evidence "overlooked" by the fools at CIA. Inevitably, the agency gave in, with surrender coming in the form of a letter from Tenet that grudgingly allowed for the possibility of a bin Laden-Saddam link. That was all the administration needed. "Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam," President Bush said in his 2003 State of the Union address. "It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known." A similar sequence of events can be traced involving Iraq's nuclear program. The CIA's honest assessment was that "Iraq has probably continued at least low-level theoretical R&D associated with its nuclear program," but little more. Again, postwar analysis has confirmed the accuracy of that claim, but again, the administration didn't want accuracy. It wanted scary. It cowed the CIA and other agencies into silence, allowing Cheney, Bush and others to warn that Iraq had reconstituted its nuclear program, had sought to buy uranium, had tried to acquire ways to enrich that uranium. None of that was true, but it served its purpose. Looking back, then, the real scandal is not what the CIA got wrong. The real outrage is how much it got right, but was muzzled from telling us. Jay Bookman is the deputy editorial page editor. His column appears Thursdays and Mondays. 2004 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ***************************************************************** 5 AU SMH: CIA passes the buck on Iraq war threat - SpecialsWarOnIraq - www.smh.com.au [Sydney Morning Herald Online] By Bob Drogin and Marian Wilkinson in Washington February 7, 2004 CIA director George Tenet's insistence that his agency did not portray Iraq as an "imminent" threat puts new pressure on the White House to explain its decision to launch a pre-emptive war, and creates a potential division between the spymaster and the president. In the face of claims he and his cabinet hyped the prewar threat of the Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein, President George Bush on Thursday launched his own defence of the war. But he also made his most direct acknowledgment to date that there are problems with the administration's prewar claims that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and was working on delivery systems. "We have not yet found the stockpiles of weapons that we thought were there," Mr Bush said. However, he continued to defend the war, saying: "We had a choice - either take the word of a madman or take action to defend the American people." Despite the failure to find any WMD, Mr Bush stuck to his claim that Saddam had the "capability" to produce them. Asked if Mr Bush still had confidence in Mr Tenet, a White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, said: "Director Tenet is - the President appreciates the job he's doing, and he is in that position and we appreciate his service." Aides said Mr Tenet's speech on Thursday at Georgetown University was written in response to recent Senate testimony by David Kay, the former chief of the CIA's hunt for illicit weapons in Iraq. Dr Kay had angered senior intelligence officials when he told the panel, "We were almost all wrong" about Iraq's illicit weapons programs before the war. His testimony forced Mr Bush to establish an inquiry into the pre-war intelligence claims. In his speech, Mr Tenet sharply disputed several of Dr Kay's claims, including that 85 per cent of Iraq's illicit weapons programs had now been uncovered. Dr Kay did not back down, saying later that Mr Tenet was using a strategy to deflect criticism. Mr Tenet said foreign intelligence reports claiming Saddam was stockpiling chemical weapons and aggressively developing a nuclear weapon reinforced his thinking on the danger posed. The foreign reports, sent to him in October 2002, were allegedly based on "reliable" spies inside Saddam's inner circle but almost all their claims now appear to be false. Mr Tenet admitted a CIA review found US intelligence analysts cited an unreliable source and fabricated information when preparing estimates of Iraq's WMD. Mr Tenet said the US intelligence community was not "completely right" or "completely wrong" in its pre-war claims. But he acknowledged a series of mistakes, including "discrepancies" in intelligence about one of the CIA's most sensational claims - that Iraq had mobile biological weapons laboratories. Mr Tenet said there was no political pressure on him or the CIA before the war. "No-one told us what to say or how to say it." But he stressed he and the intelligence community had never described Iraq as "an imminent threat", even though Mr Bush continually described Saddam as a "threat" or a "growing threat". with Los Angeles Times Copyright © 2004. The Sydney Morning Herald. advertise| ***************************************************************** 6 AU SMH: Now it's a battle for the truth www.smh.com.au [Sydney Morning Herald Online] By Marion Wilkinson February 7, 2004 It is unnerving to watch the world's most powerful intelligence chief with his back to the wall. But when the CIA's director, George Tenet, stood up at Georgetown University to explain his handling of the prewar intelligence on Iraq's weapons, there was little doubt he was on the defensive and his career was on the line. "I have come here today to talk to you, and to the American people, about something important to our nation and central to our future," he told the packed auditorium. "I want to tell you about our information and how we reached our judgements." Underscoring his anxiety, the spy chief promised, "I will tell you what I think - honestly and directly." Tenet set about strenuously defending many of the flawed claims in the prewar US National Intelligence Estimate of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. The claims in that document, released in October 2002, were repeatedly exploited by President George Bush, Australia's Prime Minister, John Howard, and Britain's Tony Blair before the Iraq war. At the end of each claim, Tenet offered his "provisional bottom line" on what he now knows. In all but one case, the intelligence estimate was grossly exaggerated or plain wrong. On chemical weapons, his prewar estimate claimed "Saddam has probably stocked a few hundred metric tonnes of CW agents". Now, Tenet conceded, "we have not yet found the weapons we expected". On biological weapons, US intelligence had claimed that Baghdad "has established a large-scale, redundant and concealed BW agent production capability which includes mobile facilities". Tenet admitted: "We do not know if production took place and - just as clearly - we have not yet found biological weapons." Just hours after Tenet presented his case for the defence, his critics were scathing. "It was a mistake to try and defend every phrase," said Joe Cirincione of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, "when it was painfully obvious that most of it was completely wrong." Cirincione concluded: "I believe director Tenet has undermined his credibility with his vigorous defence today, not enhanced it." Sitting next to Cirincione was Dr David Kay, the man Tenet employed as America's chief weapons hunter after the war. Kay is now taking pot shots at Tenet's credibility, stating that not only was the prewar intelligence wrong but that the intelligence community, not the White House, is largely to blame. Last week, the hawkish Kay, famous for his attacks on the UN weapons inspectors, went before Congress and admitted, "we were almost all wrong" in the prewar estimates of Iraq's WMD. Kay brushed over the point that the UN inspectors were far more accurate in their assessments than he or US, British and Australian intelligence agencies. Now Bush has agreed to Kay's proposal for an independent inquiry into the prewar intelligence, pitting the White House and some powerful Republican players against Tenet. Kay's split with the CIA chief brings into the open a power struggle between the CIA and the White House over who will take the blame for the failure to find any WMD in Iraq. Kay says publicly any inquiry should also examine, "whether there was abuse by political leaders of the data". But so far he has blamed the intelligence failure on the analysts who he said failed to understand that Iraq was falling apart and incapable of producing large stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons, let alone reconstituting its nuclear program. Tenet's rare public address was designed to hit back at Kay but, more importantly, to defend himself and the intelligence agencies from a mounting barrage of political criticism. This week, the powerful US Senate intelligence committee circulated a draft report laying much of the blame for the failure on Tenet and the intelligence community. Significantly, the CIA chief began his defence by insisting that the intelligence analysts, "never said there was an 'imminent' threat", from Iraq's WMD, the benchmark justification for war. His remark appeared aimed at Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney who repeatedly talked about the "threat" or "growing threat" from Iraq. And while Tenet insisted that "no one told us what to say or how to say it", he also implicitly criticised Bush and Cheney, who repeatedly exaggerated the threat from Iraq's nuclear weapons program. In September before the war, Bush claimed, "The regime is seeking a nuclear bomb and with fissile material could build one within a year." Yesterday Tenet insisted the intelligence agencies told the White House that "Saddam did not have a nuclear weapon and probably would have been unable to make one until 2007 to 2009". In the deeply partisan debate over the prewar intelligence, many Democrats are defending Tenet in their attempt to pin the blame for the exaggerated threat from Iraq squarely on the White House. Senator Ted Kennedy and Senator Carl Levin are widely distributing quotes from Bush, the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, Cheney and especially the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, that dropped all qualifications in the US intelligence reports to prosecute the case against Saddam. Powell's famous address to the UN Security Council in the February before war is quoted repeatedly. "Saddam Hussein has chemical weapons and we have sources who tell us that he recently has authorised his field commanders to use them," Powell claimed in that address. A former State Department intelligence officer, Greg Thielmann, told the Herald that when Powell presented the intelligence to the UN he removed many of the caveats on it. "He basically mislabelled again and again the evidence behind the assertions we were making," said Thielmann. He repeatedly said there were "multiple human intelligence sources" for his claims but, says Thielmann, in many cases, there were significant doubts. One extraordinary admission by Tenet this week was that US intelligence analysts failed to see an in-house notice that accused a source they were using of providing information that was "unreliable" and "fabricated". Tenet also said the CIA found "discrepancies" in claims by defectors about Iraq's possession of mobile biological weapons laboratories. But most troubling was Tenet's disclosure that he was heavily influenced in his own assessment of the threat from Iraq by reports from two unnamed sources "characterised by our foreign partners as established and reliable". Those sources fed what now appears to be wild claims to the foreign intelligence agencies, which passed them on to the US. The claims included one that Iraq had "mobile launchers with chemical weapons which would be fired at enemy forces and Israel". The reports arrived conveniently on Tenet's desk in October 2002, just as the White House was making the case for war. Which countries supplied them and who were the sources Tenet does not say, even though he admits the information changed his thinking on Iraq. These reports and much of the false information that came from Iraqi defectors will be examined by the inquiry. But former intelligence officers like Thielmann refuse to buy the line that the intelligence failure was the sole responsibility of the intelligence community. Thielmann points out that even after the UN inspectors went back to Iraq before the war and exposed much of the intelligence as false, no one in the White House wanted the intelligence reviewed. "The White House didn't care," said Thielmann. "They weren't trying to find out how dangerous Iraq's weapons programs were, or what the status of the WMD was. They were simply looking for arguments to go to war." Copyright © 2004. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 7 The Age: Iraq threat was limited, troops told - Iraq - www.theage.com.au By Lindsay Murdoch February 7, 2004 Australian troops fighting in Iraq were told in an official briefing days before entering the country that Saddam Hussein did not have the capability to launch weapons of mass destruction against its neighbours. Roger Hill, Australia's most experienced weapons inspector, yesterday told The Age that Iraq had possessed the remnants of weapons of mass destruction but its ability to use them on the battlefield was "almost zero". "There is no question Iraq possessed materials, documents and possibly products," Mr Hill said. "But it did not have the ability to conduct attacks on its near or regional neighbours," he said. "I told our troops that. I also told people in the other coalition forces. But I was a lone voice." In March last year, shortly before the war, Mr Howard told Parliament: "We are determined to join other countries to deprive Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction, its chemical and biological weapons, which even in minute quantities are capable of causing death and destruction on a mammoth scale." Mr Hill said Australia should have had a closer look at the intelligence information it had received before committing troops to the US-led invasion. Asked if the Australian Government was aware at the time of his assessment of Iraq's capabilities, Mr Hill said: "If they had asked me, I would have told them." Mr Hill, who is widely acknowledged as Australia's top expert on Saddam's weapons programs, said that during the eight years he spent travelling to Iraq as a senior UN weapons inspector he was asked only once to brief officials in Canberra about the threat posed by Saddam. The Australian Defence Force sent him to the Middle East to advise the 100-strong squadron of Perth-based SAS soldiers who conducted covert operations inside Iraq during the first weeks of the war. Mr Hill, a career army officer, had served in the SAS and led the last UN inspection team that went to Iraq in November 1998. But none of Canberra's intelligence agencies asked for his assessment of the Iraq threat before the Government made its decision to send the troops. Prime Minister John Howard yesterday left open the question of whether Australia would follow the US and Britain and have its own independent inquiry into the intelligence used to determine whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Mr Hill was not asked to testify before a seven-member parliamentary committee that was set up last year to look into Australia's intelligence services. That committee's report is due to be released later this month. Roger Hill in Jakarta Mr Hill said most of Iraq's stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons were destroyed or hidden before the war. But he said that Saddam did not have the missile systems to deliver them anyway. "It is all very well having weapons of mass destruction, like a chemical round, but you still have to have the ability to deliver them," Mr Hill said. "They had not been able to bring the systems out of storage, to practise with them or to transport them," he said. "None of these sorts of things were functioning." Mr Hill said the Government would be negligent if it did not hold an independent inquiry into the intelligence it received before the war, focusing on the quality of the information and obtaining a better understanding of the sources of information. "Was there a conspiracy or was it just poor assessment? That is the issue," Mr Hill said. "I am still not sure." Mr Hill said he did not believe there was any particular flaw in Australia's intelligence agencies, but that "it appears we got it wrong". He added: "But that is at this stage." Mr Howard said this week that information that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction was one of the principal justifications for sending Australian troops to war. Only days before the invasion he said in a televised speech that the prospect Saddam could arm terrorists with weapons of mass destruction was a "direct, undeniable and lethal threat to Australia and its people". Mr Howard had told Parliament several weeks earlier the Government had information that Iraq possessed both chemical and biological weapons and had the capacity to build a nuclear arsenal. Mr Hill said after the first war in the Gulf Saddam set up a committee that arranged material on weapons of mass destruction to be hidden and ordered that no records be kept. "They will be digging up stuff for years to come. I guarantee it." Mr Hill said the SAS soldiers he briefed days before they went to war would not have slept easier because of what he told them. "When I say the Iraqis didn't have enough weapons of mass destruction to threaten any of their neighbours, that is true," Mr Hill said. "But did they have enough to kill soldiers? Yes," he said. The Australians played a pivotal role in the first strike on Iraq, launching a secret raid on Scud missile sites in western Iraq a day before US President George Bush declared the invasion had begun. The missiles had the capability to reach Israel but it is not known if they were able to be fired at the time. Copyright © 2004. The Age Company ***************************************************************** 8 AU SMH: Another inquiry but Blair holds out www.smh.com.au [Sydney Morning Herald Online] February 7, 2004 Many see the Butler investigation as overstatement in itself, writes Peter Fray in London. The British Government is now facing its fourth inquiry in less than a year into its decision to join the invasion of Iraq. But there is little chance the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, will admit he was wrong to help George Bush oust Saddam Hussein, despite the failure to find weapons of mass destruction. If anything, Blair's evangelical zeal about the rightness of the Iraq cause has been re-energised by the recent Hutton report which cleared Number 10 of "sexing up" the September 2002 dossier used to justify the invasion. And he appears undaunted by the cross-party Butler inquiry, announced this week, into the accuracy of the intelligence data behind it. In front of his own divided backbench, he told Parliament this week: "I am not ashamed of taking the decision to go to war. Ridding the world of Saddam Hussein has made the world a safer place." After months of insisting the Iraq Survey Group should be allowed to do its work, Blair, like his US and Australian counterparts, has been forced to concede that actual biological and chemical weapons may never be found. "It may well be we overestimated WMD capabilities in some quarters," he said. "I accept they [the ISG] have not found what I and many others confidently expected they would - actual weapons ready for immediate use." But, unlike the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, he's made it clear he would have supported the war even in their absence; it was enough that Saddam continually defied the UN Security Council - and had the intent of building WMD. The Butler investigation, which follows Hutton and two parliamentary committee inquiries into aspects of the Iraq decision, will not deal directly with the political decision to go to war. Downing Street made sure of that in negotiations with other parties before the inquiry's establishment. MPs from all parties remain doubtful that Lord Butler, a former cabinet secretary to Thatcher, Major and the early Blair governments, will get to the bottom of how and why intelligence apparently overstated the Iraqi threat. Some Labour backbenchers, citing Butler as an establishment figure and a career bureaucrat, believe the inquiry will be ineffective. But it may flush out the true level of disquiet among Britain's spies and intelligence analysts over Iraq data. Already, the former head of the Defence Intelligence Staff's nuclear, chemical and biological branch, Brian Jones, has claimed that Blair's war dossier was "misleading" . He suggested it was produced only after expert analysts were "overruled" by the heads of the British security agencies MI5, MI6 and the Joint Intelligence Committee. "There was no indication that the Iraqi military had practised the use of CW [chemical weapons] or BW [biological weapons] for more than a decade," he wrote in The Independent newspaper. Jones, who retired from the Ministry of Defence last year, is unlikely to be joined by too many other would-be whistleblowers, especially given the experience of David Kelly, a former colleague of Jones whose suicide prompted the Hutton inquiry. But the Butler inquiry may prove a perfect forum for airing concerns in private. As a former senior military analyst, who declined to be named, told the Herald, many intelligence staff at the Ministry of Defence were feeling "depressed, anxious and miserable" by the prospect of the inquiry blaming them for the failure to find weapons in Iraq. "They feel they are being taken for a ride, a big ride by Blair," the source said. "I am 100 per cent convinced that within the public service, they got it [the intelligence assessment] absolutely right. But something very strange happened to it on the way [to the dossier]." By week's end, Blair gave renewed hope to the Opposition that despite Butler not reporting for several months, there is plenty of political life left in the debate over weapons, especially the contentious issue of whether Saddam had chemical or biological weapons that were capable of being deployed within 45 minutes. In Parliament this week, he conceded that when he sought and won Commons approval for the invasion of Iraq, he was unaware the dossier was referring only to battlefield weapons, not long-range missiles, when it came to potential deployment of WMD. The dossier itself was vague on the point, stating only that the Iraqi military were able to "deploy chemical or biological weapons within 45 minutes of an order to do so". Unhelpfully for Blair, his former foreign secretary, Robin Cook, who resigned over the war, recalled it was clear to him at the time of the Commons vote because he had asked the intelligence chiefs for clarification. The Opposition leader, Michael Howard, called for Blair's resignation for dereliction of duty. But his call was dismissed, and No. 10 Downing Street noted that Blair had not drawn attention to the 45-minute claim in his call to arms. But claims that Saddam could send missiles packed with WMD against Western targets such as Cyprus certainly played a prominent role in the reporting of the September 2002 dossier, including in the Herald. Downing Street's line is in essence that it was the journalists, not the Government, who overstated the case: the PM had never said Iraq could deliver ballistic missiles stuffed with WMD within 45 minutes. But it appears it was happy to let the media do exactly that. Blair's admission will only reinforce the widely held belief that Britain - and the rest of the world - went to war on a dodgy basis or, at the very least, after being sold half-truths. But such public opinions are not going to move Blair from his central belief that it was right to get rid of Saddam. The question yet to be answered is, will they be strong enough to get rid of him. Copyright © 2004. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 9 BBC: Nuclear scandal still begs questions Last Updated: Thursday, 5 February, 2004 By Zaffar Abbas BBC Islamabad correspondent If Pakistan was hoping that, after investigations into proliferation allegations and a public admission by its top scientist of leaking nuclear information abroad, the controversy would go away, it has certainly not happened. [Abdul Qadeer Khan] Khan was considered the father of Pakistan's nuclear programme Questions are still being asked at home and abroad about the level of proliferation and, more importantly, about who else might have been involved in transferring nuclear know-how to countries like Iran, Libya and North Korea. Serious doubts have been raised about the government's claim that a handful of scientists acted on their own, without the involvement of the civilian and military establishment. The widely-held view is that because of the controlled nature of the Pakistani establishment, it would not have been possible for individuals to transfer nuclear technology to a third country. For the first time, President Pervez Musharraf has given some details of Pakistan's covert nuclear weapons programme to substantiate the government's claim that top scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan acted on his own to pass details to other countries. He says Mr Khan, as sole authority for running the clandestine operation to illegally acquire nuclear technology and know-how for Pakistan in the past, took advantage of his position to sell some of the information to other countries. Blue-eyed boy If President Musharraf's explanation is to be believed, it all happened when Pakistan was covertly developing its nuclear weapons programme; and only a handful of people were directly involved to ensure a high level of secrecy. According to him, when Pakistan embarked on its nuclear weapons programme in 1976, it was a closely guarded secret between Dr Khan and then Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. STREET REACTION [Syed Kosar Ahmed] src=] The military is definitely involved. One can't clap with one hand Syed Kosar Ahmed, Peshawar More views from Pakistanis Foreign press comment With the change of government, military ruler General Zia-ul-Haq and Dr Khan shared the information for several years, and the civilian head of state became the third player in the late 1980s. Other than these three, no-one - including successive prime ministers - was informed about the exact nature of the weapons programme until it became overt in 1998 when Pakistan carried out its first nuclear tests. It was during this period that Mr Khan was considered the blue-eyed boy of the Pakistani establishment. He was given authority to develop contacts with Europe's underworld that was illegally dealing in nuclear technology; creating a team of scientists and officials who were assigned to this clandestine operation. For years they worked to bring to Pakistan technology and know-how to establish a uranium enrichment facility outside Islamabad, the Khan Research Laboratories. Monetary benefits Some of these people also developed contacts with countries like Iran, Libya and North Korea, who were also seeking nuclear weapons. In return for huge monetary benefits, they provided them with information that was only meant for Pakistan. Dr Khan's appearance on TV admit responsibility for leaking nuclear information has shattered those who saw him as a national hero While admitting that there may have been intelligence lapses, President Musharraf believes that because of Mr Khan's stature it was not possible for anyone to doubt his intentions. "During this period it was not difficult for someone like him to carry the centrifuge design with him," he said. He says there was no physical transfer of hardware, only designs. President Musharraf says the only motivation for these scientists was money. Two ex-army chiefs have also been questioned. General Aslam Beg, who was the army chief during the most crucial period of 1988-92, and General Jehangir Karamat, who headed the military in the mid-1990s, were asked about their involvement. President Musharraf says they have been cleared by the investigators. Demoralising effect So if President Musharraf is to be believed, these few scientists deceived the Pakistani establishment, particularly the powerful military and its intelligence agencies. They made hundreds of millions of dollars by selling nuclear know-how to three different states. Some analysts believe a more thorough investigation is required to establish that only 11 scientists and officials were involved. [Pakistani nuclear-capable missiles] Khan's Kahuta plant is Pakistan's main nuclear weapons laboratory The proliferation controversy has shocked the country. Its demoralising effect on most Pakistanis can be compared to the country's defeat in the 1971 war with India, which led to the creation of Bangladesh. Dr Khan's admission of responsibility has virtually shattered those who regarded him as a national hero. President Musharraf's explanation that national heroes cannot be protected when the country's own prestige is at stake has gone some way to satisfying people at home. However, it may not be enough to satisfy the international community, particularly the international atomic agency IAEA. Perhaps at some stage Islamabad will have to share its findings with the international community to convince the world that the Pakistani establishment was neither involved in the past, nor will ever share its nuclear knowledge with any other country. ***************************************************************** 10 BBC: Powell says nuclear ring broken Last Updated: Friday, 6 February, 2004 [Abdul Qadeer Khan meeting President Musharraf] The presidential pardon had huge public support The world's biggest network in nuclear proliferation has been broken with the exposure of a top Pakistani scientist, the US secretary of state has said. Colin Powell said he would be speaking to the Pakistani president to ensure no remnants of the network were left. On Wednesday, Abdul Qadeer Khan - the man who gave Pakistan the nuclear bomb - publicly confessed leaking nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea. A day later, Pakistan's "national hero" was pardoned by the Pakistani leader. It (the pardon) sounds rath odd if you are going to deal firmly with that issue, but he obviously is the president of the country, he has to manage his own national situation Kofi Annan UN Secretary General "The biggest (proliferator) is now gone and so we don't have to worry about proliferation from Mr AQ Khan or his network. And this is a success for the international community," Mr Powell told reporters in New York. He said he would talk to President Pervez Musharraf by telephone over the weekend, during which he would also raise the issue of the pardon. United Nations Secretary General, Kofi Annan, described the pardon as "odd", but said the important thing was the assurances Mr Musharraf had given about fighting proliferation. "Obviously it is a very difficult situation that he has to deal with - he is dealing with a national hero," Mr Annan told reporters. Co-operation plea Mr Annan called on governments to exchange information to stop the black market in nuclear technology. He endorsed comments by the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohammed ElBaradei, who said on Thursday that the case of Dr Khan, was the tip of the iceberg. But while Pakistan has said it will co-operate with the UN watchdog, Mr Musharraf has said he would not allow an inspection of Pakistan's nuclear programme. The BBC's Jon Leyne in Washington says there is scepticism that Dr Khan acted on his own and there will be private pressure from the US for its ally to provide all the facts. On Friday, a senior Pakistani official involved with the investigation into the scandal told AFP news agency that Dr Khan could spend the rest of his life under virtual house arrest. "It is a conditional pardon and Khan knows he would be jailed if he tries to proliferate again in any way," the official said. More than 15 people from the nuclear enrichment facility that Dr Khan used to run, Khan Research Laboratories, are still being questioned. ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Set to Name Iraq Friday February 6, 2004 1:16 PM By KEN GUGGENHEIM Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush is expected to name a commission today to examine intelligence failures involving Iraq. Democrats have been clamoring to find out whether the White House pressured analysts or manipulated intelligence, but it's not clear whether the commission will address those areas. On Thursday, CIA Director George Tenet says intelligence analysts gave the White House an objective view of the threat posed by Iraq. But Tenet didn't answer a question emerging as a top campaign issue: Did the Bush administration accurately describe that intelligence in making the case for war? Tenet offered his defense of prewar intelligence in a speech at Georgetown University on Thursday. Administration officials say that in addition to assessing how well U.S. intelligence did in determining the existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, the commission also will look at the bigger picture of fighting terrorism and monitoring U.S. adversaries, such as those in Iran and North Korea. The White House has yet to reveal the names of any of the nine commission members, but an administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., would be one. David Kay, the former CIA adviser for the Iraqi weapons search, said Thursday that the commission should look into whether political leaders manipulated intelligence data. ``I think that is an important question that needs to be understood,'' he said at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Kay repeated statements made last week that he doesn't believe analysts were pressured to make the case for war. It was Kay's criticism of prewar intelligence since resigning two weeks ago that built momentum for an independent commission. Kay said intelligence agencies wrongly concluded that Iraq had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons because they had too little human intelligence and overanalyzed the data in hand. But Tenet said the intelligence was mostly on target, especially as it applied to Iraq's nuclear, missile and unmanned aerial vehicle programs. He said the analyses were reasonable given the information available to the United States and other nations. ``Based on an assessment of the data we collected over the past 10 years, it would have been difficult for analysts to come to any different conclusions than the ones reached in October of 2002,'' when a comprehensive intelligence estimate was prepared. He made clear that analysts differed on important aspects of Saddam Hussein's chemical, biological and nuclear programs and spelled out those disputes in the intelligence estimate. Analysts ``never said there was an imminent threat,'' Tenet said. ``Rather, they painted an objective assessment for our policy makers of a brutal dictator who was continuing his efforts to deceive and build programs that might constantly surprise us and threaten our interests.'' Agreeing with Kay, Tenet said, ``No one told us what to say or how to say it.'' He also didn't rule out that weapons still could be found. Speaking in Charleston, S.C., Bush defended the decision to go to war. ``Knowing what I knew then and knowing what I know today, America did the right thing in Iraq,'' the president said. But Democratic presidential candidates said Tenet's speech showed that Bush misled Americans. Democratic front-runner Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts said Bush and other officials ``were playing politics with our national security.'' Retired Gen. Wesley Clark said, ``The question now is: What did (Bush) know at the time?'' Before the war, Bush and his senior advisers made clear they viewed the threat from Saddam as urgent. On Sept. 13, 2002, Bush said of Saddam, ``He's a threat we must deal with as quickly as possible.'' The next month, he said ``the danger is already significant and it only grows worse with time.'' White House aides have pointed out that Bush, while he cited the urgency of stopping Saddam, never called the threat ``imminent.'' The question of whether intelligence was manipulated has deeply divided the Senate Intelligence Committee, which is completing its own inquiry. Committee members reviewed a classified draft report Thursday that is believed to be critical of U.S. intelligence agencies' work. But Democrats have said the inquiry was too narrow because it didn't examine how the administration used the intelligence. Both parties have accused each other of trying to use the investigation for political purposes. Sen. Pat Roberts, the committee chairman, said he hoped the report would be a catalyst for intelligence reforms. ``I don't think this is the time to be really beating the intelligence community about the head and shoulders for what appears to be'' a global intelligence failure, said Roberts, R-Kan. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 Guardian Newspapers Limited ***************************************************************** 12 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: No imminent threat? Today: February 06, 2004 at 9:04:03 PST LAS VEGAS SUN The White House and the Central Intelligence Agency have come under attack because U.S. troops haven't found any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, weapons that were the principal reason for the U.S. invasion. Last week even the former U.S. chief weapons inspector in Iraq said there should be an independent investigation to probe the intelligence failures that led to the assumption that Saddam Hussein had these weapons. On Thursday CIA Director George Tenet, while defending his agency's performance, maintained that U.S. analysts never claimed before the war that Iraq posed an imminent threat. Now he tells us. This is not what we were hearing from the White House a year ago and thereafter in the lead up to the war with Iraq. Secretary of State Colin Powell, in his presentation last February to the U.N. Security Council, was unflinching in his certitude that Iraq had amassed a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. "My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources. These are not assertions. What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence," Powell said. "The gravity of this moment is matched by the gravity of the threat that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction pose to the world." Don't forget that Tenet was sitting directly behind Powell as he spoke, a none-too-subtle statement that the intelligence community backed Powell's declarations. Meanwhile, today the president is supposed to appoint members to a commission to investigate the intelligence failures in Iraq. It's encouraging that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who in the past has shown that he isn't afraid to criticize Bush, is expected to be named to the commission. But not many people have McCain's backbone, which is one reason why Bush shouldn't get to name all the commission's members and why Congress should make some of the appointments. If this commission is to have credibility with an increasingly skeptical public, it needs to be truly independent, and having members appointed only by the president will sow doubts about just how tough it will be on the administration. ***************************************************************** 13 KR Washington Bureau: What went wrong with Iraq intelligence? | 02/06/2004 | [krwashington.com - The krwashington home page] By Warren P. Strobel and Jonathan S. Landay Knight Ridder Newspapers WASHINGTON - The Bush administration's case that Iraq had chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs before the U.S. invasion weakened further this week, with new revelations from CIA Director George Tenet about problems with U.S. intelligence. Increasingly, the question from here on out will be: What went wrong and who's to blame? That's the focus of the new independent commission that President Bush named Friday. It's also the subject of a round of finger-pointing that pits the CIA against the White House, intelligence professionals against their political masters and Republicans against Democrats. It's a question that Bush will face when he makes an unusual solo appearance Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." There's no single answer, according to current and former intelligence officials, the administration's own public statements and a review of the publicly available documents on Iraq's weapons programs. In what now appears to have been a cascade of errors, U.S. intelligence overestimated Iraq's weapons progress in several key areas. That was in part because analysts, mindful of Iraq's long history of deception, had to assume the worst, according to Tenet and others. Compounding the damage, top officials including Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and others exaggerated what the available intelligence said about Iraq's nuclear, chemical, biological and missile programs and left out important caveats. And the process was warped by the Pentagon's creation of an alternate intelligence channel that fed questionable data on Iraq's weapons and links to the al-Qaida terrorist network into the system. The White House's charges that Saddam Hussein's regime had links to al-Qaida are missing entirely from the current debate, although they were key to the administration's argument for war. Tenet never mentioned them in his Thursday speech at Georgetown University in which he defended the CIA, which has argued consistently that there's no compelling evidence of anything more than occasional contacts between Iraq and al-Qaida. Some of the questionable material, which came largely from Iraqi defectors, some of whom were considered unreliable by intelligence professionals, was weeded out. But not all. Each of these factors was to blame, according to Walter P. "Pat" Lang, a former top official from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency and critic of the administration's handling of Iraq. "The intelligence community, generally, screwed up," he said. Lang blames administration hawks who favored overthrowing Saddam and who he said "acted out of conviction," and he blames intelligence agencies, which he said were weak in standing up to political pressure. The administration, former chief weapons inspector David Kay and Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, have all denied that intelligence analysts were subjected to political pressure. Here's a summary of the administration's prewar claims on Iraq's weapons and what's now known: -Nuclear weapons: Bush, Cheney and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice raised the specter of Saddam working feverishly to get the bomb. The vice president may have gone the furthest, saying in an August 2002 speech that "many of us are convinced that Saddam will acquire nuclear weapons fairly soon." But a major intelligence report, called a National Intelligence Estimate, or NIE, two months later said Iraq could make a nuclear bomb "within several months to a year" only if it acquired plutonium or uranium from abroad. Without that huge assist, it would take until 2007 to 2009, declassified portions of the document said. Tenet said Thursday that the CIA now doesn't know whether Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, "but we may have overestimated the progress Saddam was making." Several key pieces of evidence in the nuclear file have proved false, such as administration claims that Saddam was seeking uranium in Africa, or highly questionable, such as claims that Iraq was acquiring aluminum tubes to make centrifuges to purify uranium for nuclear arms. Cheney, in the August 2002 speech, said some of the information on Iraq's nuclear program came from Iraqi defectors. -Unmanned aerial vehicles: In an October 2002 speech, Bush said the United States had discovered that Iraq "has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We're concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States." That statement came from the NIE. But the document adds an important caveat that Bush never mentioned: The Air Force, the leading expert on such vehicles, disagreed that Iraq was developing the drones "primarily" for delivering chemical or biological weapons. Another key piece of evidence has since been proved false: that the Iraqis were trying to acquire mapping software so they could target the United States. Tenet, in his speech, said the U.S. intelligence community's record on UAVs was mixed. It detected prohibited and undeclared Iraqi programs, he said, "but the jury is still out on whether Iraq intended to use its newer, smaller unmanned aerial vehicle to deliver biological weapons." -Biological weapons: One of the most dramatic parts of Secretary of State Colin Powell's Feb. 5, 2003, presentation to the U.N. Security Council on the Iraq threat was his detailed description of mobile facilities for producing and researching germ weapons. Powell said there were three human sources who described the mobile production labs and a fourth who revealed the mobile research facilities. A senior State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the reference to the research labs was the only claim in Powell's speech based on a single type of information: human sources, or spies. But, in a snafu hinted at by Tenet, the source of the information on the labs was believed to have fabricated information and an alert stating this went unnoticed. The source was a defector provided by the Iraqi National Congress, an Iraqi exile group favored by hard-liners in the Pentagon and the vice president's office. In his speech, Tenet said questions also have been raised about the veracity of sources who described Iraq's alleged biological weapons production facilities. Intelligence agencies now disagree over whether two trailers found in Iraq after the war were intended for making biological weapons - the CIA's original assessment - or hydrogen for military balloons. State Department and Defense Intelligence Agency experts favor the latter explanation. -Chemical weapons: Powell, Cheney, Bush and numerous other officials either said or suggested before the war that Iraq had large stocks of chemical weapons, a claim based in part on Saddam's failure to account for known caches of ingredients used to make poison gas. The NIE said Iraq probably had renewed production of mustard gas, sarin and other deadly substances, and it estimated that Saddam has stockpiled between 100 and 500 metric tons of chemical weapons. But a September 2002 report by the Defense Intelligence Agency, while agreeing that Iraq probably had a covert chemical weapons program, said there was "no reliable information" about whether Iraq was producing or stockpiling the weapons. Tenet indicated that a key moment came when CIA analysts saw "what they believed to be" satellite photos of material being moved from Iraqi ammunition sites. The photos appeared to be evidence of revived chemical weapons production. But the reasons for the movements have never been determined. ***************************************************************** 14 ThisisLondon: Ex-defence secretary blasts Blair By Patrick Hennessy and James Langton, Evening Standard 6 February 2004 Tony Blair came under further attack today over his claim that he did not know key facts about Iraqi weapons on the eve of sending British troops into battle. A former Tory defence secretary joined Labour MPs and Liberal Democrats as pressure mounted on the Prime Minister for a full explanation of what he knew. The row refused to die down over Mr Blair's startling admission that he was not aware of intelligence material central to the Government's case for war. The Government's September 2002 dossier detailing the threat posed by Iraqi weapons claimed Saddam had WMD which could be fired in 45 minutes. Crucially, Mr Blair says he did not know this referred only to battlefield weapons, not long-range missiles, even though other members of his Cabinet were well aware of the difference. Former Tory defence secretary Lord King told Radio 4's Today programme that Mr Blair had claimed it was impossible to brief the British public fully on intelligence matters in the dossier. This made it all the more "extraordinary" that he now claimed he was not aware of the key intelligence material himself, the peer added. "The Prime Minister made a point in the dossier," said Lord King. "He said as Prime Minister he had made it his duty to be briefed in detail, so that they could set out the facts in that dossier. "For a decision of this importance... I do find it quite extraordinary." Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy said the whole matter had "an air of incredibility" about it. Former Labour defence minister Doug Henderson, an opponent of the war, said: "If he didn't know about it, then he should have known about it ." Labour's Donald Anderson, chairman of the all-party foreign affairs select committee, criticised the September dossier for not spelling out which weapons the 45-minute claim referred to. But he said exaggerated significance had been attached to the issue. He said: "To put this in some perspective, clearly it was mentioned four times in the dossier. But then the whole issue went to sleep. "It did not figure in the debate in March, and I can't imagine that any of my colleagues who voted two to one in favour of the conflict were influenced by an Evening Standard headline and a Daily Express headline in the September of the previous year." On the day the dossier was published, the Standard's front-page headline read: "45 minutes from attack." The story highlighted the 45-minute claim as a key fact in the dossier. The point was also headlined in other newspapers the following day. The Government did nothing to correct what it now claims was a misleading impression - that the 45-minute claim referred to long-range missiles which could attack British interests. Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon has claimed he did not see headlines at the time of the dossier because he was on a visit to Eastern Europe, although his department monitors the entire media's output on defence issues. Meanwhile, Mr Blair faced fresh criticism over his inquiry into the run-up to the Iraq war after President George Bush chose one of his toughest critics to head the US's investigation. Mr Bush was set to appoint Senator John McCain to the job in a bid by the White House to head off claims that the probe will be little more than a whitewash. By contrast Mr Blair has chosen former Cabinet secretary Lord Butler to head his investigation - leading to claims that such a leading establishment figure will not inspire public confidence in the probe. More on the WMD row " Fierce critic leads US inquiry " Inquest to resolve Kelly suicide riddle " Inquest to resolve Kelly 'suicide riddle' ***************************************************************** 15 UK Independent: What we were told, what we know now and the unresolved issues By Paul Waugh, Deputy Political Editor 06 February 2004 Michael Howard, the Tory leader,called yesterday for Tony Blair to resign after the Prime Minister admitted that he did not know the Government's claim that Saddam Hussein could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes referred simply to battlefield munitions. As Mr Howard labelled Mr Blair's failure to ask key questions about the intelligence "a gross dereliction of duty", Downing Street revealed that Mr Blair did not know the truth until the summer, after the military conflict. Geoff Hoon, the Secretary of State for Defence, said he knew, and said the reason he had not told the Prime Minister was that there was no point of controversy about it. The 45-minute claim appeared in the September 2002 dossier on Iraq's capabilities and inferred that the chemical and biological weapons could be delivered by long-range missiles. It prompted newspaper headlines suggesting British interests in Cyprus were at risk. The Government did nothing to correct that impression. Brian Jones, the former leading expert on WMD at the Ministry of Defence, said this week that there was widespread disquiet in the intelligence community over the representation of the claim. The controversy, which the Government hoped had been lanced after Lord Hutton exonerated it last week, is gathering pace. WHAT WE WERE TOLD The Government's dossier, published in September 2002, cited the 45-minute claim no fewer than four times. It was deemed so important to Tony Blair's case that it was highlighted in his own foreword, in the executive summary and twice in the body of the text. The wording varied slightly, but the strongest formulation was in the body of the text: "The Iraqi military are able to deploy these weapons within 45 minutes of an order to do so." Mr Blair's own use of the phrase came almost immediately after claims about the threat posed by Saddam's ballistic missile programme. He made it clear it was the basis for his belief that Iraq was a "serious and current threat". Mr Blair followed up with a speech to Parliament on the same day in which he again underlined the 45-minute claim. The dossier concludes, he said, "that Saddam ... has existing and active military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons which could be activated within 45 minutes". That afternoon, the Evening Standard's headline shouted "45 MINUTES FROM ATTACK", with a photo of ballistic missiles that could be used to attack long-range targets. The next day, The Sun had the headline "45 MINUTES FROM DOOM". The story began: "British servicemen and tourists in Cyprus could be annihilated by germ warfare missiles launched by Iraq, it was revealed yesterday. They could thud into the Mediterranean island within 45 MINUTES". WHAT WE KNOW NOW MI6 first received a so-called CX report, containing raw intelligence, on 29 August. Thanks to Andrew Gilligan's report in May last year, we learned that the intelligence came in late and was single-sourced. The Hutton inquiry discovered that David Kelly had been the source for both of these claims. It later emerged that the information had been relayed by an Iraqi general to an exiled Iraqi opposition activist described as "reliable" by MI6. The raw intelligence was translated into a formal assessment by the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) on 5 September which was then revised on 9 September. "Intelligence indicates that chemical and biological munitions could be with military units and ready for firing within 20-45 minutes," the final assessment read. The Intelligence and Security Committee, the only parliamentary body to have looked at the raw intelligence and the assessments, concluded last year that the wording "did not precisely reflect the intelligence provided" by MI6. "The JIC did not know precisely which munitions could be deployed from where to where and the context of the intelligence was not included ... this omission was then reflected in the 24 September dossier." Worse still, the MPs discovered that the claim was assessed by some in MI6 to refer to short-range munitions and not long-range missiles. The report said: "The claim ... was always likely to attract attention because it was arresting detail that the public had not seen before. As the 45-minutes claim was new ... the context of the intelligence and any assessment needed to be explained." The battlefield context "should have been highlighted in the dossier". The Hutton inquiry also shed more light on the claim. We learned that Brian Jones, the head of the nuclear, biological and chemical branch of the MoD's Defence Intelligence Staff, had formally complained to his bosses that he and his staff could not accept its inclusion, as worded, in the dossier. The Government obviously wanted the dossier to make waves. We learnt that Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair's chief of staff, sent an e-mail to Alastair Campbell, No 10's former director of communications, asking "What will the headline be in the Standard? ... What do we want it to be?" We also discovered that Mr Campbell had been responsible for the claim in the body of the text being strengthened. An early draft of the dossier stated that the Iraqi military "may be able" to deploy the weapons in 45 minutes. Following an e-mail from Mr Campbell to John Scarlett, the chairman of the JIC, the sentence was changed to "are able" to deploy. Mr Blair, Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, and a raft of ministers said yesterday that the claim was not important. But the headlines in two of Britain's most influential papers ensured the public had a stark impression of the dossier's 45-minutes point. Furthermore, it now appears that the reason Mr Blair subsequently dropped the claim on the eve of war was because he was told that MI6 suggested it referred to battlefield weapons. Robin Cook, a former foreign secretary, revealed in his diaries that he had a conversation about Saddam's arsenal with Mr Blair on 5 March. Mr Cook had been briefed by MI6 that Iraq had no WMD in the sense that they could strike strategic cities. But it probably had "several thousand battlefield chemical munitions" and Mr Cook asked if Mr Blair worried they would be used against British troops. Mr Blair's response was: "Yes, but all the effort he has had to put into concealment makes it difficult for him to assemble them quickly to use." So Mr Blair did appear to know on the eve of war that the 45-minute claim was groundless and had been advised that it referred to battlefield weapons. Sir Richard Dearlove, the head of MI6, said to Lord Hutton that the 45-minutes claim had been given "undue prominence" in the dossier. UNRESOLVED ISSUES The credibility of the Iraqi general and the Iraq opposition activist who relayed the 45-minutes intelligence must be in serious question. American intelligence experts were highly suspicious of information coming from exiles in the US and the UK because they were so desperate to oust Saddam. Dr Jones has called on the Government to publish the intelligence submitted to MI6, not just on 45 minutes but also on claims that Saddam was continuing to produce chemical and biological weapons. He suggested that only then would the public see just how threadbare intelligence was. It is unclear why Mr Hoon failed to tell Mr Blair that the claim related to battlefield weapons. Mr Hoon has mysteriously forgotten exactly when he was first made "aware" of the headlines and when exactly he asked about it. Mr Hoon says there was no public controversy about the 45-minute point but that is because no one knew the claim was controversial. It was only after Mr Gilligan's report and Dr Kelly's suicide that light was shone on the whole area. Is Mr Blair again distancing himself from the intelligence services in the hope of scapegoating them over the fact that WMD have not been found? If Mr Blair did not know about the battlefield point in September 2002, he has to explain why he didn't ask his intelligence chiefs what it referred to. Troops were massing at the time. Was it a slip of the tongue that led Mr Blair to tell MPs that he didn't know the battlefield point on 18 March? Military chiefs repeatedly told former ministers that they didn't feel Iraq posed an imminent threat. No one in the Government has answered the obvious point that Saddam could not have used any weapons against Western targets or Israel because nuclear retaliation would be swift. Most crucial, why does Mr Blair insist that the 45-minute point was not important? Dr Jones has made the point that the claim is one of the few in the dossier that declares that WMD existed. The only other clear claim that WMD existed was the equally controversial intelligence that Saddam continued to produced chemical weapons. UK Independent Ltd. ***************************************************************** 16 Washington Post: Bush Stands Firmly Behind His Decision to Invade Iraq (washingtonpost.com) By Mike Allen Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, February 6, 2004; Page A16 CHARLESTON, S.C., Feb. 5 -- President Bush edged closer Thursday to admitting that some of his prewar allegations about Saddam Hussein may have been mistaken, but he defiantly defended his decision to invade Iraq and said he would do it again. "Knowing what I knew then, and knowing what I know today, America did the right thing in Iraq," Bush told a handpicked crowd of applauding supporters on a Charleston Harbor dock. He lashed out at critics, including Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and other Democratic presidential candidates, and leveled a sharp accusation that until now he has left to his party and his campaign. "If some politicians in Washington had their way, Saddam Hussein would still be in power," he said. "All of the Security Council resolutions and condemnations would still be issued and still be ignored -- scraps of paper amounting to nothing." The president, who faces a reelection test in nine months, added: "I will protect and defend this country by taking the fight to the enemy." In the months before the war, Bush said the Iraqi government was "a threat of unique urgency," and he called Hussein "a threat that we must deal with as quickly as possible." Thursday's speech was Bush's most detailed defense of his decisions since David Kay resigned last month as chief of the Iraq Survey Group -- the CIA-led weapons-hunting team -- and declared that he did not think Iraq had stockpiles of unconventional weapons on the eve of war. Bush repeated his contention that Iraq was "a gathering threat" but acknowledged that U.S. troops have not discovered what he expected. "The facts are becoming clearer," Bush said. "As the chief weapons inspector said, we have not yet found the stockpiles of weapons that we thought were there. Yet, the survey group has uncovered some of what the dictator was up to." Hussein, he said, had "the capability to produce weapons of mass destruction," "the scientists and technology in place to make those weapons," "the necessary infrastructure to produce weapons of mass destruction" and "the intent to arm his regime with weapons of mass destruction." "And Saddam Hussein had something else," Bush said. "He had a record of using weapons of mass destruction against his enemies and against innocent Iraqi citizens." The morning was raw, with wind whipping his hair, script and overcoat. Moments before the speech, the White House staff had to get the Coast Guard to reposition a cutter anchored behind him because it had drifted out of position and was no longer providing a perfect backdrop. The speech launched a three-part campaign by a White House hoping to regain the offensive on national security issues, at a time when polls have shown Bush's job-approval rating dipping below 50 percent for the first time in his presidency. On Friday, Bush plans to sign an executive order creating a nine-member, bipartisan commission to study the prewar intelligence on Iraq and the broad problem of proliferating unconventional weapons. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) will be a member, Republican officials said. White House aides also discussed a possible spot for Kay, the officials said. Officials also plan to talk to former senator Warren B. Rudman (R-N.H.). As the third step in the campaign, Bush plans to appear Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," his first Sunday talk-show appearance as president. "There's a lot of background noise and second-guessing going on in Washington," a senior administration official said. "We view this whole debate as an opportunity for the president to speak from the heart about the decisions he has made and why America is safer." Bush's remarks amounted to a reply to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, who told The Washington Post on Monday that he did not know whether he would have recommended an invasion knowing Iraq had no prohibited weapons. The president began speaking just minutes after CIA Director George J. Tenet defended his own actions in a speech at Georgetown University, declaring that his intelligence analysts had accurately reported that Hussein's government posed a danger. Bush, whose speech was built around his homeland security plans and safety measures for containerized cargo, arrived in the Republican-leaning state two days after a Democratic primary that was won handily by Sen. John Edwards (N.C.). Bush generally does not use "Hail to the Chief" at his events, but a stirring rendition welcomed him to the podium at the Port of Charleston. "September the 11th, 2001, was a lesson for America -- a lesson I will never forget, and a lesson this nation must never forget," Bush said. "We cannot wait to confront the threats of the world, the threats of terror networks and terror states, until those threats arrive in our own cities." Bush renewed his assertion that Iraq had posed a direct threat to U.S. soil, even though nine months of hunting has turned up no nuclear, chemical or biological stockpiles. "We had a choice: either take the word of a madman, or take action to defend the American people," he said. "Faced with that choice, I will defend America every time." Some Republican officials fear the weapons controversy could hurt Bush's credibility with voters, and here in Charleston he tried to recast the decisions on Iraq as emblematic of his leadership. "When you're the commander in chief, you have to be willing to make the tough calls and to see your decisions through," Bush said. "America is safer when our commitments are clear, our word is good and our will is strong. And that is the only way I know how to lead." © 2004 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 17 Washington Post: In Response to Criticism, Tenet Reveals CIA Successes (washingtonpost.com) Director Points to Pakistan, Libya, Iran and North Korea By Walter Pincus Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, February 6, 2004; Page A18 CIA Director George J. Tenet yesterday took the unusual step of disclosing previously secret success by the agency, describing its spying on Pakistan's nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, and on the international trade in nuclear weapons technology involving Libya, Iran and North Korea. The disclosures were an attempt by Tenet to counter what he described as ill-informed criticism of the CIA's record in tracking global weapons proliferation. Last week, David Kay, former chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq, said the United States had been surprised by revelations about nuclear programs in other countries. The White House then said it would create an independent commission on prewar intelligence on Iraq that would also review CIA performance elsewhere. "It's important that I address these misstatements, because the American people must know just how reliable American intelligence is on the threats that confront our nation," Tenet said in a speech at Georgetown University. In Libya, Tenet said, U.S. and British intelligence agencies played a major role in getting Moammar Gaddafi to give up his pursuit of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. He said Gaddafi's renewed interest in getting a nuclear weapon was discovered because intelligence agencies had "penetrated Libya's foreign supplier network." With such knowledge, and working with other countries, CIA officers located and stopped a shipment of centrifuge parts that were to be used in processing uranium. CIA and British officers visiting Libya last year were able to show Libyan officials that they knew so much about that country's missiles and nuclear programs that scientists there finally showed them actual weapon designs, Tenet said. "Intelligence," Tenet said, "was the key that opened the door to Libya's clandestine programs." Tenet said the CIA also had deep knowledge of the activities of Pakistan's Khan, who admitted this week that he gave nuclear expertise and equipment to Iran, Libya and North Korea. The CIA director said that, with the help of the British, "we pieced together the picture of the network, revealing its subsidiaries, scientists, front companies, agents, finances and manufacturing plants on three continents. Our spies penetrated the network through a series of daring operations over several years." The information, Tenet said, was central to uncovering Khan's "years of nuclear profiteering." In Iran, Tenet said, the United States was not surprised by reports in 2002 from an Iranian opposition group that Tehran was moving secretly toward completing a facility to enrich uranium. The recent admissions by Iran to the International Atomic Energy Agency about that facility validated previous intelligence assessment, Tenet said. He also credited U.S. intelligence with enabling Washington to confront North Korea on its decision to turn to uranium enrichment as a way to get weapons-grade material for its nuclear weapons programs. © 2004 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 18 Washington Post: Tenet Defends CIA's Analysis Of Iraq as Objective, if Flawed (washingtonpost.com) By Dana Priest and Walter Pincus Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, February 6, 2004; Page A01 CIA Director George J. Tenet argued forcefully yesterday that, months before the war in Iraq, intelligence agencies gave policymakers objective, apolitical judgments on Iraqi weapons, including caveats and details of where analysts disagreed in their assessments. Defending the agency for the first time since his own weapons expert said prewar intelligence on Iraq was "all wrong," Tenet acknowledged that the CIA made misjudgments but said the agency worked hard to provide a careful and nuanced assessment regarding weapons of mass destruction. "Let me be clear: Analysts differed on several important aspects of these programs, and those debates were spelled out in the estimate," he said. "They never said there was an imminent threat." In a speech at Georgetown University, Tenet defended his analysts as "dedicated, courageous professionals." But he also revealed that the postwar work of U.S. weapons experts in Iraq has cast doubt on numerous judgments made by the CIA in a classified October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that was circulated to Bush administration policymakers. Some of those judgments -- involving the status of Iraq's nuclear program, mobile biological weapons labs and unmanned aerial vehicles for the dispersal of biological weapons -- were portrayed as evidence by Secretary of State Colin L. Powell during his presentation to the United Nations one year ago. Tenet did not directly address the question of whether top administration officials went beyond the CIA's assessments as they built a public case for going to war with Iraq, as many Democrats have charged. Tenet said recent assertions by his former chief weapons hunter, David Kay, that U.S. intelligence had also missed proliferation programs in Libya and Iran were "misstatements." White House officials in recent days have echoed Kay's concerns, and President Bush has said he will appoint an independent commission to look at the broader issue of proliferation intelligence, not just whether the CIA erred on Iraq. "I welcome the president's commission looking into proliferation," Tenet said. "We have a record and story to tell." To rebut the charge that the agency missed proliferation activities, Tenet disclosed a series of previously secret operations to penetrate and disrupt clandestine weapons-smuggling rings involving the father of Pakistan's nuclear program, Abdul Qadeer Khan, as well as clandestine nuclear programs in Libya and Iran. [Story, Page A18.] Tenet also revealed for the first time that reports by two informants working for foreign intelligence services weighed heavily in his thinking as he assessed the gravity of Iraq's weapons threat. The information came to Tenet while his team was putting together the NIE in the fall of 2002 and continued into 2003 as the buildup to war began. A senior intelligence official said that the two sources Tenet mentioned worked for different countries, and that U.S. officials independently validated what one of them said. The official declined to name the countries but, when asked, confirmed that neither was Israel. Tenet said the foreign services had determined the informants to be "established and reliable." Tenet said the first source, who had direct access to Saddam Hussein and his inner circle, told of how Iraq "was aggressively and covertly developing" a nuclear weapon, and that Hussein's Nuclear Weapons Committee had assured the Iraqi leader that once the country obtained fissile material, "a bomb could be ready in just 18 to 24 months." The same person said that Iraq was stockpiling chemical weapons, and that equipment used to produce insecticides under the U.N. oil-for-food program had been diverted to covert production of chemical weapons. The second person, Tenet said, told his handlers that Iraq was producing chemical and biological weapons, and that prohibited chemicals were being manufactured at dual-use facilities, meaning factories normally used for industry. CONTINUED 1 2 Next > Print This Article © 2004 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 19 Washington Post: Missed Signals On WMD? (washingtonpost.com) [David Ignatius] By David Ignatius Friday, February 6, 2004; Page A23 The intelligence failure in Iraq began with U.N. weapons inspectors, who gathered detailed evidence that Saddam Hussein had destroyed his weapons of mass destruction in 1991 but never presented those findings forcefully to the world, according to Iraq's top nuclear scientist. Jafar Dhia Jafar, who ran Iraq's nuclear program from 1982 on, revealed new details of his country's dealings with U.N. inspectors in a telephone interview yesterday from the United Arab Emirates, where he now lives. His interview was the first broad, on-the-record discussion of WMD issues by a top Iraqi scientist since the end of the war. Jafar said he has explained the 1991 termination of Iraqi WMD programs in more than 20 voluntary debriefings with U.S. officials since he left Iraq on April 7, 2003. The debriefings took place in the United Arab Emirates and Jordan. To confirm the accuracy of his account, he said, he volunteered to take a lengthy polygraph test, which U.S. officials administered. The comments from Iraq's most prominent scientist add a new perspective to the intense debate over Iraq's alleged WMD programs. Jafar, 61, who received his doctorate in physics in Britain in 1965, said his chief complaint concerned the U.N. inspectors, who, he said, "had all the facts but evidently did not present them convincingly enough to the United Nations Security Council." "The United Nations inspectors were on the ground. They were everywhere. They had access to all the documents," Jafar argued. "They knew the facts, and they should have said confidently that Iraq was free of weapons of mass destruction." Instead, he said, U.N. inspectors -- under apparent pressure from the United States and Britain to continue looking for weapons that had actually been destroyed -- kept asking for more time to conduct further searches. The Iraqis were never able to prove the negative. If Jafar is right, the U.N. inspectors had detailed evidence to rebut the arguments about Iraqi WMD made in the intelligence dossiers compiled by Britain and the United States that were a main justification for their March 2003 invasion. In the supercharged political atmosphere before the war, that evidence was either diluted, suppressed or ignored. The United Nations' problems began with Hussein, by Jafar's own account. He said the Iraqi leader initially concealed some of his WMD stockpiles after the 1991 Persian Gulf War by turning them over to his most trusted military unit, the Special Republican Guards. But after U.N. inspectors discovered some of the material at a Special Republican Guards camp in early July 1991, Hussein ordered the unilateral destruction of all his banned stockpiles. "Before the end of 1991, all proscribed nuclear, chemical, biological and missile assets were destroyed," Jafar said. Jafar said Iraqis destroyed all stockpiles of chemical weapons -- including mustard gas, sarin, tabun and VX -- and biological weapons, including botulinum toxin, anthrax and aflatoxin. Some of the biological toxins had been weaponized in 1990, but never used, so the regime decided to conceal that program from U.N. inspectors, Jafar said. They also withheld some details of their nuclear program. The Iraqi regime initially decided to deceive U.N. inspectors about some aspects of the nuclear and biological programs for two reasons, Jafar said. First, to obscure the extent to which they had violated treaties against developing such weapons and, second, to minimize the destruction of the facilities where they had carried out the work. First hints of the Iraqi bioweapons program were made to U.N. chief inspector Rolf Ekeus in 1995, because the Iraqis knew that defectors had spoken of the program, Jafar said. A full accounting of the bioweapons that had been destroyed four years before came later in 1995, after the defection to Jordan of Hussein's son-in-law Hussein Kamel. Remaining aspects of the nuclear program were also disclosed to U.N. inspectors after Kamel defected, Jafar said. But U.S. and U.N. officials suspected the Iraqis were probably hiding other violations. The mistrust was amplified by Hussein's antagonism toward the U.N. inspectors, whom he regarded as spies who might threaten his personal security, Jafar said. As an example of the detailed information given to U.N. inspectors, Jafar cited 26 letters he provided between January and March 2003 to rebut allegations that Iraqis were continuing their nuclear weapons program. The letters, totaling 85 pages with 1,400 more as attachments, countered specific claims made in a Sept. 24, 2002, British intelligence dossier. Jafar's story reinforces one theme of the unfolding Iraqi WMD saga: Even for intelligence analysts and U.N. experts, facts could not be disentangled from expectations. The will to believe that Hussein had WMD was far stronger than the evidence that he didn't. davidignatius@washpost.com © 2004 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 20 Scotsman.com: 45 minutes is a long time in politics Saturday, 7th February 2004 ANALYSIS WHAT is the 45-minute claim? In September 2002 the government produced a dossier called Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction - the assessment of the British government setting the alleged threat posed by Saddam Hussein. The document claimed Iraq had "a useable chemical and biological weapons capability" and had "chemical and biological agents using an extensive range of artillery shells, free-fall bombs, sprayers and ballistic missiles". The paper - the first of its kind ever produced by a British government - went on to say: "Iraq’s military forces are able to use chemical and biological weapons, with command, control and logistical arrangements in place. The Iraqi military are able to deploy these weapons within 45 minutes of a decision to do so." The dossier said these could be used with chemical, biological, or nuclear warheads and, with a range of 650km, could reach "the UK sovereign base areas in Cyprus and NATO members Greece and Turkey, as well as all Iraq’s neighbours". WHY has the 45-minute claim caused such controversy? Doubts about the 45-minute claim were first raised by the BBC reporter Andrew Gilligan in his now infamous broadcast on 29 May last year when he alleged that the 45-minute claim was based on a single source and had been inserted by Downing Street in the dossier even though they knew it was wrong. Mr Gilligan’s report was later judged incorrect by Lord Hutton but subsequent revelations have shown the journalist was right to have asked questions about the 45-minute claim. The wording of the dossier was carefully crafted. Much of the subsequent newspaper coverage assumed that Saddam was capable of attacking neighbouring countries with weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes. But this was not the case. The 45 minutes referred only to battlefield munitions - not long-range missiles. A report last summer by the intelligence and security committee concluded the wording of the dossier "did not precisely reflect the intelligence provided" by MI6. The committee of MPs, who saw the raw intelligence material, said the battlefield context should "have been highlighted in the dossier". WHY is this a problem for the government? It wasn’t until Wednesday afternoon when Tony Blair let slip in the Commons that he first became aware the 45-minute claim only referred to battlefield weapons after 18 March, the date of the Commons debate which authorised the military action. Mr Blair’s admission stunned MPs as it contrasted directly with evidence given by Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, when he told the Hutton Inquiry he knew "at the time" that the 45 minutes replied to battlefield and not ballistic missiles. Asked why he didn’t correct the misleading impression at the time, Mr Hoon replied that correcting every error in the media would have been a "time-consuming and frustrating process". If Mr Hoon is telling the truth, it means Mr Blair had been kept in the dark about a crucial piece of information. Labour and Conservative MPs who wavered before voting in favour of the war may have voted differently if they had known that the threat posed by Saddam was less extensive that suggested by the 45-minute claim. Alternatively, if Mr Blair is telling the truth, Mr Hoon and the intelligence services appear guilty of a dereliction of duty in not informing the Prime Minister about the changed circumstances of the evidence. Also, why did Mr Blair not question the intelligence handed to him? WHO is telling the truth? It is very difficult to tell. Robin Cook, the former Leader of the House, told the House this week it was difficult to reconcile his recollection of events with the Prime Minister’s assertion he did not know the 45-minute claim was misleading until after 18 March. Mr Cook said: "I knew Iraq only had battlefield weapons because I asked the chairman of the joint intelligence committee [John Scarlett]. I have the highest respect for his professionalism. Is it not hard to credit that at no point between the September dossier and the March debate, he did not explain to the Prime Minister the crucial distinction between battlefield weapons and medium-range weapons?" However, Mr Scarlett suggested to the Hutton Inquiry Mr Blair could have been left out of loop. "There was no discussion with the Prime Minister that I can recall about the 45 minutes point in connection with battlefield or strategic systems. Indeed I do not remember a discussion with the Prime Minister about the 45 minutes point at all," he said. WHAT is Downing Street’s explanation? Downing Street’s first line of defence is that the 45-minute claim has only taken on importance - "totemic status" to quote the Prime Minister’s official spokesman - since Mr Gilligan’s broadcast. They point out that Mr Blair did not refer to the 45-minute claim during the 18 March debate. Geoff Hoon has even gone so far as to claim the 45-minute claim was not a "significant issue" at the time Britain went to war. Critics have argued the reason the reference was dropped was because Downing Street had been made aware of the ambiguity of the 45-minute assertion. Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary, accused critics of "nit-picking" and compared Mr Blair’s situation to that of Winston Churchill doing the Second World War. "Do you suppose Winston Churchill went round asking precisely the kind of munition they had in the Second World War, and would that have been a valuable use of his time?" she asked. Downing Street has also argued the distinction between battlefield and long-range weapons is irrelevant. In the Commons on Wednesday, Mr Blair said the range of a weapon was less significant than its capability: "If there were chemical or biological or nuclear battlefield weapons, that most certainly would be a weapon of mass destruction and the idea that their use would not threaten the region’s stability I find somewhat eccentric." HOW damaging has this proved? Primarily it dashed any hopes within No 10 that the Hutton Report would draw a line under the controversy surrounding the war. One Conservative MP gloated that Labour had "snatched defeat from the jaws of victory". It has also given Michel Howard, the Conservative leader, the opportunity to renew his attack on Mr Blair. Mr Howard has focused on why the Prime Minister did not follow Mr Cook’s lead and question the authenticity of the intelligence. "I cannot imagine a more serious dereliction of duty by a Prime Minister than failing to ask that basic question," said Mr Howard, who went on to call for Mr Blair’s resignation. WHAT happens now? Downing Street is hoping that the public’s fatigue with the issue will see it slip down the agenda. Mr Blair’s official spokesman joked with the media yesterday that the public were starting to "nod off within 45 seconds" of reading about the 45-minute claim. Officials also believe the Hutton report has dealt conclusively with issues of government propriety regarding WMD and the only question is whether or not the intelligence was correct. London and Washington have both announced investigations into the use of intelligence in the run-up the war. Mr Blair faces the embarrassing prospect of the US blaming British intelligence for any failures. Furthermore, there is a risk the inquiries could throw up evidence the politicians were aware before authorising military action that the intelligence was incomplete. This would blow apart Mr Blair’s defence that he acted properly based on the intelligence which he had no reason to doubt. The future of Mr Hoon is also in doubt. Downing Street is furious at the way he has handled the row, particularly his comments during Wednesday’s debate when pressed on why Mr Blair did not know the 45 minutes referred to battlefield weapons. "My right honourable friend the Prime Minister will speak for himself," said Mr Hoon. It was not the sort of remark on which careers are improved. [ border=] ©2004 Scotsman.com | contact ***************************************************************** 21 Spectator.co.uk: The great whitewash 31 January 2004 Rod Liddle says that Lord Hutton gave the government the benefit of the doubt, sometimes to the point of appearing either hopelessly naive or a visitor from a kinder, gentler planet So what were you all waiting for? You surely could not have been expecting an inquiry, headed by an eminent law lord, to deliver an indictment of the government? They don’t do that, law lords. Certainly they haven’t in my lifetime. And it hasn’t happened now, with Lord Hutton. But even by the standards of his equally well appointed and eminent predecessors — Lord Franks, Sir Richard Scott, Sir Anthony Hammond, Lord Denning, all of whom found it necessary to exculpate the political establishment when push came to shove — Lord Hutton has flung the whitewash around with a copiousness, a completeness, which must have surprised even the inhabitants of Downing Street. The only thing we can learn from the Hutton report is that next time we yearn and clamour for an inquiry into some piece of governmental chicanery, we should avoid at all costs importuning a senior member of the legal community to write it. Instead we should get someone a little more sentient, a little more observant, a little less inclined to accept without question the protestations of innocence of the ruling political elite. A plumber, for example. Or maybe the members of Atomic Kitten. Be a bit cheaper, too. The Hutton inquiry established in the public mind — beyond all question — the government’s disingenuousness and deceit over the gravity of the threat posed by Iraq to the West. And then the Hutton report passed over, or ignored, or rather airily dismissed all of this stuff. Lord Hutton was merely following precedent here: the same sort of thing happened, if you remember, with the Scott inquiry into the selling of weapons to Iraq and, even more brazenly, Lord Franks’s inquiry into the government’s failure to prevent the Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands. The ability of law lords and the like to hear a mass of evidence and, having done so, to draw precisely the opposite conclusion to that reached by the rest of the country is almost as entertaining as their penchant of law lords for pronouncing simple words in a bizarre or anachronistic manner. Weapons of maaaarse destruction indeed, Lord Hutton? So let us help his lordship. Let us remind him of the salient facts established by his own inquiry but by which he seemed unimpressed, or maybe just bored. Firstly, the BBC was not merely justified in but should be congratulated upon broadcasting a story that was important, significant and in the public interest. There are some, around here, who consider it the most important political story of the last 20 years or so. Secondly, that the story was not merely fundamentally correct as it stood on 29 May, but has since been endlessly corroborated. The story was this: a senior member of the intelligence community had deep misgivings about the way in which the government was using the information he and his colleagues had gathered — and that, what’s more, it was Alastair Campbell or his office that was primarily responsible for ‘sexing up’ the September dossier which so wilfully exaggerated the threat posed by Iraq. We should concede here — as the BBC conceded — that the wording of one of Andrew Gilligan’s 18 interviews on 29 May went a shade too far. The allegation that the government knew that the claim that Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction could be deployed in 45 minutes was false and could not be corroborated. You and I might suspect that it’s true, but we can’t prove it — and so Andrew Gilligan should not have made the allegation. He has already admitted this point. But we might also acknowledge that this particular rogue interview, at seven minutes past six in the morning, did not form the basis of the original complaints from Mr Campbell. It is doubtful that he even heard it. The complaint, then, was that a) Gilligan had only one source and b) his source was insufficiently senior. We now know precisely how ‘important and credible’ Dr Kelly was, and we have more recently heard his views repeated by other members of the intelligence services. Lord Hutton decided, for reasons which entirely elude me, that the September dossier was not ‘sexed up’. Let’s examine what we know, as a fact, about this. Firstly, the 45-minute claim evolved from ‘a mere possibility to a certain judgment’ (Andrew Caldecott QC) in the September dossier; the late rewrite of the document was suggested by Jonathan Powell, the Downing Street chief of staff. This change had the effect of presenting Saddam Hussein as an offensive rather than a defensive threat (and we have discovered more recently that he was not even that). As Caldecott said, ‘This was not cosmetic. It was substance.’ Further, Hutton decided that the government was entirely justified in meddling with the September dossier, because the dossier was for public consumption. Clearly his lordship has no greater opinion of the unwashed British public than he has, more specifically, of journalists. He did not go into detail about the nature of the changes made to that dossier at the behest of Alastair Campbell — who, in a break with tradition, was allowed to chair meetings of the intelligence staff. We might direct his lordship’s attention to the way in which the very title of the document was changed. Originally it was entitled ‘Iraq’s Programmes for Weapons of Mass Destruction’, which had the whiff of accuracy about it. Later it became ‘Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction’ — as if they already had them and were about to use them; which is, of course, what the government wished us to believe. At every possible point, Lord Hutton gave the government the benefit of the doubt, sometimes to the extent of appearing either hopelessly naive or maybe a visitor from a gentler, kinder planet where chicanery never takes place. Listen to this, for example: ‘The desire of the Prime Minister to have a strong dossier may have subconsciously influenced John Scarlett and the joint intelligence committee to produce a strongly worded document.’ Subconsciously! The suggestion here that the PM’s need for a ‘strong’ (or, to use another description, ‘blatantly inaccurate’) document was not made explicit to the hapless Scarlett and the JIC almost beggars belief. Indeed, the politicisation of the security services has been one of the darkest aspects of this whole affair. There was not, according to Hutton, a plan to identify Dr Kelly to the media — despite the fact that Hutton agreed that Tony Blair had chaired meetings about the naming of Dr David Kelly. What did he think was discussed at these meetings? And, similarly, at every juncture, Lord Hutton stuck the boot into the BBC and, while he was about it, Dr David Kelly. For Hutton, Kelly’s previous eminence and chance of a knighthood were destroyed by his regrettable decision to talk to journalists, and — the implication is — he got what he deserved. Which is a strong message to be sent out to any other public servants who feel appalled at the way politicians use or abuse their services. At the BBC, it looks as if there will be resignations. The chairman of the BBC, Gavyn Davies, may well feel that his position is untenable following such trenchant criticism from his lordship. Davies is no great friend of mine, believe me — but on this issue he was steadfast and principled. And that principle grew from a sense of outrage at the way in which Alastair Campbell attacked and attacked the corporation on the broadest possible front, vilifying its output, its broadcasters and its ethos. Davies behaved with a great deal of dignity and no little strength. I dare say we can all brace ourselves for another pointless political row as to who should be allowed to take his place. My guess is there may not be too many takers right now. And finally, back to those weapons of mass destruction. Tony Blair apparently thinks that they will still be found. He’s about the only person left standing who does believe such a thing. Even Bush and Rumsfeld have given up the ghost on that one. Hans Blix, the UN’s chief weapons inspector, says that Iraq hasn’t had WMD for ten years. In fact, every inspector dispatched to Iraq says that there are no weapons of mass destruction. That was the essence of Gilligan’s story: the PM and the PM’s office felt that they could not go to war except on the issue of Saddam’s preparedness to attack the West. And having decided upon this, they then went about ensuring that the public believed that Saddam was prepared and equipped to attack the West despite the considerable evidence to the contrary. In other words, he led us to war on a false pretence. Only Lord Hutton seems unable to see this. I think, as a country, we’ve had enough of law lords. Return to top of page · Send comment on this article to the editor of the Spectator.co.uk · Email this article to a friend © 2004 The Spectator.co.uk ***************************************************************** 22 WAR.WIRE: North, South Korea agree to cooperate to resolve nuclear crisis SEOUL (AFP) Feb 06, 2004 North and South Korea agreed Friday to work together to ensure that six-way talks on defusing the crisis over Pyongyang's nuclear drive this month bear fruit. Before wrapping up cabinet level talks here, the two Koreas also agreed to resume military talks aimed at reducing tension on the divided peninsula and the prevention of further naval clashes in disputed waters in the Yellow Sea. "South and North Korea have agreed to cooperate in making a second round of six-way talks fruitful for a peaceful settlement of the nuclear issue," a joint press statement said. North Korea announced Tuesday that it would attend a new round of six-party talks in Beijing on February 25. The first round in August involving the two Koreas, China, Russia, Japan and the United States were inconclusive and North Korea later said it had no interest in follow-up talks. The nuclear crisis cast a long shadow over the high-level talks, whose agenda focused on inter-Korean economic exchanges including tourism, cross-border transportation and an industrial park and reunions of families. South Korea's chief delegate, Unification Minister Jeong Se-Hyun, demanded that the North must respect a 1991 joint declaration by Seoul and Pyongyang to rid the Korean peninsula of nuclear weapons. But Jeong's counterpart, Kim Ryong-Song, noted Pyongyang had recently offered a freeze of its nuclear drive in exchange for economic and other concessions from the United States and its allies. Washington has rejected the offer, calling for complete, irreversible and verifiable dismantlement of North Korea's nuclear programme. The Northern delegation initially objected to mentioning the nuclear issue in the joint press statement, insisting that the nuclear row is separate from inter-Korean talks. South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-Moon on Thursday said that Seoul is willing to reward North Korea if its offer of a nuclear freeze is meant as a short-term process toward ultimate dismantling of its nuclear programme. At the conclusion of three-days of the cabinet-level meeting, the two Koreas also agreed to hold military generals' talks at the earliest possible date, according to the six-point joint press statement. "The South and North agreed to hold talks between military authorities of the two sides to discuss reducing military tension on the Korean peninsula," the statement said. The prevention of naval clashes in the rich fishing grounds in the Yellow Sea will top the agenda of such military talks, a spokesman of the South Korean delegation said. "The military talks will be aimed at easing military tension in the Yellow Sea that regularly rise during the fishing season in May and June every year," spokesman Shin Eun-Sang said. In the first known naval clash between the two Koreas since the Korean War ended in 1953, seven South Korean soldiers were wounded and some 30 North Koreans were killed or injured in 1999 in the Yellow Sea. In 2002, six South Korean sailors were killed and North Korean casualties were believed to be larger in another naval clash. The two Koreas also called for the speeding up of work on a joint project to build an industrial zone at Kaesong, on the North Korean side of the heavily fortified border, in the joint statement. On humanitarian matters, they agreed to arrange a new reunion of families separated by the division of Korea around late March. The ministers agreed to meet again in Pyongyang in May 4-7. WAR.WIRE ***************************************************************** 23 Korea Herald: U.S. banking on N.K. nuclear dismantlement (shj@heraldm.com) By Seo Hyun-jin 2004.02.07 Washington hopes to get Pyongyang's promise for complete elimination of its nuclear weapons programs during six-way talks this month, the top U.S. envoy to Seoul said yesterday. Isolationist North Korea should come clean on its clandestine nuclear weapons program using highly enriched uranium, Amb. Thomas Hubbard said. "We do hope to see in these talks a North Korean commitment to dismantle its nuclear programs completely, verifiably and irreversibly," Hubbard told South Korean reporters. The two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia have engaged in closed-door consultations to make a stride in settling the 15-month nuclear tension prior to starting nuclear talks in Beijing on Feb. 25. "Certainly, we're willing to hear what the North Koreans have to say about their freeze. The important point to us is that any steps that might be taken lead directly to the complete, verifiable, irreversible dismantlement," Hubbard said. North Korea has offered to freeze its nuclear weapons development only if the United States lifts political and economic sanctions on the communist country and provides relevant assistance. The ambassador avoided answering whether the United States would provide returns to North Korea if a nuclear freeze was an initial step to complete nuclear dismantlement, as suggested by South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon on Thursday. "We hope North Korea will recognize the importance of coming clean on entire nuclear weapons programs so that we can move toward the kind of relationship we would like to have with North Korea," Hubbard said. Regarding some skepticism about U.S. intelligence on North Korea's uranium-based weapons program, the ambassador said the U.S. assessment on North Korea's nuclear capability is based on "clear evidence." The presence of the uranium program has become a controversial issue. Washington has said Pyongyang admitted to harboring the uranium-based program, but Pyongyang has recently denied it. But a Pakistani nuclear scientist's recent confession that he traded nuclear technology with North Korea has added weight to U.S. claims. "I think all the countries participating in the talks will take into account the revelations that have come from Pakistan," Hubbard said. A first round of six-way talks ended with little progress in August also in Beijing. The ambassador also took time to speak about other issues, including urging the Seoul government to decide whether to allow the United States to build a new embassy on the old grounds of Deoksu Palace in Jeong-dong, downtown Seoul, as agreed in the past. "Our strong hope and expectation is that the Korean government will come up with a conclusion quickly as to whether we should be allowed to build our embassy on the site, which is our preference, or whether the Korean government will find an alternative site for us to build an embassy," he said. The U.S. plan to build new facilities has been put on hold, with academics and civic groups calling for the palace site's preservation. The United States hopes to have its embassy building in central Seoul so that it can reflect the importance of the bilateral ties, Hubbard said. "The issue needs to be resolved much earlier than (September) because if we are to obtain the funding that we need to start building an embassy we need to make provisions for that and our budget should come well in advance the fiscal year (running the beginning of October to the end of September)," he said. ***************************************************************** 24 Daily Times: North, South Korea agree to cooperate Saturday, February 07, 2004 * Washington hopes Pyongyang will dismantle nuclear weapons programme SEOUL: North and South Korea agreed Friday to work together to ensure that a new round of six-way talks later this month on defusing the crisis over Pyongyang’s nuclear drive would bear fruit. Wrapping up cabinet-level talks, the two Koreas also agreed to resume military talks aimed at reducing tension on the divided peninsula and preventing further naval clashes in disputed waters in the Yellow Sea. “South and North Korea have agreed to cooperate in making a second round of six-way talks fruitful for a peaceful settlement of the nuclear issue,” a joint press statement said. North Korea announced Tuesday that it would attend a new round of six-party talks in Beijing on February 25. The two Koreas also agreed to hold military generals’ meeting on “reducing military tension on the Korean peninsula” at an earliest possible date. But no date has been fixed. Since holding a first round of meetings between their defence ministers in September 2000, both Koreas have yet to open a second round of talks. “The military talks will be aimed at easing military tension in the Yellow Sea that regularly rise during the fishing season in May and June every year,” Shin Eun-Sang, spokesman for the South Korean delegation, said. Meanwhile, Washington expressed hope that North Korea will promise to dismantle its nuclear weapons programme when the six-nation talks start later this month. Critical to the talks will be North Korea’s acknowledgment that it is running a secret uranium-based nuclear programme in addition to a plutonium-based one, Thomas Hubbard, US ambassador to South Korea, said recently. The United States claims North Korea admitted having a highly enriched uranium, or HEU, programme. But the North has since denied such claims. “Our hope and expectation is that the North Koreans will come clean on their entire nuclear weapons programme,” Hubbard said. “They need to acknowledge what they already acknowledged to us at one point. That is that they were pursuing not only the plutonium programme in Yongbyon, but a separate HEU programme.” Six-nation talks on settling the issue had faltered for months over disagreements on the ground rules for negotiations. A first round between ended in August in Beijing without much progress. But Tuesday saw a breakthrough with North Korea agreeing to a second round Feb 25. North Korea has insisted it needs a nuclear “deterrent” against a possible US attack. But it has said it would suspend its nuclear programmes as a first step in easing tensions if Washington lifts sanctions, resumes oil shipments and removes North Korea from its list of countries sponsoring terrorism. The United States has said North Korea must first begin dismantling its nuclear programmes. US officials believe the North already has one or two nuclear bombs and could make several more within months. The nuclear dispute flared in October 2002 when US officials accused North Korea of running the uranium programme in violation of a 1994 deal requiring the North to freeze its nuclear facilities. —AP Daily Times - All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 25 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: 'Fog' lets McNamara tell his side of the Vietnam War [seattlepi.com] Friday, February 6, 2004 By WILLIAM ARNOLD SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER MOVIE CRITIC To the Vietnam generation, Robert S. McNamara -- secretary of defense to both Kennedy and Johnson -- has long seemed a top heavy of that conflict: a smug, arrogant statistician who disastrously tried to apply business principles to Southeast Asian geopolitics. THE FOG OF WAR DIRECTOR: Errol Morris DOCUMENTARY RUNNING TIME: 107 minutes RATING: PG-13 for subject matter GRADE: B In Errol Morris' perversely enthralling documentary, "The Fog of War," McNamara finally gets to tell his side of the story -- and is somewhat humanized in the process -- but still comes off looking like a tragic character living in a state of denial. The Oscar-nominated film consists mostly of an obviously heavily edited (with all the pauses taken out) talking-head interview, in which the 85-year-old McNamara shares the lessons he's learned from his long and controversial career in public service. He groups this knowledge in 11 adages -- things such as "Empathize With Your Enemy," "Maximize Efficiency," "Get the Data," "Never Say Never" and "You Can't Change Human Nature" -- and explains how these principles apply to America's recent past and its 21st-century future. This wisdom is interspersed with old film clips and Morris' famous expressionistic illustrations (so that when McNamara speaks of the domino theory, we see dominos on a map of Asia), and is counterpointed by one of Philip Glass' more apocalyptically monotonous scores. The talk covers McNamara's childhood, his World War II years as a bomber pilot, his rise to the presidency of the Ford Motor Co., his appointment to the Kennedy team, and his experience in the Cuban missile crisis and Vietnam (but nothing, curiously, about his 14 years with the World Bank). The two most chilling moments are his casual justification for Gen. Curtis LeMay's fire bombing of Japan (killing hundreds of thousands of civilians) and an eerie tape of a Cabinet meeting during the Cuban crisis, when the world was truly on the brink of nuclear war. The film also plays Oval Office tapes made during the Vietnam years that seem to back up McNamara's contention that he was extremely reluctant to commit America troops to Indochina. (In one tape, we hear him being bullied by LBJ for this reluctance.) But McNamara sees Vietnam as an unfortunate extension of the Cold War and is not particularly haunted by it. He does, however, admit that the Gulf of Tonkin attacks (leading to direct U.S. involvement in the war) probably didn't happen and that he may have unknowingly authorized the use of Agent Orange. At one climactic point, he shrewdly tells us that the main thing America didn't realize about Vietnam was that it was "a civil war." And he says this as if it was his own original idea, and not the central thesis of the Vietnam anti-war movement for more than a decade. McNamara comes off as both an emotional and a loyal man (the Kennedy assassination still chokes him up). But there's no poetry in him, and there's something missing in that cool, analytical mind that allows him to sleep much better at night than he deserves. P-I movie critic William Arnold can be reached at 206-448-8185 or williamarnold@seattlepi.com. [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com ***************************************************************** 26 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: House needs to tighten its ethics rules Today: February 06, 2004 at 9:04:03 PST LAS VEGAS SUN In passing its updated ethics code last month, the Clark County Commission toughened enforcement of its "cooling-off" period. This prevents former commissioners from lobbying the commission for one year after leaving office. Similar cooling-off periods are standard ethics rules in most governmental bodies, including the U.S. House of Representatives. But no matter how tough and clear, they cannot cover every contingency if someone is bent on subverting the spirit of the rules. The latest example would be Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-La., if he takes a job as the pharmaceutical industry's top lobbyist. Nevadans remember Tauzin for his aggressive support of Yucca Mountain as the issue headed toward congressional approval in 2002. As chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Tauzin called this blight on Nevada "clearly the right choice for the American people." The rest of the country knows Tauzin for his recent shepherding of the Medicare prescription drug bill through Congress. It will cost taxpayers more than $500 billion because it does nothing to stem rising drug prices. The bill was a godsend to the drug makers. Now they have offered Tauzin their top lobbying job, which is rumored to pay $2.5 million a year. This would strip away all the pretense of Tauzin's current position as a representative of the people and make official his role as the industry's foremost supporter. Possibly in preparation for accepting the position, Tauzin this week resigned his committee chairmanship and announced he will not run for re-election. If Tauzin accepts the job, he can avoid technical violation of the House's cooling-off period simply by staying away from Congress during his first year. Of course, no one in Congress would fail to understand who was really behind the pharmaceutical industry's lobbying efforts. In our view, Tauzin should turn down this and any similar offer. And Congress should tighten the rules governing its own cooling-off period. ***************************************************************** 27 NWI: Analysis: Is Bill Richardson a Good Fit for John Kerry? - Insight on the News - Politics Posted Feb. 6, 2004 By John Hendel Published: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts has a lot of momentum, perhaps enough to carry him to the 2004 Democratic Party nomination, and may be looking at potential vice-presidential candidates. Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico has the résumé -- former Cabinet secretary, former U.N. ambassador, former member of Congress -- and as a Hispanic executive from the Southwest, might be a strong counterbalance to a ticket topped by a senator from New England. "He is, depending on how you look at it, a three-fer, or a four-fer or a five-fer," said University of Virginia professor Larry Sabato. "He's Hispanic, enabling the Democrats to target that key group of 2004. He's a governor from outside of Washington, so he's not responsible for the mess in Washington. He has national security-experience, having been U.N. ambassador. He's from the Southwest, which could be the critical substitute region for the South on the Democratic side. And finally, experience. He's not only a governor, but he has federal executive experience and legislative experience." In short, apparently a very good fit for Kerry. Richardson consistently has said that he doesn't want to be vice president, that he plans to complete his first term as governor and run for re-election in 2006. He also points out that, as chairman of the Democratic National Convention, he cannot play favorites among the candidates for president. But he wouldn't be the first politician to answer a party's call -- should it come -- after voicing a desire not to seek a particular position "I think that most New Mexicans take the governor at his word and think he'll serve out, certainly, the first term," said Gilbert St. Clair, a professor of political science at the University of New Mexico. "Certainly he's the most ambitious governor we've had in recent times, if not ever, both in terms of his own political ambitions" and his programs for New Mexico. Democratic consultant Donna Brazile, who directed the Gore-Lieberman presidential campaign, said she has known Richardson for a long time and "the nominee would be foolish not to give Gov. Richardson as much attention and scrutiny" as other vice-presidential possibilities. She said Richardson had qualities "rarely seen in a governor [such as] extensive foreign-policy experience. He's on a first-name basis with many foreign dignitaries. He'd bring strength to any ticket. This is a guy who is value-added, bringing a lot of assets to the table. Not just as an Hispanic American but as a Democrat with both domestic and international experience." Richardson, 56, served 15 years in the U.S. House of Representatives before being selected to represent the United States in the United Nations in 1997. The following year he was confirmed as the secretary of the Department of Energy. He ran for governor in 2002 and took 55 percent of the vote. "He is eminently qualified, irrespective of his being Hispanic," said Gabriela Lemus, director of policy and legislation for the League of United Latin American Citizens. Richardson is Hispanic -- even though Lemus said many people don't know it -- and Hispanics as voters are a big question mark in the upcoming election. All the candidates are courting the Hispanic vote, often speaking in Spanish, sometimes with embarrassing results. That is something that wouldn't happen to Richardson. Hispanics now are the largest minority in the United States, but it's not a group easy to pigeonhole as far as a voting bloc. Even potential turnout among Hispanics is a great unknown. But the stress the Democratic candidates put on Southwest states for the Feb. 3 primaries and caucuses show their respect for that batch of voters. According to Lemus, "I think the Latino community would feel this is an opportunity. They would feel very confident seeing a person like Gov. Richardson running and that he would be able to speak to the issues of the community." St. Clair said, "Certainly he would have an appeal, but whether that would increase Hispanic turnout is hard to speculate. The Hispanic vote across the country is very diverse. In California or Texas the issues are different than [in New Mexico] or Florida or North Carolina." Sabato is more positive about the effect of Richardson's appearance on a ballot -- but perhaps not because of his birthright as much as his address. "Richardson can carry his state and maybe his region," Sabato said. The Southwest was Bush country in 2000. Although Al Gore won New Mexico, the states of Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Utah, Nevada and Arizona -- a total of 65 electoral votes -- all went to George W. Bush. As far as negatives, Sabato points out that Richardson had two of the toughest political offices behind him -- U.N. ambassador and secretary of the Energy Department. "The Energy Department has controversy that no secretary can avoid -- like the Nevada [Yucca Mountain] situation," he said. "That's a tough department to head if you have political ambitions. And also as a U.N. ambassador. God only knows what [U.N.] resolutions he's voted for." The positives probably outweigh those points, however. "I think he would spotlight the Democratic Party and [show] how deep the bench is," Brazile said. "He'd just be a tremendous asset to the ticket. I'd put him on any short list." John Hendel is the Americas editor for UPI, a sister wire service of Insight magazine. Copyright © 1990-2003 News World Communications, Inc. ***************************************************************** 28 U.S. Newswire: World Energy Council to Hold Briefing Friday at the National Press Club on Newly Released Study 'Drivers of the Energy Scene' 2/5/04 5:08:00 PM To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor Contact: U.S. Energy Association, 202-312-1230 News Advisory: WHAT: World Energy Council to Release Study: 'Drivers of the Energy Scene' WHEN: Friday, Feb. 6, 9:30 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. WHERE: National Press Club, Zenger Room, 14th & F Streets, NW, Washington, DC DETAILS: The World Energy Council has been working on newly released study, "Drivers of the Energy Scene" since the last WEC Congress in 2001. The work will be the subject of a USEA briefing on Friday, February 6th from 9:30 AM - 10:30 AM at the National Press Club. Jean-Marie Bourdaire, WEC Director of Studies will summarize the key aspects of this study. USEA members, news media, Congressional staff and other interested parties are invited to attend. RSVP (Attendees Only) Media are welcome to attend and may register on-site. To attend, please provide the following information: name, title, organization, address, phone, fax, e-mail. Two Easy Ways to Register: by fax: 202-682-1682 or by e-mail: /© 2004 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/ ***************************************************************** 29 PAKISTAN NUKES - Much noise over full drums Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 01:53:51 -0600 (CST) Much noise over full drums By Wilson John Editorial The Pioneer Tuesday, February 3, 2004 Drumbeats on Pakistan's nuclear black-marketing are getting louder. The international community (read Washington) is alarmed and worried at the rapidly accumulating pile of evidence against Pakistan's top nuclear scientist, Dr AQ Khan, and a few of his associates for selling nuclear technology and materials to nations that are considered "rogue". (China is not the target yet and hence does not qualify to be a rogue despite overwhelming evidence.) The heat and dust being created by the "revelations", obviously made by muck-raking journalists of influential Western papers, begs the question: Why does the world get drawn into the carefully planned and orchestrated propaganda, year after year? First it was the Al Qaeda; then the WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction); and now a nuclear blackmarket racket. This is not intended to be in defence of AQ Khan or Pakistan. If Dr Khan and his associates in the military and nuclear establishment have indulged in buying and selling nuclear technology and materials for several years, they should be punished; that is, if there is punishment for a crime that qualifies to be categorised as crime against humanity. If the allegations currently being made in the media were true, a special court should be set up by the United Nations to try them. In fact, the first step towards that direction would be to institute an independent investigation and send UN Inspectors to Pakistan immediately. But the question that begs an answer is: Who will be the judge? Take the case of Pakistan. Pakistan decided to go nuclear after a humiliating defeat in the 1971 battlefield. Within weeks of the surrender at Dhaka, Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto called a secret meeting (January 24, 1972, at Multan) of nuclear and military officials and said he wanted the Bomb. A 125 mw heavy water reactor became operational near Karachi the same year. It was built with Canadian assistance. The US was not in the dark about these developments. Three years after Bhutto's secret meeting, the State Department prepared a short note on Pakistan and the Non- Proliferation Issue (January 22, 1975), which said Pakistan was not only building more power reactors, it was also negotiating with the Belgians for a heavy water facility, with the Canadians for a fuel fabrication plant and with the French for a chemical separation plant."These facilities," the note (since declassified) said, "together with the heavy reactor, will give Pakistan a virtually independent nuclear fuel cycle and the opportunity to separate a sufficient amount of plutonium to build a nuclear weapon....the earliest the Pakistanis are likely to be able to produce a weapon would be 1980." Just a year later, so clear was the evidence that Pakistan was buying nuclear technology and materials from European countries that the State Department issued a demarche to Pakistan. On June 23, 1983, the State Department prepared a four-page note for the US President on "The Pakistani Nuclear Programme", which began on this ominous note "...There is unambiguous evidence that Pakistan is actively pursuing a nuclear weapons development program." Besides the declassified documents, the following findings have been pieced together from open sources which reveal the involvement of the United States and other Western nations in helping Pakistan build the nuclear capability. Pakistan's initiation into the nuclear club began in 1958, when it was invited to join the Atoms for Peace Programme launched by the Eisenhower Administration. Two years later, Pakistan received a grant of $350,000 from the US to build its first research reactor. In 1962, US supplied a five mw light water research reactor known as the Pakistan Atomic Research Reactor (PARR-1). In 1971, the Canadian General Electric Co. completed a 137 mw CANDU power reactor for the Karachi Nuclear Power Plant. Plans for the plutonium separating facilities designed by the British Nuclear Fuels Limited were finalised the same year. A Belgian firm, Belgonucleaire, and a French corporation, Saint-Gobain Techniques Nouvelles, designed a pilot reprocessing facility called the New Labs at PINSTECH. In 1976, under a highly secretive project codenamed 706, Pakistan bought components for centrifuges from the Netherlands; orders for 6500 tubes of specially hardened steel were placed with Van Doome Transmissie. Other support components and subsystems were bought from Vakuum Apparat Technik (high vacuum valves) of Haag, Switzerland and Leybold Heraeus (gas purification equipment), Hanan, Germany. A year later, the British subsidiary of Emerson Electric sold 30 high frequency inverters to Pakistan for controlling centrifuge speeds. In 1987, West Germany sells a tritium purification and production facility with a capacity to produce 10g of tritium daily. Tritium can be used to produce a thermonuclear device. In 1989, German magazine, Stern reported that "since the beginning of the eighties over 70 (West German) enterprises have supplied sensitive goods to enterprises which for years have been buying equipment for Pakistan's ambitious nuclear weapons programme." There is more evidence gathered from US sources to show how the US blinks when it wants to. The most basic is the CIA's unclassified report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advanced Conventional Munitions www.cia.gov/cia/reports/721_jan_jun2000.html which, since 1999, have been religiously reporting Pakistan's acquisition of "a considerable amount of nuclear-related and dual-use equipment and materials from various sources-principally in the FSU (former Soviet Union) and Western Europe". What the CIA would never report is the involvement of the US Administration and firms in helping Pakistan acquire nuclear weapons technology at a time when it was forcing the world to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and other non-proliferation agreements. In May 1990, the intelligence agencies had gathered evidence that the US Administration was allowing Pakistan to acquire restricted items for its nuclear arsenal from within US. Well-known investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh, writing in the New Yorker, March 29, 1993, said, "Many more nuclear-related goods were clandestinely bought inside the United States by Pakistan than by Saddam Hussein's Iraq." The story of Richard M Barlow is equally revealing. He was a CIA officer working on Pakistan's nuclear programme. In 1987, he discovered what the State Department and his seniors were telling the Congress was not exactly what he and his colleagues were digging out on Pakistan's expanding nuclear weapons development programme. He resigned a year later. He later joined as an analyst with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defence for Policy from where too he had to resign under pressure after he raised strong objections to the administration's continued support to Pakistan's nuclear purchases in the US. The only conclusion one can draw from these findings is the US was not only aware of Pakistan's nuclear weapons development programme from the beginning but was willingly assisting the latter to develop the capability, even brushing aside CIA's intelligence reports on Pakistan's purchases from the west. No one else had the technology to sell them anyway. So who, in the final analysis, should stand trial for nuclear proliferation? Read the complete news at: http://www.dailypioneer.com Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti ***************************************************************** 30 IPS-English PAKISTAN: Pardon of father of N-bomb good thing, Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:06:16 -0800 MM HD IP PAKISTAN: Pardon of father of N-bomb good thing, says UAE paper Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM) DUBAI, Feb 6 (WAM) - A United Arab Emirates (UAE) English language daily has described as good the decision by President Pervez Musharraf to pardon Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb, as "a good thing." The Dubai-based 'Khaleej Times' paid similar tribute to Khan for taking the entire blame for what it said was the "alleged nuclear proliferation." "He would likely have indulged in finger-pointing, saying so and so was at fault. But Khan evidently is cut from a different cloth," commented the paper in its editorial today. It said Khan had absolved the government and his fellow scientists of any blame in the alleged sale of Pakistan's nuclear secrets and technology for uranium enrichment abroad. By pardoning Khan for any role in the proliferation scandal, 'Khaleej Times' said Musharraf has done "the right thing in accepting the scientist's plea for mercy." The paper was hopeful that the pardon would put an end to the controversy roiling Pakistan for the past couple of weeks, as well as stave off a showdown between the government and religious opposition. It concluded by saying that several lessons could be learned from the leaks episode, the most important of them was that "civil servants should always be exemplary in their behavior and also very careful about what they do." (WAM) ***************************************************************** 31 NEWS24: 'SA part of nuke underworld' Jeanne Marie Versluis London - Components used in the manufacture of nuclear bombs are believed to have been bought by a number of middlemen from countries that include South Africa. According to the Daily Telegraph, components have been bought in Japan, Malaysia, Germany and in at least two other European countries. Meanwhile, the United Nations' expert on atomic energy, Mohamed el-Baradei, has called for a new international policy to curb the flourishing black market trade in nuclear weapons technology. This comes after Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf scolded nuclear expert Abdoel Kadeer Khan for dealing in nuclear components. Khan is responsible for the Islamic world's first nuclear bomb. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is aware of Iran and Libya's nuclear programmes. However, it appears as if individuals are behind these programmes rather than governments. El-Baradei warned of a very complex underground network of nuclear component operators. The Daily Telegraph reported that the components, which have links to South Africa, were initially meant for use in the nuclear industry. Eventually, the components were used in machines that enriched uranium for nuclear weapons. The Guardian reported that Musharraf said international investigators would not be allowed to speak to Khan. Edited by Iaine Harper Discussion Forums ***************************************************************** 32 Las Vegas SUN: Bush Names Panel to Study Iraq Intel Woes Today: February 06, 2004 at 11:00:14 PST By KEN GUGGENHEIM ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush named seven people Friday to sit on an independent study commission to look into intelligence failures on Iraqi weapons, choosing former Democratic Sen. Charles S. Robb and retired judge Laurence Silberman, a Republican, to head the panel. "We must stay ahead of constantly changing intelligence challenges," Bush said. "The stakes for our country cannot be higher." Robb was a former U.S. senator and governor of Virginia and son-in-law of the late President Johnson. He is married to Lynda Baines Johnson and has been practicing law since leaving the Senate. Silberman is a conservative who served as deputy attorney general in the Nixon and Ford administrations. He was named to the appeals court by President Reagan in 1985. Bush directed federal agencies to cooperate with the commission, which will report to the nation by March 2005. Bush said he has yet to select the remaining two members of the nine-member panel. Bush also picked Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., to be a member of the commission. Bush had come under increasing pressure from Democrats in recent days in the wake of the admission by chief weapons inspector David Kay that he could not substantiate that Saddam Hussein had the kind of weapons arsenal the administration maintained was in existence, and which it used to justify the invasion of Iraq. Bush also named Lloyd Cutler, former White House counsel to Presidents Carter and Clinton; former federal judge Patricia M. Wald; Yale University president Richard C. Levin, and Adm. William O. Studeman, former deputy director of the CIA. Wald, a respected former chief judge for the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, served as a judge on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Bush had initially opposed a commission, but agreed to do so as calls grew from Republican lawmakers as well as Democrats. But the White House said the commission would look beyond problems in Iraq and examine the handling of intelligence on terrorists and U.S. adversaries. Democrats said any commission appointed solely by Bush could not be considered independent and objective. They have called for an examination not only of the work of intelligence agencies, but whether the White House pressured analysts and manipulated data to boost the case for war. Kay, the former CIA adviser for the Iraqi weapons search, has said he does not believe analysts were pressured. But he said Thursday that the commission should look into whether political leaders manipulated intelligence data. "I think that is an important question that needs to be understood," he said Thursday at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. CIA Director George Tenet offered a forceful defense of prewar intelligence in a speech at Georgetown University Thursday. He said the intelligence was mostly on target and that the analyses were reasonable given the information available to the United States and other nations. He made clear that analysts differed on important aspects of Saddam Hussein's chemical, biological and nuclear programs. Tenet said analysts had never claimed Iraq posed an imminent threat, but provided an objective picture of Saddam's efforts to build and conceal weapons programs. He also said that no one told analysts "what to say or how to say it." On Friday morning, Bush met with Charles Duelfer, who is taking over the weapons search in Iraq, and told him that he "wants him to find the truth ... it is important that we know all the facts," McClellan said. -- ***************************************************************** 33 Las Vegas SUN: Parties Want Pakistan Nuke Leaks Probed Today: February 06, 2004 at 10:55:13 PST By BURT HERMAN ASSOCIATED PRESS ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) - Opposition parties on Friday urged a parliamentary inquiry into the sale of Pakistan's nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea, a day after the president sought to defuse tensions by pardoning the disgraced father of the country's weapons program. Meanwhile, an Islamic party's call for nationwide protests Friday to support Abdul Qadeer Khan failed to arouse widespread sympathy, with businesses mostly ignoring a plea for a nationwide shutdown. President Gen. Pervez Musharraf pardoned Khan on Thursday after the scientist's televised apology a day earlier, saying Khan sold nuclear secrets for personal gain. The move avoided a trial for Khan, considered by many a national hero for giving Pakistan its nuclear deterrent against rival India. A public investigation also could have exposed high-level military involvement in spreading nuclear technology, a claim that Musharraf denies. However, many question how Khan sold weapons secrets - and sometimes used military cargo planes to ship the goods - without at least tacit official approval. The opposition Pakistan Peoples Party said Friday that Khan's confession didn't answer questions about the responsibility of intelligence and military officials for securing the nuclear program. "The matter will not end with the so-called confession of Dr. A.Q. Khan and the so-called pardon by Gen. Musharraf," said Farhatullah Babar, a senator and spokesman for the party. "We do not believe in the veracity of the steps taken by Gen. Musharraf," said Sadique al-Farooq, spokesman for the opposition Pakistan Muslim League party. "He has actually tried to play a game to save his skin and the skin of his predecessors in the armed forces and the intelligence agencies." Meanwhile, relatives of other scientists and security officials detained in the probe called for their release, after Musharraf said Khan was fully responsible for the leaks. "There lies no justification, moral or legal" to still hold detained scientists and engineers, a relatives' group said in a statement. At least six people remain in custody, but Musharraf said Thursday no decision had been made on their cases. Khan's pardon was greeted with relief Friday in Pakistani media. The Dawn newspaper wrote in an editorial it would "serve to lessen the intensity of the trauma to which this country has been subjected for several months." The pardon also drew no criticism from the United States, despite its professed concern over the spread of weapons of mass destruction to rogue states - the reason given for the war in Iraq. Analysts said Washington was leery of publicly criticizing Musharraf, an important partner in the war on terror in neighboring Afghanistan. Across the country, protests called by the hard-line Islamic opposition coalition Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal against what it called the "humiliation" of Khan attracted only scattered crowds. At least 50 protesters were arrested for blocking roads with burning tires and clashes with police ahead of a planned rally in Karachi, Pakistan's largest city, said Tariq Jamil, city police deputy inspector general. No injuries were reported. About 1,000 MMA supporters rallied in the northwestern city of Peshawar, near the Afghan border, where coalition leader Qazi Hussain Ahmed claimed to have spoken Thursday by telephone with Khan - who is being guarded under tight security at his home in the capital, Islamabad. Ahmed quoted Khan as saying: "What I was made to do, I was told to give a sacrifice for the nation. I rendered a sacrifice for the nation. And I am ready to give sacrifice for the nation anytime." -- ***************************************************************** 34 AU SMH: Malaysia caught up in nuclear trade web - World - www.smh.com.au [Sydney Morning Herald Online] By Raymond Bonner in Kuala Lumpur February 7, 2004 A Malaysian oil and gas conglomerate that supplied high-quality nuclear components to Libya is the latest link to emerge in a rogue nuclear trading network stretching back to Abdul Qadeer Khan, the creator of Pakistan's atom bomb. The components were made by Scomi Precision Engineering based in Selangor, Malaysia, a subsidiary of Scomi Group Berhad, Malaysian and Western investigators and the company said this week. The parts were shipped to a company in Dubai in four consignments between December 2002 and August 2003, Scomi Group said in a statement. Scomi's largest shareholder is Kamaluddin Abdullah, the son of the Malaysian Prime Minister, Abdullah Badawi. The 35-year-old son has no management role in the company and does not sit on the board. He is only a shareholder, a Malaysian official familiar with the company said. Scomi's chairman is Tan Sri Asmat Kamaluddin, a former secretary-general of Malaysia's international trade ministry. The company said it was not told by the Dubai company where the components were going. The company declined to answer any questions beyond its four-paragraph statement. A government official said on Wednesday that the Prime Minister will insist on a thorough investigation of the transaction. Western and Malaysian investigators said the equipment was ordered by Dr Khan, who has admitted responsibility for trading nuclear secrets. He made periodic trips to Malaysia over the past few years, according to Malaysian and Western intelligence agencies, not always travelling under his real name. The components, which were to be used in centrifuges to make weapons-grade uranium, were "very high quality, very high tech," said a Western official. "It required a lot of expertise." US and United Nations officials are investigating the secret network of trade in nuclear weapons designs and equipment that originated in Dr Khan's laboratory in Pakistan and extended to Libya, Iran and North Korea. "Malaysia was an unwitting participant in all this," an official in the prime minister's office said. But with the tight control that the Malaysian Government has traditionally exercised, many Malaysians and foreign diplomats doubt such a sale would have been possible without the knowledge of some government officials, probably in the military. The New York Times Copyright © 2004. The Sydney Morning Herald. advertise| ***************************************************************** 35 AU SMH: Investigators may be able to question Khan www.smh.com.au [Sydney Morning Herald Online] By Ahmed Rashid in Lahore and Robin Gedye in London February 7, 2004 Pakistan's President, Pervez Musharraf, has ruled out any outside inspections of the country's nuclear technology, while leaving open the possibility that Abdul Qadeer Khan - the scientist behind the illegal sale of weapons expertise - could be questioned by international investigators. In an apparently contradictory speech, General Musharraf tried to calm domestic fears that the West would infringe Pakistan's sovereignty in its search for culprits while promising an international audience there would be a full investigation. "This is a sovereign country. No document will be given," he said. "There is a written mercy appeal from his [Dr Khan's] side and there is a written pardon from my side. A rollback of Pakistan's nuclear program will never happen." However, the President added that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was welcome to come and discuss the issue. "We are open and we will tell them everything." Western diplomats said an 11-page confession by Dr Khan, the creator of the Pakistani nuclear bomb, which showed his dominant role in the spread of illicit nuclear know-how to other countries, including North Korea, Iran and Libya, had been sent to the IAEA. And the head of IAEA, Mohammed ElBaradei, has called for an international regime to destroy the flourishing blackmarket in nuclear technology, describing current controls as "kaput". Dr ElBaradei said Dr Khan's admission "raises more questions than it answers" and that Dr Khan was the "tip of an iceberg for us". "It's a supermarket," he said of the maze of clandestine nuclear buyers, shippers, middlemen and manufacturers in the network Dr Khan fostered. "It's the most dangerous phenomena we've seen in the non-proliferation area for many years." International investigations, led by the CIA and the IAEA and also involving British intelligence (MI6), are being conducted as a matter of urgency into the network in nuclear technology stretching from Europe to Asia, with a hub in the Middle East. Dr ElBaradei said he knew of people in at least five countries believed to be involved in the nuclear rackets. A leading IAEA investigator has recently been to Germany to question retired engineers. A Dubai-based British businessman is also believed to be involved, though the Foreign Office said it had no knowledge of him. Many in Pakistan's opposition parties and its media also called for a public inquiry into Dr Khan's "confession" that seeks to absolve the army and political leadership of any involvement in or knowledge of Dr Khan's network. The White House praised General Musharraf's efforts but made little mention of his decision to pardon Dr Khan. The Telegraph, London; The Guardian; The New York Times Copyright © 2004. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 36 Guardian Unlimited: Malaysia Is Caught in Nuclear Probe Friday February 6, 2004 7:01 PM By ROHAN SULLIVAN Associated Press Writer SHAH ALAM, Malaysia (AP) - The blue-shirted workers say they thought they were making parts for the oil and gas industry. The CIA says this nondescript factory on the outskirts of Malaysia's largest city was, in fact, churning out components for Libya's nuclear weapons program. Malaysia has become the latest Southeast Asian nation caught in a widening probe into the global black market in nuclear know-how and equipment, triggered by Pakistan's admission that its top nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, sold technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Managers at the Malaysian factory owned by Scomi Precision Engineering, or SCOPE, opened their doors to journalists Friday in an effort to prove their contribution to nuclear proliferation - if any - was unwitting. The case raises questions about export and trade regulations on so-called ``dual-use'' items, components for illegal technology that are indistinguishable from common machine parts to all but the experts. ``To me, they were just normal parts,'' said Che Lokman Che Omar, manager of the SCOPE factory. ``I have been using these machines for 15 years, and I have made many more difficult parts.'' Around him, technicians worked on tooling machines, carving precision edges onto bits of aluminum and stainless steel destined for car brake discs and ashtrays. Seven months ago, according to the CIA and Britain's MI6, similar parts were found in boxes marked with SCOPE's name aboard a ship bound for Libya. Investigators say the parts were for centrifuges, machines that can be used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons production. Scomi Precision Engineering's majority shareholder is the son of Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. The government rejected CIA Director George Tenet's assertion that SCOPE was one of the largest plants servicing a nuclear black market. ``To say it is the largest part of a network is totally inaccurate,'' a government official told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity. ``It is coming from a CIA director who is discredited - he screwed up the intelligence going into Iraq.'' According to Malaysian police, SCOPE built its Shah Alam factory to fill an order from the Dubai-based Gulf Technical Industries, which negotiated a $3.4 million contract through a Sri Lankan middleman named B.S.A. Tahir. Between December 2002 and August 2003, SCOPE shipped four consignments to the Gulf company, according to SCOPE's parent company, the Scomi Group. Using designs from the customer, SCOPE made 14 parts from high-grade stainless steel and aluminum obtained from the Singapore branch of a German supplier, Che Lokman said. He said 15 Malaysian contractors did the work, their employment terminated when the contract was filled. Scomi group spokeswoman Rohaida Ali Badaruddin said the Gulf company never told SCOPE what the parts were for, and SCOPE never asked. ``We make sure we are indemnified against any illegal activity in the contract,'' Rohaida said, but the company makes no background checks of clients or inquires about the end-use of products it make. Rohaida said SCOPE complied with government regulations in shipping the parts found in the Libya-destined crates. While an export permit is required for ``sensitive items,'' none was sought in this case because nothing appeared out of the ordinary, she said. Tahir, the middleman, visited the factory several times, as did engineers from Dubai, Che Lokman said. ``To my memory,'' he said, Pakistan's top nuclear scientist, Khan, never came. But a Malaysian official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told AP that Khan visited Malaysia several times - including to attend Tahir's wedding. National police chief Mohamed Bakri Omar said his Special Branch started investigating the Tahir-arranged deal after the CIA the MI6 informed them about the Libya shipment last November. Che Lokman said Malaysian police first came to the factory ``two or three weeks ago'' and that no foreign investigators had visited. He also said there were up to 30 other companies in Malaysia able to make the components in the Dubai deal. SCOPE is the only company identified as under investigation. He said the factory currently has several clients, Malaysian and international, but declined to give details citing confidentiality. Rohaida said SCOPE's services were precision milling and cutting, and its engineers do not have the expertise to know the use of the items they are making. If the company received a similar order to the one SCOPE filled for the Libya shipment, it would have no reason to turn it down. ``Milling and cutting is the same today as it was before,'' she said. Malaysian authorities say they are satisfied that the components built by SCOPE may have had medical or petrochemical uses. But U.S. and European officials have told AP the components from Malaysia were highly sophisticated and would have few uses other than nuclear enrichment. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 37 The Economic Times: 'Nuke issue not internal to Pak' - Saturday, February 7, 2004| Updated at Indiatimes>The Economic Times >Politics/Nation >Article NEW DELHI: In its first official reaction to admission by Pakistan’s top scientist AQ Khan of providing sensitive technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya, India on Friday said it was “not an internal matter†of Pakistan and the matter has to be debated in the IAEA and elsewhere for a “more responsible†behaviour from countries with nuclear capability. “Obviously, there were some charges and the Pakistan Cabinet decided to recommend to President (Pervez Musharraf) that AQ Khan should be pardoned. The Pakistan president has pardoned him,†external affairs minister Yashwant Sinha said at a joint press conference with his British counterpart Jack Straw. He said, “Obviously, it appears to me that things will not stop here because it is not merely an internal matter of Pakistan but it is a matter concerning the entire international community. Pakistan itself is not a signatory to the NPT but Libya and Iran are.†New Delhi ’s reaction assumes significance in the wake of US terming the presidential pardon to Mr Khan as an internal matter of Pakistan . “These are issues which will have to be debated in the IAEA and elsewhere so that we have a more responsible behaviour from countries which have nuclear capability,†he said. Mr Sinha and Mr Straw were asked whether Mr Khan’s admission and the pardon granted by President Musharraf could be construed as responsible behaviour by a nuclear weapon state. Mr Sinha said Mr Khan has been pardoned. “We don’t know what the charges are... In our system the pardon is given by the president. I don’t know what the system in Pakistan today is.†Mr Straw said Britain as a member of the UN Security Council as also being on the board of IAEA looked to all countries including Iran and Libya to observe their obligations. “We will do everything we can to ensure full compliance with the treaty (NPT),†he said. Asked whether the issue of re-entry of Pakistan into the Commonwealth was discussed, Mr Straw said there was a brief discussion on it. “It is not a matter of bilateral decision between India and the UK . It is a decision to be taken in due course by the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG),†he said. indiatimes.com Copyright © 2004 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. | ***************************************************************** 38 Washington Post: U.N. Nuclear Chief Warns of Global Black Market (washingtonpost.com) By Peter Slevin Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, February 6, 2004; Page A18 VIENNA, Feb. 5 -- Pakistan's top nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, represented "the tip of an iceberg" in an illicit nuclear supply network that has connections in many countries, the chief of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency said Thursday. The Khan case "raises more questions than it answers," said Mohamed ElBaradei, the agency's director. He said existing safeguards had failed to stop the spread of nuclear technology, and he called for urgent international cooperation to police a global black market whose reach is unknown. "We need to know who supplied what, when, to whom. Dr. Khan was not working alone," ElBaradei told reporters at his headquarters in Vienna one day after Khan publicly admitted to providing nuclear weapons expertise and supplies to North Korea, Libya and Iran. Investigators are pursuing leads in Japan, Malaysia, Germany and two still-unidentified European countries, IAEA officials said. ElBaradei said IAEA investigators were also reviewing an allegation that a representative of Khan's offered to provide Iraq with designs for a nuclear bomb and uranium enrichment equipment for $5 million on the eve of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Iraqi authorities rejected the proposal as a scam. "Maybe in hindsight it was not a scam," ElBaradei said. "But thank God they did not act on it." ElBaradei described the U.S. failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq as an affirmation of the U.N. inspections process. He said the White House should allow the IAEA to return to Iraq and finish its work. ElBaradei said a recent report by a former chief U.S. weapons inspector, David Kay, "validated what we have thought, that inspections were working." Kay's conclusion that Iraq had not rebuilt its nuclear program "strengthened my conviction that we need to go back to Iraq and stop this hullabaloo and bring the issue to closure," ElBaradei said, referring to the debate over the prewar extent of Iraq's nuclear program and U.S. intelligence about it. "We are the ones who have the credibility, and we know every person there," ElBaradei said. "And I think we can bring that issue to closure as early as anybody else could." The black market in nuclear components was uncovered in discussions with Iran and Libya. Both countries have revealed secret sources of supplies for programs that long went undetected by foreign intelligence services or international organizations. The IAEA was among the outside institutions that passed information about the network to the Pakistani government. Pressed by the Bush administration, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's president, ordered the detention and interrogation of senior weapons scientists who worked with Khan, often called the father of his nation's nuclear weapons program. ElBaradei, noting that the supply network had representatives in at least five countries, said evidence that a Malaysian company had produced sophisticated parts for enriching uranium raised concerns about factories elsewhere peddling such goods outside the public eye. Malaysian police have said Scomi Precision Engineering, known as SCOPE, had manufactured components for Libya's fledgling nuclear program. SCOPE is a subsidiary of Scomi Group Berhad, a publicly traded conglomerate whose principal shareholder is a son of Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. The parent company said the parts were ordered by Gulf Technical Industries, a company in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Scomi Precision Engineering said in a statement that it made "14 semi-finished components." The parts were shipped to Dubai in four batches between December 2002 and August 2003 in a deal worth $3.4 million. ElBaradei said the revelations showed that informal rules designed to prevent suppliers from aiding nuclear weapons aspirants were "kaput." He said only 38 countries take part in the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a voluntary alliance. "You need a complete overhaul of the export control system. It is not working right now," said ElBaradei, who called news about the clandestine supply network "the most dangerous thing we have seen in proliferation in many years." Special correspondent Azhar Sukri in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, contributed to this report. © 2004 The Washington Post Company ***************************************************************** 39 yaledailynews.com: Through the Fog, 11 points on War FILM REVIEW Published Friday, February 6, 2004 Through the Fog, 11 points on War McNamara tells us the lessons of his life and career, and does not apologize TOM TORO AND BETH DETERS He has 11 points, but pressures one lesson above all: try to learn. This outstanding demand sets the tone for the well-credentialed documentary "Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara." It presents the 85-year-old McNamara as interviewed by the voice behind the camera -- director and producer Errol Morris, of "Thin Blue Line" stature. McNamara ascended from humble beginnings to become the first extra-familial President of Ford Motor Co. He then left the job after five weeks to accept President Kennedy's bid as secretary of defense. The music, composed by long-time collaborator Philip Glass, sustains the pulse of information, but it does little to distinguish itself from his other Morris film scores. Both the music and the additional visuals serve to pace the presentation of ideas, rather than make loud claims. The 96-minute "Fog of War," edited down from 20 hours of interview, bears important fruits for those interested in America's role in the Cold War -- more specifically the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Vietnam War. McNamara's insight into the ring of power that determined U.S. defense strategy makes this film much more intriguing than most PTA politics. The stakes pinned to his story -- threat of compound nuclear destruction -- summon gut emotions, and the story itself captures all attentive minds. As McNamara says, "if people do not display wisdom, they will clash, like blind moles, and then annihilation will commence." So pay for your ticket, and pay attention please. Every person who would call him or herself educated should take two hours to bear witness. "Fog of War" begins with the point, "empathize with your enemy." A most startling example owes itself to McNamara's revisiting of U.S.-Vietnamese politics on screen. Lyndon B. Johnson's administration clutched the Domino Theory to justify the U.S.'s fight for a "free and democratic" Vietnam. The North Vietnamese, however, viewed this conflict with the U.S. as the final battle in a 100-year war for liberation. This scenario seems especially pointed toward American current events. It is well-timed that Morris release this picture right in the froth of the upcoming elections, a time of debate, a time to "reexamine [your] reasoning," McNamara's eighth point. The film's structure treats each of its 11 segments' prefacing quotes -- including "belief and seeing are both often wrong," "never say never," and "you can't change human nature" -- like a tenant, and McNamara like a sage. Does this rig afford its subject too elevated a position? The film remains vague about a judgment: whether to treat McNamara's musings as political scripture, or to stare down the man whose "rationalization" took hundreds of thousands of American lives, not to mention those of the Vietnamese and Japanese. By the time "Mac the Knife" McNamara stepped down from his duties under Johnson, approximately 25,000 Americans had died in Vietnam, about half of the total body count by the war's end. An often-canted angle and slightly shifting frame captures fittingly the image of a man who eludes most prejudices. We could accuse McNamara of much, but condemn him of little. His impulse toward a more efficient war machine -- he served as a war planner under General Curtis LeMay in WWII -- increased the cost of losing for Japan. Even before the atomic bombs fell over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, U.S. firebombs had extinguished 50 square miles of Tokyo -- roughly equal in size to New York City at that time -- among 67 other Japanese cities. Though McNamara's post then placed him among those responsible for such decisions, can we blame a man unable to crunch the innumerable variables of war? He tempers his fourth point, "maximize efficiency," with his fifth: "proportionality should be a guide in war." Would the country of the Kamikaze bomber have folded without the pressure applied by America's atomic bombs? What sort of morality allows for that amount of death in the span of 3 days? "[General] LeMay said, 'if we lost the war, we'd all be prosecuted as war criminals.' He recognized he was being immoral." At this point Morris allows McNamara's words to float over his face, silenced either by slow motion or editing. This use of voice-over emphasizes the thought, spoken through McNamara's eyes. It calls attention to the greatest trick pulled by nations: the winner's right to write history. It traces a line between self-foolery and self-preservation. With "Fog of War," Morris gives history another elegantly quizzical document. Both Morris' and McNamara's compassionate fascination with human politics are transmitted to the audience's side of the screen. The care and craftsmanship given to this documentary transforms the hour and a half into an experience not to be missed. Copyright © 1995-2003 Yale Daily News Publishing Company, Inc. ***************************************************************** 40 SF Chronicle: McNamara speaks Berkeley's language / He declares Iraq war is wrong, rails against nuclear weapons Friday, February 6, 2004 He didn't win hearts and minds in Vietnam, but Robert McNamara won a warm if not forgiving welcome in another republic that once reviled him as a war-mongering demon -- Berkeley. The anti-war city is buzzing with talk about the 87-year-old former defense secretary's sold-out appearance Wednesday night at Zellerbach Hall, where he railed against nuclear arms and, for the first time, admitted to fellow Americans what he has long refused to say -- that he condemns the Bush policy in Iraq. Although McNamara is a Cal grad, it was his first public appearance in Berkeley, where bitter memories remain vivid of his waging the Vietnam War in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, a conflict that killed more then 2 million Vietnamese and 58,000 Americans. Among those applauding in the 2,089-seat hall was Daniel Ellsberg, the defense department defector who blew the whistle on U.S. government deception in Vietnam when he released the Pentagon Papers. "I think I started some of the applause when he talked about nuclear weapons," said Ellsberg, who lives in Berkeley. "He's one of the very few establishment people who make that point." McNamara, who spoke in forceful, self-assured tones often punctuated by jabs with his pen in the air, urged broad public debate on nuclear weapons policy and, to hearty applause, exhorted the crowd to not lose hope on averting the horror of war: "Don't give up! You as individuals can do something about it." But Ellsberg strongly objected to McNamara's justification for not speaking out against a war in progress. Although McNamara said the Vietnam War was wrong 20 years after the fact in his 1995 book, "In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam," he says he refused to voice his misgivings at the time for the same reason he doesn't want to speak now about the Iraq invasion and occupation -- to avoid risking American lives. Ellsberg said McNamara's silence, as well as his own, from 1964 through 1967 "condemned tens of thousands of American soldiers to death and more than a million Vietnamese." McNamara said 173 reporters have asked him to comment on Bush's policy in Iraq, and that he told them, "I think it's irresponsible for an ex-secretary of defense to comment ... when hundreds of thousands of Americans are at risk and when he's engaged in the most delicate negotiations with the United Nations." But moderator Mark Danner, a journalist who teaches at Cal, prodded McNamara on a recent interview he gave the Toronto Globe and Mail in which he said the United States is fighting a totally unnecessary war that has managed to destroy important relationships with potential allies. "It's morally wrong," McNamara said of U.S. policy in the Globe and Mail, "it's politically wrong, it's economically wrong." McNamara, who has denounced unilateralism as a general policy without regard to Iraq, said he talked about Iraq to the Canadian reporter, thinking it wouldn't be read in the United States. "What I said was true," he said, "but I'm not sure I was right in saying it at the time." Many people came to hear McNamara because he is the heart of an extraordinary new documentary, "Fog of War," by Errol Morris, who also was on stage for the unscripted discussion on Wednesday. The film, an Academy Award nominee shown in part Wednesday night, is an engrossing interview with McNamara, who has emerged as a latter-day prophet of nuclear peril and a restless soul haunted by his moral responsibility for the slaughters of Vietnam and World War II. A member of the Air Force team under Gen. Curtis LeMay responsible for the World War II fire-bombings of Tokyo and 66 other Japanese cities that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, McNamara says in the film that he would have been tried as a war criminal if the U.S. had lost the war. UC Berkeley history professor David Hollinger said he wasn't surprised by the Berkeley reception of McNamara. He called the film "a fantastically important American cultural document." Audience reactions were far from unanimous. "I will say as a Vietnamese that he is still a war criminal," said Tran Tuong Nhu of Berkeley, who opposed the war as a '60s Cal student. Larry Bensky, political analyst for KPFA radio in Berkeley, saw McNamara as both a "con man" who has not apologized for his deeds and as a "classic liberal" caught in a political system that "doesn't allow good-hearted idealistic people to be good-hearted idealistic people. ...When he gets into the world of real politic, he's basically a war criminal." Berkeley mortgage broker David Kupler, a '60s war protester at Cal, said his feelings changed after hearing McNamara. "I was quite impressed with him," Kupler said. "There was a kind of humility. Very few American political personalities admit their mistakes like this. I think the audience appreciated that." E-mail Charles Burress at ©2004 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback | FAQ ***************************************************************** 41 Daily Times: Pakistan’s nuclear leak: Indian FM says it is not an internal matter Saturday, February 07, 2004 By Iftikhar Gilani NEW DELHI: In its first official reaction to the admission by Pakistan’s top scientist Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan of providing sensitive nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya, India said on Friday it was “not an internal matter” of Pakistan and it had to be debated with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and elsewhere for “more responsible” behaviour from countries with nuclear capability. “Obviously, there were some charges and the Pakistani cabinet decided to recommend to President Pervez Musharraf that AQ Khan should be pardoned. The Pakistani president has pardoned him,” Indian External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha said at a joint press conference with his British counterpart Jack Straw. He said, “Obviously, it appears to me that things will not stop here because it is not merely an internal Pakistani matter but one concerning the entire international community. Pakistan itself is not a signatory to the NPT (nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty) but Libya and Iran are.” The US has called the presidential pardon for Dr Khan an internal matter for Pakistan. But Sinha said, “These are issues which will have to be debated in the IAEA and elsewhere so that we have more responsible behaviour from countries which have nuclear capability.” Mr Sinha and Mr Straw were asked whether Dr Khan’s admission and the pardon granted by President Musharraf could be construed as responsible behaviour by a nuclear weapon state. The Indian minister said, “We don’t know what the charges are... in our system the pardon is given by the president. I don’t know what the system in Pakistan today is”. Mr Straw said Britain, as a UN Security Council member and also being on the board of the IAEA, looked to all countries to observe their obligations. “We will do everything we can to ensure full compliance with the treaty (NPT),” he said. Mr Straw said they briefly discussed Pakistan’s retioning the Commonwealth. Pakistan says nuclear plan won’t be debated elsewhere: Pakistan on Friday strongly rejected Indian Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha’s remarks regarding Dr Khan’s confession and said its nuclear programme would not be debated elsewhere. “The investigations in Pakistan are an internal matter. The buck stops here in Pakistan. The matter won’t be debated elsewhere”, Foreign Office spokesman Masood Khan told Daily Times while commenting on remarks by the Indian minister earlier in on Friday. Home | National Daily Times - All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 42 Daily Times: Libya paid $50m for N-blueprints from Khan network Saturday, February 07, 2004 WASHINGTON: Libya paid $50 million to purchase nuclear blueprints from dealers who were part of the AQ Khan network, a report in the New York Times said on Friday. “Those blueprints, along with the capability to make enriched uranium, could have given the Libyans all the elements they needed to make a nuclear bomb. What the Libyans purchased, in the words of an American weapons expert who has reviewed the programme in detail, was both the kitchen equipment ‘and the recipes,’” according to the report. The designs flown out of Libya and now in US possession closely resemble the warheads that China tested in the late 1960s and passed on to Pakistan decades ago. There is no evidence that the Libyans actually produced the warheads, much less sufficient nuclear fuel. According to American and European investigators, the network that supplied Libya was enormously complex, and not all the paths led directly back to the Khan Research Laboratories. Centrifuge parts were made in Malaysia, and other parts were obtained in Germany and Japan. The Japanese last year seized critical equipment headed for North Korea, though they never announced it. But both the centrifuge designs and the bomb designs seized in Libya appear to have come from the same country, according to the experts who have reviewed them. —Khalid Hasan Home | National Daily Times - All Rights Reserved Site developed and hosted by WorldCALL Internet Solutions ***************************************************************** 43 Daily Times: Pakistan will help UN investigate Iran Saturday, February 07, 2004 LONDON: Pakistan’s foreign minister said on Thursday his country will help the United Nations probe leaks of nuclear technology to Iran, although it would not allow an investigation into its own nuclear programme. President Pervez Musharraf pardoned scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan on Thursday after he confessed to leaking nuclear secrets. Musharraf told a news conference Pakistan would give no documents to the UN International Atomic Energy Agency or permit it to hold an independent probe into Khan’s activities. But Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri said Musharraf had been “misunderstood”, and that what he meant was Pakistan would not allow the IAEA to investigate Pakistan’s own nuclear programmes, although it would help the body investigate Iran. “What he said is actually that we are under no obligations,” Kasuri told the BBC World Service radio’s The World Today programme. “We will cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency.” “What is the International Atomic Energy Agency’s function?... It’s a body that has come into the picture because Iran has signed the additional protocol. They wish to investigate whether Iran’s declaration is correct or not. “We will not allow them under any situation whatsoever to come and peep into our programme. These are our national secrets. But wherever they need support to achieve their declared objectives...we will fully cooperate,” he said. —Reuters Daily Times - All Rights Reserved Site developed and hosted by WorldCALL Internet Solutions ***************************************************************** 44 Daily Times: US satisfied with N-investigations, says Rashid Saturday, February 07, 2004 WASHINGTON: A consensus has developed in the US that President Pervez Musharraf has handled the investigation of the nuclear scientists “wisely and courageously” and “the difficult period is over”, according to Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, federal minister for information and broadcasting, at a press conference here on Wednesday. “The US is totally satisfied with the way matters were handled,” Mr Rashid said. “We have demonstrated our commitment to non-proliferation, and we shall emerge from this situation soon.” There is a realisation that the Government was not involved in the matter in any way, he added. He said except for the single incident of leakage pertaining to Dr AQ Khan, who has made a public confession, all of the country’s nuclear assets are in safe hands and this has been acknowledged by the world. “We conducted the investigations in the light of information provided by the IAEA, and the results are before everybody,” he said. He said the investigations pertain to a period when responsibility for the programme was in Dr Khan’s hands, while the others involved were security personnel. He said a nuclear deterrent guarantees Pakistan’s national security and neither will it be rolled back nor will there be any compromise on it. He was hopeful that the February 16 Pakistan-India talks will take place as planned. The comity of nations, he said, is appreciative of India and Pakistan for the role their leaders have played. Mr Rashid said Pakistan supports President Hamid Karzai for working towards establishing a stable Afghanistan. He referred to the $100 million assistance Pakistan had provided Kabul for reconstruction, stability and development. He said the major issue of the Legal Framework Order (LFO) had been amicably overcome and, national reserves, revenues and exports have increased. He said the recovery of $12 million to $13 million from Benazir Bhutto is due and another case of alleged corruption has been filed by the National Accountability Bureau against her for about $61 million allegedly deposited in foreign accounts in Switzerland. He also said the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) is an ally of the elected government, and now works in concert with the Jamali government. He stated that Benazir Bhutto is fully supportive of the current government’s foreign policy and has supported the Islamabad Declaration. However, he said the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) is opposing the government. At the US Senate Committee Hearing held on January 28 remarks made by a witness, Stephen Cohen, the Federal minister, emphasised the US take steps to improve the contrary message going to Islamic world. Hence, he said, it is only befitting that the need for the US to take action to mend its image in the Islamic world so that is policies are more acceptable to the people there. Ambassador Ashraf Jehangir Qazi was also present on the occasion. —APP Home | National Daily Times - All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 45 Indian Express: Pardon of Khan an internal matter - US The Financial Express Friday, February 06, 2004 Press Trust of India Washington, February 6: Asserting that Pakistan's decision to pardon its chief nuclear scientist Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan is an internal matter, the US has said the action needs to be seen in the light of that country's overall efforts in investigating leakage of nuclear secrets and urged Islamabad to should ensure that proliferation does not happen again. "As far as the specifics of sentencing or pardons or whatever, that really is a matter for Pakistan to decide and they will take, I am sure, appropriate measures under Pakistani law and regulations to ensure that he and his associates are no longer able to endanger the international community," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher told reporters on Thursday. The actions that Pakistan has been taking with regard to this investigation and uncovering information about the actons of various Pakistanis, said Boucher, need to be seen in the context of the overall international effort against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. "The spread of nuclear weapons and technology," said Boucher, "is indeed a matter of global concern. The US has urged all nations that have this technology to take precautions to ensure that it is properly controlled, that it does not fall into the hands of rogue States, non-State actors and individuals. "And that is why we have said that we value the commitments President Musharraf has made to prevent the expertise in Pakistan from reaching other places and other countries and othernations, and we have welcomed the investigation that they have undertaken into reports that such activities have occurred," he said. © 2004: Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 46 Indian Express: Pak deadlier than Osama, Saddam - US media Pak deadlier than Osama, Saddam: US media Friday, February 06, 2004 Reuters Islamabad, February 6: At first glance it's the perfect face-saving solution. But a dramatic confession by Pakistan's top nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan that he was personally responsible for selling nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea is unlikely to draw a line under one of the largest proliferation scandals ever. "A.Q. Khan has been made a scapegoat," said Samina Ahmed, Pakistan director of the International Crisis Group, a Brussels-based think thank. "Will the issue die that easily in Pakistan? It will be interesting to see." The scientist's carefully scripted television apology was the result of a deal between Khan and the army, newspapers said. Khan absolved the government and military of any responsibility for the nuclear leaks, and on Thursday Musharraf said he had officially pardoned Khan. Washington appears to have agreed to stand by Pakistan's embattled president and not push for a full investigation into the military's role in selling nuclear secrets that could undermine one of its most important allies in the Muslim world. US administration officials say they are satisfied with assurances from Musharraf of no further proliferation, and do not seem to want to unsettle a man who survived two assassination attempts late last year. Continued Single-Page Format 1 2 3 4 Next » © 2004: Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 47 Japan Times: Pakistan and the nuclear bazaar Saturday, February 7, 2004 EDITORIAL Pakistan has long argued that it had tight grip on the country's nuclear-weapons program. Despite mounting suspicions, Islamabad assured the world that neither it nor its scientists were involved in the proliferation of such weapons to other countries. In recent weeks, Pakistan has changed its tune. Under intense international scrutiny, Pakistan has admitted that its top nuclear scientist helped other nations build atomic bombs. That scientist has confessed, but it is still unclear whether he was, as the government maintains, acting on his own or with official sanction. Either way, it has become abundantly clear that the market for weapons of mass destruction is far less regulated than thought. The WMD arms bazaar is open for business. Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan is a hero in Pakistan, where he is considered the father of the country's nuclear bomb. Dr. Khan established and ran the laboratories that enriched uranium and procured the equipment that allowed Pakistan to build an atomic device. He won won global attention after stealing blueprints for uranium enrichment from a European firm for which he worked in the 1970s. Since returning home, Dr. Khan has been an outspoken advocate of "the Islamic bomb." He became a target of the International Atomic Energy Agency when his centrifuge designs -- essential to creating weapons-grade enriched uranium -- turned up in Iran. In recent weeks, pressure has mounted on Pakistan to go beyond the ritual denials of Dr. Khan's involvement in efforts to help rogue states develop nuclear weapons and seriously investigate the charges. Last week, Islamabad conceded it was wrong and reported that Dr. Khan had confessed to helping North Korea, Iran and Iraq. Pakistan insists that the scientist's activities were for personal gain, that they were unauthorized and government officials were unaware of them. The government's claim of ignorance is bolstered by the fact that Dr. Khan ran his laboratories like a fiefdom. He was left alone to accomplish the critical task of catching up with archrival India and building an atomic bomb. In a confession to the nation last week, Dr. Khan said he supplied designs, hardware and materials to make enriched uranium to Iran, Libya and North Korea. His motives varied: financial gain, supporting other Islamic nations, deflecting attention from Pakistan. But no matter what the rationale, he insisted that he acted alone without the knowledge or approval of the government or military authorities. How convenient. Pressure has been mounting since the IAEA found evidence last year that Pakistan had assisted Iran in its quest to develop nuclear weapons. Initial reports had Dr. Khan complaining that senior military officials, including two former army chiefs and President Pervez Musharraf, were aware of his work for other governments. Given the military's intense interest in the nuclear-weapons program, its protection of the facilities, and the sheer amount of materials and planning that was involved, the claims of ignorance are hard to credit. Moreover, it has long been believed that Pakistan's Ghauri missile program was the result of a deal brokered at the highest levels that swapped Dr. Khan's nuclear technology for North Korea's missiles. The Pakistani government's involvement is disturbing. More troubling still is the size of the black market that the investigation has uncovered. Dr. Khan's assistance to rogue states lasted over a decade, and during that time he used middlemen in Europe, the Mideast and South Asia, airlines on several continents and he reportedly even owned factories in Malaysia. There is a very good chance that Dr. Khan's activities might have remained mere suspicions if Libya had not decided to make a break with its past and come clean about its programs to develop weapons of mass destruction. Most experts believe that the recent revelations constitute only a fraction of the illegal activities in the nuclear black market. Uncovering and putting an end to that market are more important now than punishing Dr. Khan. The scientist's popularity ensures that Islamabad would prefer to pardon rather than punish him; his readiness to take full responsibility for his actions, thus sparing the military additional embarrassment, makes that even easier. To no one's surprise, Mr. Musharraf has announced that he will do just that. In addition, Mr. Musharraf has said that Pakistan's dignity prevents it from cooperating with the IAEA to uncover the full extent of Dr. Khan's activity. Complete disclosure and debriefing to the IAEA should be the prerequisite for any leniency for Dr. Khan. Pakistan can shed light on nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea; that information could help other nations deal with the destructive powers that Dr. Khan has unleashed. There is nothing dignified in covering up that ugly truth. The Japan Times: Feb. 7, 2004 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 48 BulletinWire News: India's new toys BulletinWire | February 6, 2004 As part of an ongoing expansion of its military capabilities, India is looking to acquire a new air defense system and other advanced weapons systems. "Some of the top-priority acquisitions will be the medium multi-role combat aircraft, air defense systems, (nuclear) command and control, communications . . . advanced weapons for aircraft, advanced warning and control systems, and force-multipliers," Indian Defence Minister George Fernandes told reporters (Agence France Presse, February 5). To that end, the French firm Thales announced its plans to sell India 19 low-level defense radar systems in the next three years, according to the report. Recently, India has been bolstering its ability to provide an effective nuclear deterrent. On January 20, India inked a $1.5 billion deal with Russia for the transfer of a refurbished Soviet-era aircraft carrier and 28 MiG-29 fighter jets. The aircraft carrier is expected to be delivered no sooner than 2008, when the life expectancy of India’s current carrier will end. India’s National Security Council spelled out its broad intentions in a 1999 draft nuclear doctrine, that "called for the creation of a ‘credible minimum deterrent' to be based 'on a triad of aircraft, mobile land-based missiles, and sea-based assets,' but the board’s recommendations had no official standing," reported Robert S. Norris, William Arkin, Hans Kristensen, and Joshua Handler in the Bulletin’s March/April 2002 Nuclear Notebook. Administration (NNSA) announced January 28 that its final environmental impact statement for the planned $4 billion Modern Pit Facility (MPF) would be indefinitely delayed. The statement, originally due by April and expected to name a site for the facility, was postponed because of congressional concerns, according to the NNSA. As Chris Paine reported in the September/October 2003 Bulletin, the MPF would be able to make 250–900 plutonium weapons cores per year. Yet “Energy could easily maintain a sufficient deterrent without the MPF,” Paine reported. He added, “Such bomb-making abilities don’t just knock the moral-political props out from under efforts to stem bomb programs in North Korea, Iran, India, and Pakistan. They’re a felonious frontal assault” on nonproliferation itself. Despite criticism from Congress and elsewhere, Energy is unlikely to give up its drive for new weapons cores. “Restoring our capability to manufacture plutonium pits is an essential element of America’s nuclear defense policy,” said NNSA head Linton Brooks. In a victory for environmental activists, the Energy Department revoked its own approval for a new biowarfare lab at Los Alamos National Laboratory, delaying the lab’s opening until a new environmental assessment is completed. “New circumstances and information relevant to environmental concerns bearing on the operation of the [Bio-Safety Level 3] facility have arisen since the building was constructed,” according to a January 23 press release from Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). After an initial environmental assessment in February 2002, the NNSA issued a finding of no significant impact and approved the new lab. Activists filed a lawsuit in August 2003 charging that the facility at Los Alamos and another at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory were approved without conducting a thorough review of environmental risks. “The public can now have better assurance that a stringent risk analysis will be completed before bio-agent research begins at a secret nuclear weapons lab with a shoddy environmental, safety and security record,” said Jay Coghlan, director of Nuclear Watch, one of the suit’s complainants, in response to NNSA’s announcement. In the September/October 2003 issue of the Bulletin, Coghlan and Marylia Kelley questioned the wisdom of opening the new high-level biowarfare labs at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore, where nuclear weapons research programs are already located. They listed some of the reasons that the Energy Department’s initial assessment was flawed. “Ignored in the assessments were security risks, such as threat from terrorists or disgruntled employees. Nor did Energy analyze in any depth the accident scenarios for its [Bio-Safety Level 3] facilities,” wrote Coghlan and Kelley. The NNSA projects that the new environmental assessment for the Los Alamos lab will be complete in three to four months. Meanwhile, activists continue to demand another review of the new Lawrence Livermore facility. Bulletin Resources Bugs and Bombs, by Marylia Kelley and Jay Coghlan, September/October 2003 Additional Resources A copy of the NNSA press release is available at the Nuclear Watch Web site. January 15, 2004 German defenses: Blowing smoke? The nuclear power industry in Germany is exploring the possibility of protecting its plants from suicide air-attacks by hiding them behind smoke screens. Devices would deploy thick clouds of fog when threats are detected. “The probability that a plane could be aimed precisely at the reactor would be very efficiently reduced,” according to a statement from the German ministry of the environment (AFP, January 13). The protective measures were proposed in response to a post-9/11 report produced by the German government that examined the danger of planes crashing into nuclear plants. The feasibility study for the smoke screen project is set to be complete by March, a ministry spokesman said. Despite rising concern about the vulnerability of U.S. nuclear power facilities, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has made little effort to strengthen its facilities against potential security threats, including suicide air-attacks. In a sidebar to a May/June 2003 article in the Bulletin, Joel Hirsch suggested that building a protective screen of beams, high-strength cables, wires and netting (known as “Beamhenge”) might blunt the impact of a suicide air-attack on the key structures of a nuclear plant’s facilities. “The NRC has also rejected calls by the public and policy-makers to consider the feasibility of directly protecting nuclear plants from air attack by imposing no-fly zones or deploying portable anti-aircraft systems, citing the command-and-control problems inherent in such an approach,” reported Daniel Hirsch, David Lochbaum & Edwin Lyman in the May/June 2003 Bulletin. Local political and military conflicts, as well as the legacy of colonialism, will likely constrict the flow of oil to the United States from foreign regions critical to the Bush administration’s energy policy, according to a recent report in Foreign Policy in Focus (January 2004). For example, “U.S. efforts to tap into abundant Mexican and Venezuelan energy supplies will hit a major snag. Because of a long history of colonial and imperial predation, these two countries have placed their energy reserves under state control, establishing strong legal barriers to foreign involvement in domestic oil production,” argues author Michael Klare. In the January/February 2004 Bulletin, Alfred Cavallo reported that even if the United States had access to all the oil in the world, one day in the not too distant future that supply would dry up—contrary to public perception. “The idea that petroleum resources are finite and that petroleum production might peak in the near future seems to have vanished from all discussion of energy policy,” wrote Cavallo. ***************************************************************** 49 Halliburton: FG Probes Theft of Radio Active Materials By Mike Oduniyi in Lagos and Josephine Lohor in Abuja President Olusegun Obasanjo yesterday set up a six-member high-powered committee over the theft of radioactive materials in December 2002 from Halliburton Energy Services in Nigeria. The move by the President came a day after the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mr. Nuhu Ribadu, confirmed that the Commission had recovered N80 million from the troubled US-based oil services group, which cheated Nigeria in taxes. Also, the United States has launched an investigation into allegations that a subsidiary of Halliburton was involved in the payment of $180 million in bribes to win contracts in the Nigerian LNG project. Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity to the President, Mrs. Oluremi Oyo, while briefing State House Correspondents, named members of the committee to probe the theft of the Halliburton radio-active material as Ambassador Olu Adeniji, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Akinlolu Olujinmi, Minister of Justice, Mr. Tafa Balogun, Inspector-General of Police, the Department of State Security Service, Ministry of Petroleum Resources and the Director-General of the National Nuclear Regulatory Agency. Oyo, who said the committee is to ensure that all those involved in the act, no matter how highly placed are brought to book, stated that "the committee is charged with identifying person or persons instrumental to the theft of the radioactive material in December 2002." "The committee will also establish whether any harm has been done to any person or persons who have come into contact with the material. As you know, radioactive materials are harmful to health," she said. She said that the radioactive materials have been traced to a recycling plant in Germany. She, however, regretted that the stolen material was quickly taken to Halliburton in the United States last month before Nigeria could retrieve them. Oyo added that such an act violates the Nuclear Safety and Radiation Act of 1995. "The committee will also take steps to bring culprits in and outside Nigeria to book. I will like to recall that after the theft of the radioactive materials in 2002, they were intercepted in Germany at a recycling plant and that was because that plant had proper radiation monitors. So it was easy to be discovered," she stated. Who Are We ? | About THISDAYOnLine.com | THISDAY People | Contact Us © Copyright 2000 Leaders & Company Limited ***************************************************************** 50 Brattleboro Reformer: State files evacuation summary February 06, 2004 Brattleboro, VT By TOBY HENRY Reformer Staff BRATTLEBORO -- Public Service Commissioner Kerry Sleeper and officials from Vermont Emergency Management emphasized on Thursday that their recent FEMA submittal is an annual abstract of emergency plans, not a request for the approval of a local evacuation plan. "One of the biggest challenges ever since I've been involved in this is misinformation," Sleeper said. "There's been an assumption that this was some type of the approval for the (radiological emergency response plan) or the evacuation plan, which is only one part of the overall emergency response plan. This is really an annual submittal to the Federal Emergency Management Association saying that we've met a series of benchmarks, of FEMA requirements, this year, and what we plan to do next year. "FEMA will evaluate it to assess what we've done, but really, there is no approval process," he added. "It's just a way to show FEMA that we've done what we're supposed to do in supporting our plan." Sleeper, along with VEM director Albie Lewis and deputy director Duncan Higgins, said that the annual submittal is frequently distorted in both press and public perception to the point where some state residents are led to believe the certification letter is a request for the state's evacuation plan to be approved by FEMA. Higgins insisted that this perception is false. "Usually, at this time of year, there's a lot of confusing press about this," he said. "It's a letter that basically tells (FEMA) what we did last year, where money was spent and what it was spent on, the meetings we've held and how we've worked in concert with the local communities and with Vermont Yankee. There's a lot of hindsight involved, and it gives an overview of what we expect for next year." Neil Lunderville, state secretary of military and civil affairs, echoed comments about the confusing nature of the yearly submittal and stressed that the power to approve or disapprove the evacuation plan exists only at the federal, not state, level. "Only FEMA can do that," he said. "That's just not our job, and federally, that's not something (FEMA) has asked us to do." The radiological emergency response plan, commonly referred to as the "RERP," is Vermont Emergency Management's layout for responding to a major accident, such as a meltdown, at Vernon's Vermont Yankee nuclear plant. Sleeper said that he submitted the approximately 20-page annual letter of certification in late January, meeting the required Jan. 31 deadline. According to FEMA guidelines, all states with a nuclear power plant are required to submit this certification letter of their plan to the association each year. The letter is partly a checklist which requires Vermont Emergency Management to verify that they conducted monthly drills and adhered to other FEMA guidelines, Sleeper said. Other portions of the annual letter call for operational checks on equipment, details on public and media education procedures and documentation of emergency planners' meetings. Sleeper, who signed the letter, said that his review of it indicated to him that all required FEMA guidelines had been met. Daryl Eli, a spokesman for FEMA's Region I office in Boston, confirmed on Thursday that the letter had been received before last month's deadline. The annual certification letter will be reviewed by a team consisting of FEMA's technological hazard program specialists, Eli said. The team is expected to issue a response back to Vermont Emergency Management within 60 days, he said. There is no relation between the annual submittal and this week's inspection of VEM by a six-member team from the Louisville, Ky.-based Emergency Management Accreditation Program, Higgins said. VEM officials submitted the request for the voluntary inspection on their own volition last year. The team will contrast VEM's statewide disaster response policies with nationwide standards set by the National Fire Planning Association, but the program is not an enforcement body. Higgins said that one detail included in the recent FEMA submittal outlines VEM's hope to test a new public alert system this year. Known as the Community Alert Network, the system consists of a mass-dialing device that can call and deliver a prerecorded message to hundreds of residents each minute in the event of an emergency at Vermont Yankee. VEM plans to use the system as an adjunct to the already existing methods of notification, which includes sirens, tone-alert radios and emergency broadcasts on local radio stations. According to online data, the Community Alert Network, established in 1981, is used for emergency notifications in about 700 communities in North America and can make up to 300 calls per minute. The network is used in a variety of scenarios, including missing child "Amber Alerts," product recalls, bomb threats, fires and floods. In Vermont, the Department of Corrections uses the system for towns located near prisons in the event of a prison escape. Higgins could not specify when the system might undergo a local test, but added that it is a priority for VEM this year. While the system could be used in emergencies involving Vermont Yankee, Higgins added that it could also be used in situations that local towns are far more likely to experience, such as the flood which inundated parts of the county this summer and the 2001 train derailment in Westminster. "It's a great way to provide information to every resident and business," he said. "It puts more 'depths on the bench,' to use a sports term." Lewis said that the system might not work in cases where some local residents have had their phones turned off, but added that individual responsibility is the most important factor in emergency planning at both the single-family and larger community level. "The first line of defense starts with the individual," he said. "That is why, for example, families should have a plan for what they will do in the event of a fire. There's a certain responsibility to ensure that you will have water on hand, a working radio to get updated information, in an emergency." ***************************************************************** 51 NRC: NRC to Hold Public Meeting in Connecticut on License Renewal Application for Millstone 2 &3 News Release - Region I - 2004-00 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-04-002 February 6, 2004 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold a public information meeting on Tuesday, February 17, in Waterford, Conn., to discuss how the agency will review the application submitted by the Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., to renew the operating licenses for Millstone Units 2 and 3. The plants are located in Waterford. The meeting will be held from 7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in the Waterford Town Hall, 15 Rope Ferry Road in Waterford, Conn. The NRCs presentation will include information on how the process works and how the public can participate. Members of the public are invited to ask questions on the NRCs license renewal review process. Under NRC regulations, the original operating license for a nuclear power plant is issued for up to 40 years. The license may be renewed for up to an additional 20 years if NRC requirements are met. Dominion has submitted an application to renew the operating license of the Millstone Power Station, Units 2 and 3, for an additional 20 years. The current operating licenses for Units 2 and 3 expire on July 31, 2015, and November 25, 2025, respectively. The license renewal process requires that both a technical review of safety issues and an environmental review be performed for each application. The NRC staff is currently reviewing Dominions application to determine whether it contains enough information to begin the required formal review. If the application has sufficient information, the NRC will formally docket, or file, the application and will announce an opportunity to request a hearing. The Dominion application is posted on the NRC web page at: www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/mil lstone.html. It is also available for review at the NRCs Public Document Room in Rockville, Md., at the Waterford Public Library, 49 Rope Ferry Road in Waterford and at the Three Rivers Community College, Thames River Campus, 574 New London Turnpike in Norwich, Conn. Last revised Friday, February 06, 2004 ***************************************************************** 52 NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request for Decommissioning FR Doc 04-2619 [Federal Register: February 6, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 25)] [Notices] [Page 5879-5880] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06fe04-116] the ABB Prospects, Inc. Site in Windsor, Connecticut and Opportunity for a Hearing AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of consideration of amendment request for decommissioning and opportunity to request a hearing. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randolph C. Ragland, Jr., Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406; telephone (610) 337-5083; by facsimile transmission to (610) 337-5269; or by e- mail to . DATES: The agency must receive requests for a hearing on or before March 8, 2004. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of a license amendment to Materials License No. 06-00217-06, to authorize the decommissioning of the ABB Prospects, Inc. site in Windsor, Connecticut, for unrestricted use. The current license expires April 30, 2011. By letter dated October 15, 2003, ABB Prospects, Inc. submitted an application for a license amendment, specifically the CE Windsor Site Decommissioning Plan (DP), which included a report entitled, ``Derivation of the Site-Specific Soil DCGLs.'' The licensee has been performing limited decommissioning of Building Complexes 2, 5, and 17 at the CE Windsor site in accordance with the conditions described in License No. 06-00217-06. Although certain buildings and areas on the site are being addressed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP), the proposed DP is intended to provide the decommissioning information necessary for site-wide license termination and unrestricted release. The NRC staff has completed its initial expanded acceptance review and has determined that the licensee's submission is sufficiently complete for the NRC staff to initiate a detailed technical review of the DP. If the NRC approves the DP, the approval will be documented in an amendment to License No. 06-00217-06. However, before approving the DP, the NRC will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and NRC's regulations. These findings will be documented in a Safety Evaluation Report and an Environmental Assessment. II. Opportunity for a Hearing The NRC hereby provides notice that this is a proceeding on an application for amendment of a license falling within the scope of Subpart L ``Informal Hearing Procedures for Adjudication in Materials Licensing Proceedings,'' of NRC's rules and practice for domestic licensing proceedings in 10 CFR part 2. Any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding may file a request for a hearing in accordance with 10 CFR 2.1205(e). A request for hearing must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of publication of this Federal Register Notice. The request for the hearing must be filed with the Office of the Secretary, either: (1) By delivery to the Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff of the Office of the Secretary of the Commission at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, MD 20852-2738, between the hours of 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Federal workdays; or (2) By mail or telegram addressed to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Because of continuing disruptions in the delivery of mail to United States Government Offices, hearing requests should also be transmitted to the Secretary of the Commission either by means of facsimile transmission to (301)415-1101, or by e-mail to . In accordance with 10 CFR 2.1205(f), each request for a hearing must also be served, by delivering it personally or by mail, to: (1) The applicant, ABB Prospects, Inc., CEP 880-1403, 2000 Day Hill Road, Windsor, CT 06095-0500, Attention: John Conant; and (2) The NRC staff, by delivery to the Office of the General Counsel, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738, between the hours of 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Federal workdays, or by mail, addressed to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Because of continuing disruptions in the delivery of mail to United States Government Offices, hearing requests should also be transmitted to the Office of General Counsel, either by means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415-3725, or by e-mail to . In addition to meeting other applicable requirements of 10 CFR part 2 of the NRC's regulations, a request for a hearing filed by a person other than an applicant must describe in detail: (1) The interest of the requestor; (2) How the interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding, including the reasons why the requestor should be permitted a hearing, with particular reference to the factors set out in 10 CFR 2.1205(h); (3) The requestor's areas of concern about the licensing activity that is subject matter of the proceedings; and (4) The circumstances establishing that the request for a hearing is timely in accordance with 10 CFR 2.1205(d). III. Further Information In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's ``Rules of Practice,'' details with respect to this action, including the application for amendment, the proposed DP, and supporting documentation, are available for inspection at NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room at (Accession Number ML040300149). These documents are also available for inspection and copying for a fee at the Region I Office, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, 19406. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to . Dated at King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, this 30th day of January, 2004. [[Page 5880]] For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Ronald R. Bellamy, Chief, Decommissioning & Laboratory Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, RI. [FR Doc. 04-2619 Filed 2-5-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 53 NRC: Indiana Michigan Power Company, Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant; FR Doc 04-2620 [Federal Register: February 6, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 25)] [Notices] [Page 5880-5881] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06fe04-117] Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Conduct Scoping Process Indiana Michigan Power Company (I) has submitted an application for renewal of Facility Operating Licenses, DPR-58 and DPR-74 for an additional 20 years of operation at the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant (Cook), Units 1 and 2 (CNP). CNP is located in Berrien County, Michigan, about 55 miles east of Chicago, Illinois. The operating licenses for Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, expire on October 25, 2014, and December 23, 2017, respectively. The application for renewal was received on November 3, 2003, pursuant to 10 CFR part 54. A notice of receipt and availability of the application, which included the environmental report (ER), was published in the Federal Register on November 10, 2003 (68 FR 63824). A notice of acceptance for docketing of the application for renewal of the facility operating license was published in the Federal Register on December 10, 2003 (68 FR 68956). The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will be preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) in support of the review of the license renewal application and to provide the public an opportunity to participate in the environmental scoping process, as defined in 10 CFR 51.29. In addition, as outlined in 36 CFR 800.8, ``Coordination with the National Environmental Policy Act,'' the NRC plans to coordinate compliance with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act in meeting the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). In accordance with 10 CFR 51.53(c) and 10 CFR 54.23, I submitted the ER as part of the application. The ER was prepared pursuant to 10 CFR part 51 and is available for public inspection at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852, or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html , which provides access through the NRC's Electronic Reading Room link. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, or 301- 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. The application may also be viewed on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati ons/cook.html. In addition, the Bridgman Public Library, 4460 Lake Street, Bridgman, Michigan and the Maud Preston Palenske Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St. Joseph, Michigan have agreed to make the ER available for public inspection. This notice advises the public that the NRC intends to gather the information necessary to prepare a plant-specific supplement to the Commission's ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' (NUREG-1437) in support of the review of the application for renewal of the CNP operating licenses for an additional 20 years. Possible alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include no action and reasonable alternative energy sources. The NRC is required by 10 CFR 51.95 to prepare a supplement to the GEIS in connection with the renewal of an operating license. This notice is being published in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the NRC's regulations found in 10 CFR part 51. The NRC will first conduct a scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS and, as soon as practicable thereafter, will prepare a draft supplement to the GEIS for public comment. Participation in the scoping process by members of the public and local, State, tribal, and Federal government agencies is encouraged. The scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS will be used to accomplish the following: a. Define the proposed action which is to be the subject of the supplement to the GEIS. b. Determine the scope of the supplement to the GEIS and identify the significant issues to be analyzed in depth. c. Identify and eliminate from detailed study those issues that are peripheral or that are not significant. d. Identify any environmental assessments and other EISs that are being or will be prepared that are related to, but are not part of the scope of the supplement to the GEIS being considered. e. Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements related to the proposed action. f. Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of the environmental analyses and the Commission's tentative planning and decision-making schedule. g. Identify any cooperating agencies and, as appropriate, allocate assignments for preparation and schedules for completing the supplement to the GEIS to the NRC and any cooperating agencies. h. Describe how the supplement to the GEIS will be prepared, and include any contractor assistance to be used. The NRC invites the following entities to participate in scoping: a. The applicant, Indiana Michigan Power Company. b. Any Federal agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved, or that is authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. c. Affected State and local government agencies, including those authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. d. Any affected Indian tribe. e. Any person who requests or has requested an opportunity to participate in the scoping process. f. Any person who has petitioned or intends to petition for leave to intervene. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.26, the scoping process for an EIS may include a public scoping meeting to help identify significant issues related to a proposed activity and to determine the scope of issues to be addressed in an EIS. The NRC has decided to hold public meetings for the CNP license renewal supplement to the GEIS. The scoping meetings will be held at the Lake Charter Township Hall, 3220 Shawnee Road, Bridgman, Michigan, on Monday, March 8, 2004. There will be two sessions to accommodate interested parties. The first session will convene at 1:30 p.m. and will continue until 4:30 p.m., as necessary. The second session will convene at 7 p.m. with a repeat of the overview portions of the meeting and will continue until 10 p.m., as necessary. Both meetings will be transcribed and will include (1) an overview by the NRC staff of the NEPA environmental review process, the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS, and the proposed review schedule; and (2) the opportunity for interested government agencies, [[Page 5881]] organizations, and individuals to submit comments or suggestions on the environmental issues or the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS. Additionally, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour before the start of each session at the Lake Charter Township Hall. No formal comments on the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS will be accepted during the informal discussions. To be considered, comments must be provided either at the transcribed public meetings or in writing, as discussed below. Persons may register to attend or present oral comments at the meetings on the scope of the NEPA review by contacting Mr. Robert Schaaf, by telephone at 1-800-368- 5642, extension 1312, or by Internet to the NRC at CookEIS@nrc.gov no later than March 3, 2004. Members of the public may also register to speak at the meeting within 15 minutes of the start of each session. Individual oral comments may be limited by the time available, depending on the number of persons who register. Members of the public who have not registered may also have an opportunity to speak, if time permits. Public comments will be considered in the scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS. Mr. Schaaf will need to be contacted no later than March 1, 2004, if special equipment or accommodations are needed to attend or present information at the public meeting, so that the NRC staff can determine whether the request can be accommodated. Members of the public may send written comments on the environmental scope of the CNP license renewal review to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Comments may also be delivered to the NRC, Room T-6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. during Federal workdays. To be considered in the scoping process, written comments should be postmarked by April 6, 2004. Electronic comments may be sent by the Internet to the NRC at CookEIS@nrc.gov and should be sent no later than April 6, 2004, to be considered in the scoping process. Comments will be available electronically and accessible through ADAMS at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Participation in the scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS does not entitle participants to become parties to the proceeding to which the supplement to the GEIS relates. Notice of opportunity for a hearing regarding the renewal application was the subject of the aforementioned Federal Register notice (68 FR 62640). Matters related to participation in any hearing are outside the scope of matters to be discussed at this public meeting. At the conclusion of the scoping process, the NRC will prepare a concise summary of the determination and conclusions reached, including the significant issues identified, and will send a copy of the summary to each participant in the scoping process. The summary will also be available for inspection in ADAMS at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. The staff will then prepare and issue for comment the draft supplement to the GEIS, which will be the subject of separate notices and separate public meetings. Copies will be available for public inspection at the above-mentioned addresses, and one copy per request will be provided free of charge. After receipt and consideration of the comments, the NRC will prepare a final supplement to the GEIS, which will also be available for public inspection. Information about the proposed action, the supplement to the GEIS, and the scoping process may be obtained from Mr. Schaaf at the aforementioned telephone number or e-mail address. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of January, 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Pao-Tsin Kuo, Program Director, License Renewal and Environmental Impacts Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-2620 Filed 2-5-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 54 Deseret news: NRC will listen to some nuclear site concerns [deseretnews.com] Friday, February 6, 2004 By Doug Smeath Deseret Morning News In the ongoing battle over whether a Tooele County Indian tribe will be allowed to store spent nuclear fuel at its reservation, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has agreed to listen to some of the state's concerns about the site proposal. Figures in the state's battle to stop the storage plan described the decision as a mixed bag — a little victory served with a little defeat. The NRC agreed Thursday to hear the state's appeal of two issues that were ruled on by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, while refusing to hear several other issues. The state has consistently opposed plans to store the nuclear material on the Skull Valley Goshutes' land. It is joined in its opposition by Ohngo Gavdadeh Devia, a group of dissidents within the tribe. The plan would allow up to 40,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel in above-ground canisters to be stored on Goshute tribal lands, 75 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. The NRC's ruling was not available Thursday night, and several people contacted could not give specifics about the issues involved in the appeal. But Sue Martin, a spokeswoman for Private Fuel Storage, the consortium of nuclear-powered utilities that wants to store the fuel, said the first issue the NRC will hear involves the need for a safety facility at the site to quickly handle problems such as a canister leak. The state had argued such a facility would be needed, but Martin said fuel would never be handled at the site so it was a moot concern. She said the other appeal under NRC consideration is over whether the PFS cost-benefit analysis in the environmental impact statement had been adequate. Twelve other state appeals of board decisions were rejected in Thursday's decision. "Accepting these issues for review doesn't suggest how they will ultimately rule," Martin said. "It just says that they have agreed to take a closer look at these two issues." But while the commissioners' decision to hear the two appeals isn't necessarily a win for the state, Utah Department of Environmental Quality executive director Dianne Nielson said the chance to reassert two arguments is better than nothing at all. "I think it's good news that they decided to hear any" appeals, she said. "They could have just said, 'Nope.' What they would have been doing in that case is reaffirming decisions that had gone against us at the licensing board level." But another state spokeswoman said more would have been better. "We were disappointed that the commission didn't take review of a number of the issues we raised, in particular . . . the need for the facility," said Assistant Utah Attorney General Denise Chancellor. "It's always a good sign when the commission accepts anything. We just wish they would've accepted more." Among the "notable" issues the commission decided not to hear, Nielson said, was the question of whether such a facility is needed and whether PFS is financially viable to operate it. "We think there are a number of critical issues they decided not to take up, but they have taken up two," she said. The NRC also rejected OGD arguments that the site would endanger a disadvantaged group — American Indians. The appeals are part of the process that will ultimately end in the NRC either agreeing to give PFS a license to store the spent fuel at the Skull Valley site or denying the license. "In the whole process, I don't know what it means at this point," Nielson said. "It means that we will get another opportunity to make our arguments and they'll get another opportunity to get it right, I guess." A previous appeal filed by PFS is still pending before the NRC. It involves a March 10 ruling in the state's favor on the issue of Air Force overflights in the western desert and the risks of jet crashes into the facility. PFS made the deal with Goshute tribal leaders in 1997 to lease 820 acres of the reservation to temporarily store the nuclear waste until a permanent storage facility opens up in Yucca Mountain, Nev. E-mail: dsmeath@desnews.com Contributing: AP © 2004 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 55 BBC: British Energy warnings 'ignored' Last Updated: Friday, 6 February, 2004 [British Energy] British Energy underwent financial restructuring in October The government failed to monitor problems at British Energy, which runs the UK's nuclear power stations, the National Audit Office (NAO) has said. Poor regulation by the Department of Trade &Industry (DTI) meant taxpayers had to pay £410m to meet the company's debts, the NAO said. The watchdog said the DTI did not monitor how changes to the electricity market would affect costs and profits. Late last year the company reached a life-saving debt restructuring deal. NAO chief John Bourn said that the DTI "did not evaluate" how the effects of increased competition would increase British Energy's costs and reduce its income, as other, more flexible generators gained market share. The DTI seems to have assum the ostrich position, with head firmly buried in the sand [ src=] Edward Leigh MP, Chairman Public Accounts Committee And the government adopted a "wait and see" approach despite growing evidence of the company's financial distress and awareness that is was "highly vulnerable" to a fall in the electricity price. Jeremy Coleman, NAO assistant auditor general, told BBC Radio 4: "What our report shows is the DTI did really very little, and quite consciously did very little, to monitor British Energy's position until British Energy was visibly in serious trouble." The DTI decided not to intervene unless the company was in "publicly evident distress", although it prepared contingency plans to ensure the security of supply. In September 2002, the privatised company declared that it could not meet its liabilities, especially for the decommissioning of old reactors. Despite the government rescue, its share price has collapsed and it is still struggling to remain economically viable. 'Ostrich-like position' But Brian Wilson, energy minister at the time the government bailed out British Energy said the blame could not solely fall on the DTI. Mr Wilson said industry regulator Ofgem was also to blame. He told Radio 4 that Ofgem's "sole objective" of reducing the cost of generated electricity was a driving force behind the problem, as it would always present dangers for nuclear generators because the industry is heavily regulated. Mr Wilson added: "I think the wider lesson of this is to what extent can government abdicate that kind of fundamental policy to a regulator?" The government's actions have also been sharply criticised by Edward Leigh, the Conservative chairman of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee. "We told the DTI to keep careful watch over British Energy. Instead, for several years, the DTI seems to have assumed the ostrich position, with head firmly buried in the sand," he said. For the Liberal Democrats, Shadow Trade and Industry Secretary Malcolm Bruce MP said: "This report shows that British Energy continued to pay dividends that the company's performance could not justify. "At the same time the DTI failed to realise the effect the new market for electricity would have on British Energy's profitability and the exposure of taxpayers to the company's nuclear liabilities." Next week the Committee will take evidence from British Energy chairman Adrian Montague and Sir Robin Young, DTI permanent secretary. The government declined to comment ahead of their testimony. British Energy generates 20% of the UK's electricity. Its biggest plant is at Hartlepool, with others at Sizewell, Suffolk; Hinkley Point, Somerset; Hunterston, Ayrshire; Dungeness, Kent; and Torness, East Lothian. As part of its rescue package, the government will help meet some of the firm's future liabilities, such as the cost of decommissioning nuclear power plants. ***************************************************************** 56 toledoblade.com: Activist groups ask for NRC briefing on Davis-Besse restart Friday, February 06, 2004 By TOM HENRY BLADE STAFF WRITER Two activist groups yesterday called on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s governing board to hold a public briefing near Washington about Davis-Besse’s restart effort. NRC Chairman Nils Diaz, Commissioner Edward McGaffigan, Jr., and Commissioner Jeffrey S. Merrifield "have not demonstrated much interest in Davis-Besse" throughout the beleaguered plant’s two-year ordeal, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists and Ohio Citizen Action. The plant has been shut since Feb. 16, 2002, because of equipment, management, design, and performance issues. The groups said the silence from the NRC’s headquarters in Rockville, Md., has been mysterious to them given the level of engagement the NRC’s governing board had in the restart process of three other units that had extensive outages in recent years: Millstone in Connecticut, D.C. Cook in Michigan, and Salem in Delaware. The NRC’s governing board has five commissioners. All are appointed by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate to five-year terms, with the president designating the chairman. There are two vacancies now. Scott Burnell, NRC headquarters spokesman, said the agency had no immediate comment. But he said a briefing is being planned for later on lessons the agency has learned from Davis-Besse. David Lochbaum, Union of Concerned Scientists nuclear safety engineer, said a pre-restart briefing could enhance the NRC’s understanding of Davis-Besse while giving the commission a chance "to ensure that all of the work necessary to fix Davis-Besse is done." Shari Weir, Ohio Citizen Action spokesman, said it would give the agency’s headquarters a chance to assess whether FirstEnergy Corp. has made enough strides toward improving the plant’s workplace atmosphere. A restart decision could be made as early as next weekend. A meeting set for 6 p.m. Thursday at the Camp Perry clubhouse west of Port Clinton could be the public’s last opportunity to comment before the agency’s oversight panel makes a recommendation to James Caldwell, the NRC’s Midwest regional chief. Mr. Caldwell has been designated by the NRC to make the ultimate decision, which likely would be made within days after he receives the recommendation and confers with senior-level agency officials, the NRC has said. For earlier stories on Davis-Besse, go to www.toledobladecomdavisbesse © 2004 The Blade. By using this service, you accept the The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660 , (419) 724-6000 ***************************************************************** 57 Toronto Star: More delays plague Pickering restart TheStar.com - Fri. Feb. 6, 2004. | Updated at 05:03 PM DICK LOEK/TORONTO STAR The completion date of the refurbishing of the Pickering Nuclear power plant is now estimated to be completed in Aug. 2008. Work suspended on two units at nuclear plant, memo says Ontario Power Generation `is lost,' says industry expert JOHN SPEARS BUSINESS REPORTER Work on two units of the Pickering A nuclear station has been suspended, according to a message sent to staff of the plant, owned by Ontario Power Generation Inc. The problem-plagued project to restart Pickering A is already three years behind schedule and billions over budget. Only one of the plant's four reactors, Unit 4, is producing power. Work has been under way at Pickering A since 1998. The project received approval from OPG's board of directors in 1999. Despite years of work, an internal message to staff yesterday said cost and schedule estimates for Unit 1 — the second unit due to start up — are still not complete. Engineering work on the remaining two units is also incomplete. OPG also said yesterday it is scaling back its relationship with PowerSource Canada, a hiring agency that has supplied OPG with hundreds of engineers, many of them from the United States. The company was incorporated in Nova Scotia in 2002 shortly before it began receiving untendered contracts from OPG. OPG spokesperson John Earl said the company is streamlining, and will cut its engineering and design force at Pickering A by 50 per cent. "There will be fewer contractors, and some of those contractors were from PowerSource, so our relationship with PowerSource has shrunk," Earl said. Yesterday's internal memo from Bill Robinson, vice-president in charge of Pickering, said the company must focus its efforts on finishing cost estimates and work schedules for Unit 1. "We are therefore suspending any further engineering work on Units 2 and 3," the two remaining units, the memo said. OPG has been struggling to restart the Pickering A plant since OPG's board approved the project in 1999, at an estimated cost of $1.3 million. The first unit was supposed to be back in service by the end of 2000. Instead, the first unit, Unit 4, wasn't back in service until last fall, three years late. And a special panel headed by former federal energy minister Jake Epp now estimates it will cost $3 billion to $4 billion to get all four units back in service. The cost overruns and delays have prompted Energy Minister Dwight Duncan to ask a committee headed by former finance minister John Manley to review OPG's prospects, including whether it's worth completing the Pickering A overhaul. Manley's deadline is March 15. Suspending work at Units 2 and 3 will help OPG develop firmer cost and scheduling estimates for Manley's committee "in a timely fashion," Robinson's memo said. Tom Adams, executive director of Energy Probe, said it's hard to believe that five years into a project, OPG still hasn't completed cost, scheduling and engineering work. Adams noted that Epp recently completed an evaluation of the Pickering A project, and wondered how that could have been conducted without first doing firm cost and scheduling estimates. "OPG is lost," he said. "They can't find themselves on the map." If OPG still hasn't finished basic planning and engineering work, he said, it should simply be telling Manley's committee the status of the project, complete with gaps and unfinished business, rather than preparing yet another plan. Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All ***************************************************************** 58 Daily Press: Dominion to expand storage of used nuclear fuel at Surry HAMPTON ROADS, VIRGINIA February 6, 2004 9:57 PM By the Associated Press SURRY, Va. -- Energy producer Dominion Resources Inc. plans to significantly increase the amount of nuclear waste stored at Surry Power Station, where spent uranium rods will be stored until a permanent national disposal site opens. Richmond-based Dominion now stores all spent fuel that powered Surry's two nuclear reactors in an underground storage facility and in aboveground steel casks. About 965 metric tons of uranium are being stored in those facilities. But Surry's storage space is filling up, and it will be years before the U.S. Department of Energy is prepared to open a national spent-fuel storage site under Yucca Mountain in Nevada. The Surry expansion, approved Thursday by the Surry County Board of Supervisors, will allow Dominion to store another 590 metric tons. Construction at the Surry plant will likely begin this June and be completed within nine months, said Brian H. Wakeman, an engineer with Dominion Generation, a division of Dominion Resources. The expansion would allow Surry to continue to store spent fuel through 2019, Wakeman said. Wakeman and Richard Blount, a Dominion vice president who oversees the Surry station, presented the company's plans to the public and the Surry County Board of Supervisors on Thursday. The supervisors amended a conditional-use permit to allow a new storage technology as well as the expansion. The technology calls for a metal canister to be placed inside a thicker steel container, which is used to move the canister to a concrete storage bunker at Surry. The canister will remain in the bunker until the federal government can move it to a permanent disposal site. At the meeting, one resident asked about how effective the containers were in containing radiation. Wakeman said the metal canisters do a thorough job of containing radiation even before being enclosed in concrete. "If you sat next to one for an hour, it would be about the same radiation exposure as you get with a full-mouth dental X-ray," he said. Other residents asked about the strength of the concrete casks and how the spent fuel would be moved from the Surry site, which sits on Hog Island near the James River. Wakeman said the bunkers are designed to withstand earthquakes, hurricanes and tornadoes. Computer simulations show they would be safe if a commercial jet crashed into the bunkers, he said. The spent fuel would be moved by trucks, rails or barges. President Bush and Congress approved the Yucca Mountain site in 2002, but extensive design and regulatory work remains. The state of Nevada has asked a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., to overturn the decision. Today, all of the nation's nuclear power plants must store their own spent fuel. They will be able to ship their waste to the Yucca Mountain dump once it opens--as early as 2010. Get home delivery of the Daily Press for only $3.30 a week. Copyright ©2004 The Daily Press ***************************************************************** 59 Brattleboro Reformer: VY may not need temporary buildings February 06, 2004 Brattleboro, VT By TOBY HENRY Reformer Staff BRATTLEBORO -- Two temporary buildings for "uprate"-related rotor work might not be needed after all, officials from the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant said this week. According to a letter sent to the Vermont Public Service Board on Wednesday, Yankee officials indicated that they are looking at other options for the reinsulation work to their plant's generator rotor. In November, plant officials asked the board's permission to build the two steel-and-fabric buildings, the largest of which measures 150 feet by 70 feet. The board had been expected to rule on the temporary buildings in mid-March, at about the same time they make their decision on the plant's proposed 20 percent power boost. The rotor work was slated to take place during a planned mid-April re-fueling outage. "Given the uncertainties related both to weather and to board approval, (Yankee owner Entergy) has been aggressively pursuing alternatives to the temporary buildings," the letter states. "Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee will know for certain by early next week whether an alternative will become the preferred approach and will notify the board by no later than Feb. 10 of that decision. (At that time) the company may withdraw the application for approval of the temporary buildings." Vermont Yankee spokesman Rob Williams said that the Feb. 4 letter was written in response to questions asked by the board earlier this year. The letter also states that the construction of the temporary buildings "continues to be an option." At local meetings on the uprate, Yankee officials have stated that other options to doing the work on-site could include shipping the rotor by rail to a facility in Schenectady, N.Y., or possibly using a currently empty large building with railroad access in the Brattleboro area for the construction work. In late November, Yankee officials went public with their admission that a misinterpretation of a Department of Environmental Conservation wastewater permit for the buildings had led to unauthorized site preparation for the two buildings. The work, which took place without board approval between Nov. 10 and Nov. 14, included the removal of dozens of truckloads of topsoil from the building site. Yankee Site Vice President Jay Thayer later stated he had no knowledge of the work. Uprate case intervenors, including the anti-nuclear power group New England Coalition, blasted Vermont Yankee after the admission and later charged that the incident had diverted focus away from the uprate case for months because of the distraction created as the board and coalition reviewed documents related to the unauthorized work. Coalition staff advisor Ray Shadis said that the coalition may consider entering a frivolous filing suit against Entergy because of the problems and distraction caused by the temporary buildings issue. "I think we will try to recover damages," he said. "They had other options open all the time. This is just ... more of their thinking that they can put the bum's rush on the board, the public and the state." ***************************************************************** 60 [DU-WATCH] US Soldier: "Sometimes it is a soldiers duty to tell Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 01:30:12 -0600 (CST) US Soldier: "Sometimes it is a soldiers duty to tell the truth, no matter what" "Sometimes you have to weigh your duty to your government, and the duty to your fellow soldiers to protect them and keep them safe. I feel the duty to my fellow soldier out weighs any loyalty to my government. I do not see this as treason or betraying my command, especially in light of how badly the government has betrayed our troops at every level. I feel it is my ultimate duty to do everything possible to make sure my men come home alive and unharmed. There comes a time when every commander has to put the life of his troops at a higher level of importance than the profits of our corrupt leaders. There comes a time when to sit silently and watch means you have a part in those soldiers deaths, and their blood is ultimately on your hands if you do nothing to stop it. If you can do something to stop the death of even one soldier, and you sit back and do nothing, you are as culpable in that soldiers death as whoever actually kills them. " US Army high level commander on why he has chosen to speak out 2/06/04 By Jay Shaft- Coalition For Free Thought In Media The following interview was conducted with a US Army high level commander who has been back from Iraq less than two weeks. I was shocked that someone of his rank would be so open and willing to speak out, but he told me he has lost over 100 soldiers from his command since the war started. The man I spoke too had spent months with a front line combat unit and had seen terrible and horrific sights. I consider myself extremely fortunate to have the opportunity to get his tale of the horrors in Iraq. I have taken every precaution to insure his identity remains a secret for reasons he details in this article. In this time of war and reprisals against soldiers who speak out, he has exhibited extreme bravery and true valor. JS- Good morning sir, are you enjoying your time back in the states? USO- No, to be honest, I am not enjoying being back here. I keep seeing the soldiers dying every time I turn on the news or pick up a paper. I cant get a sense of relief at being home when many of my fellow soldiers will not ever be coming home. It is hard to feel good about no longer being in Iraq. I just cant seem to put my feelings in any kind of perspective. Imagine how terrible it is to be home and not be able to tear your mind away from the worst hellhole you could ever imagine. I pace the floor at night when I think about all the soldiers that are still there or imminently going over, I worry about the ones that are on call up or training to go take their turn at trying to stay alive. I was in several other combat theaters and I have never seen something as bad as Iraq. I have well over 15 years in service and was in the first Gulf War. I thought I had seen every thing that had to do with combat and police actions. I was wrong, and most of my fellow officers have said the same thing. None of us were really prepared for this, no matter what type of training or experience we have. I have seen officers with two or three combat tours just freezing up and getting this baffled look of panic and fear. I saw an officer with almost 15 years loose it and just start screaming after he lost ten guys in two days. Some of the NCOs who should have been the most experienced at losing men are being devastated by the continued loss of troops. JS- I keep hearing that from the soldiers I talk to. Almost everyone I talked to said there was no way they could have ever been prepared for how bad Iraq really is. Is this something you think the Army could have prepared you for? USO- No, there is no amount of training they could have given us to prepare us for how much of a hellhole Iraq really is. The first thing I want to point out is that most of our troops are not trained for a police action. They do not have any idea how to conduct peace keeping operations or effectively act as a police force. They are trained to kill any type of opposition forces, but not react peacefully to a civilian demonstration or day to day civil unrest. The main line troops do not even know how to properly conduct peace keeping exercises, and after many months of hostilities, they really dont care to learn. They see their buddies dying and getting severely wounded, and peaceful interaction goes right out of their minds. They are stuck in the middle of a massive civil unrest and factional strife, and they is no way to expect battle hardened troops to be objective. That is not what they were trained for and the Army has very little actual hands on training opportunities with an occupied population. Most of the guys that were in Afghanistan are able to cope with it a little better, but the majority of them were involved with combat and not the civilian control and policing. That is another thing the military never really planned out. They had no real plan set up for long term occupation, and this occupation is going to be long and bloody, no matter what those policy hacks in the White House tell you. It took us a few weeks to supposedly win the ground war, and then it was right into the role of peace keeper and police force. I am going to make this very clear: We are not giving our troops the proper training to occupy Iraq over the long run. Even if there was relative stability it would be hard, and in the midst of continuing hostilities it is impossible. These men are trained in gun barrel diplomacy, not as police or aid workers. I always laughed at the term gun barrel diplomacy, but it fits the situation that occurred in Iraq. JS- I have to ask the question that will be on everyones mind. Why are you speaking out and being so frank and honest? Some people are going to accuse you of outright treason and betraying your own government and chain of command. Why are you choosing to speak out about this? USO- Sometimes you have to weigh your duty to your government, and the duty to your fellow soldiers to protect them and keep them safe. I feel the duty to my fellow soldier out weighs any loyalty to my government. I do not see this as treason or betraying my command, especially in light of how badly the government has betrayed our troops at every level. I feel it is my ultimate duty to do everything possible to make sure my men come home alive and unharmed. My men have no greater expectation than that I will do everything in my power to keep them alive and to protect them as much as much as possible in any battle. There comes a time when every commander has to put the life of his troops at a higher level than the profits of our corrupt leaders. There comes a time when to sit silently and watch means you have a part in those soldiers deaths, and their blood is ultimately on your hands if you do nothing to stop it. If you can do something to stop the death of even one soldier, and you sit back and do nothing, you are as culpable in that soldiers death as whoever actually kills them. You wont find a whole lot of support for the way Bush and the Pentagon are running this war, not in the military anyway. Someone has to come out and tell the truth so that the rest of the troops will not be afraid to be honest with themselves and the American public. There is such an under current of fear among the troops about what might get you in trouble. There are soldiers worried that something they say in a letter or on the phone will get them court-martialed or thrown in the brig for treason. It is not right that our own men and women have to fear the government to that extent. What the hell is going wrong in America right now? The military has prosecuted and punished soldiers for simply telling the truth about the actual situation in Iraq. How can the American people let this go on? To punish a soldier for speaking his mind is one of the most atrocious things I can think of. If a soldier comes back from Iraq and wants to tell the truth we should let them do it. As long as they are not giving away any sensitive military information or revealing top secret documents there should be no reprisals against them. These brave soldiers are putting their life on the line in Iraq, supposedly to bring about democratic elections, but they are not allowed to speak freely when they come home. I think the situation with the serving forces in Iraq is slightly different, but look at what I am doing. I had enough of the bullsh.t and made my decision a few weeks ago. I went to a journalist with a major US newspaper and offered to talk to him under anonymity and he told me he wasnt looking to take that kind of heat from his paper. I know of several soldiers who were interviewed by the press while on leave, and when they started really telling the truth they were ignored, and their words were never published. I know of the Sgt. Jessica Macek incident where she went on the radio and denounced Bush and the war. Her comments were reported to the Pentagon by a journalist from some newspaper in her home state. More soldiers might be willing to speak out if they knew they were not going to get harassed and sent back to Iraq as punishment. I am doing this for all the soldiers who want to speak out but will not for reasons of fear and keeping a career intact. I know of a few guys who got called in to the O2 (intelligence operations for a military unit) after making harsh comments in e-mails home. The military has been trying to stomp out the grass fires of dissent and anger in the ranks. They are so afraid that a high level NCO or commander will go on record that they are crushing any form of dissent no matter how small. I looked at all the reasons to keep quiet, and the need for the truth outweighed any personal consequences. I want to make sure that every American knows this information, and the press has not done sh.t to bring out the voices of the dissatisfied soldiers. I think that they are willingly taking part in keeping this type of interview away from the public eye, at least for the most part. JS- So you feel it is your duty to do this interview? USO- I swore an oath to defend this country, but I also swore to protect my men to the utmost of my ability. I am only doing this out of honor and loyalty to all the men who put their life on the line in my command and the command of others. I am sick of watching young men and women die needlessly. If there were a purpose behind it besides oil and the sick greed of our leaders, I would keep my mouth shut and drive on. There is a military term we have for this type of thing. FIDO: F.ck It and Drive On! That is the attitude they try to pound into your head from the first day of training. You are supposed to follow orders and do as youre told no matter what. That makes it feel unnatural to do an interview like this or to speak out publicly against any military problem, even if it is killing troops. Another thing they have done over the past year is to make supporters of the peace movement look like traitors and terrorists. Many of our family members have joined in the protests or spoken out publicly against the war. To cast dispersion on the peace movement has really alienated many service members whose families are active in some type of peace group or activity to bring us home. There is an enormous amount of veterans who are involved in Veterans For Peace, Vietnam Veterans Against War, and other organizations. There are also a large number of vets who dont actively participate in those groups who are individually opposed to the war. My older brother is a Vietnam vet who has been anti-war for many years. He is not a part of VVAW anymore, but he still does his part to support the troops and send them letters and care packages. There is growing number of soldiers who have family members in the peace movement or have a veteran in their family who does not support the war. We got letters and e-mails, and all kinds of care packages from the peace movement. When your half a world away, someone that writes you and says they want to bring you home doesnt look that bad sometimes. I feel that I needed to get all this in some kind of recorded form, and bring out the truth even if they come after me. I dont want to be publicly identified because I have a family and a new baby at home. I dont want to get in trouble unless I can avoid it. I had thought about going on record with my name, but it is still way too dangerous right now. To finish this question off, yes I feel it is my duty and every commander and NCO who truly cares about their men. We must do whatever it takes to make the public call our leaders out on this. Our men are dying every day and there is no real purpose that I can see. We were told we were going to Iraq to Iraq to liberate them and keep Saddam from attacking the US. I dont see Iraq liberated and there are not any WMDs. I was there on some of the searches and I can tell you that we did not actually expect to find anything. Our leaders were telling us we would find them, but most of the officers knew that was bull sh.t. I am sure that there will be many of my fellow soldiers who will hate me for speaking out like this. There are many of them that are still completely dedicated to the cause of the US. Dont take this interview as a condemnation of everything the US stands for. I am still completely dedicated to serving my country in the military and fighting in whatever place they send me to. I am not going to stop serving my country, I just dont want to have my men lost for something I cant totally believe in. I have talked to many of my fellow soldiers about this tearing feeling of having to call into question any of our countries policies and beliefs. But on its basic principles, the whole war in Iraq is based on many lies and half truths. I am not saying that it will not end up causing more good than harm, but it might be years before we can really see any real results from our occupation. JS- So tell me how bad it really was. I heard recently that the chain of command almost broke down entirely. An article came out yesterday and the Army admitted that there was complete chaos at the company command level. There were details of the supply chain breaking down, lack of fresh water and food, and a whole host of problems that were not expected. How bad was it during the first months, and had it improved at all? USO- To quote a really old and well worn military expression, it was a complete cluster f.ck! I am in command at a higher level than the company command, so I saw first hand how badly prepared some of my unit commanders were. There was a level of chaos and confusion that almost brought the chain of command down around our ears. I really want to focus on some more recent stuff, but I will give some brief details on this one, because I think it caused many lives to be lost needlessly. In the first few weeks our supply chain was in shambles, whole columns were getting lost in the desert, there was a severe shortage of drinkable water, and unit level communication was completely unreliable. I could get my staff on the radio, but often we were out of contact with the more remotely located unit commanders for hours or days at a time. That was a major problem when we were trying to scout the Iraqi positions. We did not hear from some units for days except by satellite phone communication and other non-standard communication methods. I heard one story of a guy who scrounged up some kids walkie-talkies and it was the only way the unit commander could keep in contact with his patrols. I also heard of one unit that found a pair of old field radios in an Iraqi vehicle and they had to use them for short range communications. The food was in critically short supply for some of the front line units. Our faster moving strike force units were days ahead of the forward supply chain, and we had a severe parts shortage for a few weeks. Some of our units lost quite a few vehicles along the way and they had to cannibalize some of the vehicles to keep the others running. One of the worst problems is the dust and sand that gets into everything and clogs the filters and moving parts. I ate and drank enough sand to crap a beach or two. The communication problem was the most frustrating from a command level perspective. I needed to know exact positions and details of each unit on a real time basis. There was no real time communications on a consistent basis for over a month. It was especially frustrating when we reached Baghdad and our scouts could not get proper reports of the area of Iraqi positions. Initially there wasnt any real idea of how many Iraqi soldiers we were facing. There were a couple situations during combat where the unit commanders used some of the embedded reporters communications devices to reach other units for reinforcements and artillery support. Lets get on to more recent events. Its been almost a year since the invasion happened. There are much more important things happening now. I could talk about all the problems of the first few months, but it doesnt change the fact that our soldiers are still dying at an intolerable rate. Thats what I really want to focus on. JS- All right lets get to that. You told me on the phone the other day that you dont think that there is a good reason for the soldiers continuing to die after the Pentagon has declared major combat operations to be over. Do you have any solution to this? USO- That is one of the problems that is tearing me apart. We are stuck in Iraq now and committed to long term occupation, no matter what the Pentagon says. There is no simple solution, which is why I get angry with the peace movement on some issues. They just want us to come home right now and get out of Iraq. That is not possible right now, and if it were the US would not withdraw voluntarily. There is no way they are going to give up the foothold we have acquired. That is one of my biggest problems right now with the way they are directing this occupation. It has nothing to do with liberation or ensuring a free election in Iraq. No way that will ever really happen. If you could see how they are parceling out the Iraq resources to the contractors there right now, you would understand what I mean. I have seen the profiteering on a first hand basis. I have never seen that level of outright greed even around the Pentagon at budget time. It makes you nauseous to see how methodically they are taking over the Iraqi economy and work force. Right know if you dont work for the CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority), or one of the US contractors, odds are that you will be among the 50% that are unemployed. If you take a job with the CPA or one of the contractors the Iraqis are liable to call you a traitor and take revenge on you or your family. This internal strife this is helping to make it more difficult for us to stabilize the country. As long as there is any kind of internal discord among the population, it is that much harder to stop the attacks and bombings. Iraq is a powder keg right now and it is going to explode if things dont change. If it ever really turns into a classic urban guerrilla war we are going to be in a very bloody, drawn out conflict. All you have to do is look at the situation that occurred in Lebanon in the last thirty years and you can get an idea of how bloody Iraq could become. The Israelis know all about jihad and urban warfare from the high toll the various Palestinian groups have extracted. Iraq is in a similar situation and some of our high level officials refuse to admit it. If the deaths keep up at this rate we will loose over 2000 soldiers in the next year. I have heard some of the Pentagon insiders predict at least 1000 more deaths over the next year. The way they talk about it is just so casual it makes a combat commander cringe. They seem to be willing to fully accept those kinds of losses or even more deaths if it comes down to it. Anything to insure the military domination and control of Iraq. Without the military occupying the country there will be no need to build bases and installations. The whole premise of long term occupation entails fortifying the country with bases and airfields to better control the region. The fact that it is costing me the lives of my men and the brave coalition forces is not even coming into the picture. The disregard for the man in uniform who is out there on the front line dying and shedding his blood is what we need to focus on. The total lack of caring for how many of our men and women we will have to sacrifice is appalling. The nest of vipers at the Pentagon has taken over our whole military structure for the profits of their corporate connections. I dont know how much more obvious it could be. That is what I am doing this interview for. I have talked to many guys with long years of service and have heard the rants about Halliburton, Bechtel, DynCorp, Fluor, and the rest of the contracting mess. JS- Let me break in here and ask you something. I have heard about the high rate of fatalities that have occurred in soldiers traveling in the older, lightly armored Humvees. Some unit commanders have told me that up to 80% of their front line casualties are coming from the older hummers. How bad is that situation and is that number of casualties reasonably accurate? USO- I will say that the Army has started to take some steps to put better armor in them. It is not going to happen soon enough to save the lives that will be lost before they give them better equipment. Not to mention the lives that have already been lost, and all the soldiers who have been, or will be injured. Lets talk about the thousands of our soldiers who have been permanently disabled either physically or mentally. They have evacuated thousands of troops with mental problems, and then they claim that troop morale is high and the troops are satisfied with their service. JS- Lets talk about troop morale. I keep hearing from so many people that all they see on the news are soldiers who were quite happy to be in Iraq, and that their morale couldnt be higher. That is one of the things I keep having hammered into my head. How happy are the troops and how is the morale on an overall basis? USO- Are you really asking me that in a serious manner, or are you just being sarcastic? You have talked to some of the guys who came back. Did their morale seem high to you? Did they seem happy that they were going to have to go back to Iraq? Id say about 25% of my men actually wanted to be in Iraq and were happy to be in combat. Most of them were just there because it was their duty, or else they had no choice in the matter. Its not like you can really tell the military no, and most of the soldiers would never think about it. Its not like we are looking to get out of our duty to fight in Iraq. We just want our duty to be meaningful and not cost unnecessary lives. That is what is really getting more of the soldiers to be opposed to doing duty in Iraq. The high fatality rate has really hit them like nothing else can. To get into the whole case of WMDs and even the general condition of Iraq is useless for the average soldier to even consider. What is really affecting them is the daily loss of close comrades and fellow soldiers. Seeing an endless stream of casualties is what will make a soldier think about objecting to some of the things we are being ordered to do. It is not really because we are trying to bring freedom to Iraq that most of the soldiers are fighting. Many of us just do what we are told because it is so much a part of our entire being. I would not have this kind of problem if we were not losing good soldiers to such a stupid drive to completely rule Iraq. If this were about really liberating and freeing Iraq, we would have set up a different type of occupying force. We are trying to lock down a whole country while we keep telling the Iraqis that we are here to bring them freedom. I have had many Iraqis tell me it is no different than when Saddam ruled them. They see us as just another master trying to control them. One of the comments you hear is that America is the white Saddam. So no, there are not a lot of recent events that would inspire high morale. The press and government will still keep trying to sell that to the public though. At best most soldiers are just committed to doing their duty and trying to stay alive. I dont think you could say that there are that many ecstatic soldiers. JS- Lets get back to the Humvee situation. I want to explore that some more. USO- We kind of got off track there, but the morale issue needed to be discussed. Some of the horrific injuries from the Humvees are actually causing major morale problems. I had a brand new vehicle and I was still worried that it was vulnerable to IED and rocket attack. The road side bombs are tearing up the older hummers like they were made of cardboard. I have seen many that were torn open and the crew compartment was full of shrapnel holes. I have seen several that took an RPG or rocket hit and it was a bloody scene. I dont know if the casualty rate from the hummers has been as high as 80% but it has to be well over 60%. That is what the reservists have really been complaining about. They have all the older vehicles and supplies. The vehicle situation was especially bad with the support units and some of the Reserve MP units. It gets even worse if you look at some of the National Guard units. The equipment in some of the units I saw was pathetic. JS- Okay I want to get into a few other things now. You have had to take steps to make sure that the Army does not come after you. How do you feel about the fact that you are afraid to speak out? USO- I never thought I would have to speak out so I didnt ever think about what the military would do to me. I have been terrified about doing this because of how bad it will get if they catch me. The least they will do is to take all my benefits and my pension away. Not to mention the fact that they could formally court martial me and put me in jail. It would not be something that would be easy to go through if they ever find me. That is something a soldier should not even have to think is a reality, much less the fact that it will happen if they catch me. You had asked me to explain why I am doing this, and that is part of it, but not really the big reason for me. My biggest reason is to make some difference in the death toll on our troops. I have seen my men die and it hasnt made Iraq any safer or more stable. If you sacrifice a mans life, then let it accomplish something. The tragic waste of life is just sickening and it crushes troop morale. It takes away soldiers who can help defend our own shores or fight in a real defensive war should it become necessary. That is probably the biggest factor in my telling tales out of school. Do you think it is really easy for me to do this? I am trained and told to distrust the media and the public opinion on general principal. You just dont do this type thing if you want to survive in the world I live in. I just had my fill of the lies and failure to insure the safety of my men. I thought I knew how I would deal with the large scale death of my men. There is no way to prepare yourself for that kind of responsibility. It has changed my whole perspective on honor among the troops. George Bush says he is behind the troops but he keeps cutting more of our benefits and services. Right in the middle of two raging wars he has consistently demonstrated his lack of compassion and caring. My father has had some of his health care benefits cut and had to wait three months to see his doctor. These are my main reasons and I had to think long and hard before I decided to take a stand and tell someone. It was probably the hardest decision I have made recently. I am not a traitor or ashamed of doing my duty. I want nothing more than to be the best leader I can be. I searched for some other solution and for a while I was going to keep my mouth shut. Sitting here the last week watching the soldiers die changed my mind like nothing else could. I know you had told me that almost every soldier you interview has said about the same thing. Let anyone who thinks I am a traitor take my place and send good men off to die. If you can honestly say you could do this without any guilt or remorse, than you are one of the reasons that America is failing our troops. I try to understand how any citizen could support the useless death of our soldiers without any questions. I am growing more disillusioned as we lose more troops by the day. I watched the news for the last week and saw all the men we lost. It has made it feel surreal to be back home and see the war getting worse by the day. It just feels wrong to be able to walk across the street without having to watch for attackers. I left behind men who will die and come home wounded. I went to a movie and had a pizza the other day while three men died. That is something I cant get out of my thoughts. There is not an unpatriotic bone in my body. A true patriot stands up for what he believes in. I have come to believe that doing this is right, and my duty as a patriot makes this necessary. This country was founded on the right of all men to address their grievances openly, without fear of reprisal. That is the opposite of what I have seen recently. I dont know how much difference this will make, but I am obligated to do it and hope it helps save lives. Nothing else could ever be more important to me than trying to stop this bloody carnage. There has to be a better way than this. I dont think I really have anything else to say. Make this count for something. I dont want to do this for nothing. JS- Thank you for doing this. I think it will make a real difference if people are willing to listen. Jay Shaft, Editor, Coalition For Free Thought In Media, E-mail coalitionforfreethoughtinmedia@yahoo.com CFTM address http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coalitionforfreethoughtinmedia/ --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online ***************************************************************** 61 [DU-WATCH] Mossad mulled killing Vanunu Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 00:43:18 -0600 (CST) http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/391343.html Mossad mulled killing Vanunu By Reuters The Mossad spy agency considered killing nuclear whistle blower Mordechai Vanunu in 1986, but decided instead to abduct him for trial on treason charges, a former Mossad director told Reuters yesterday. Shabtai Shavit, who masterminded the "honey trap" that snaked Vanunu after he told a British newspaper about his work at Dimona atomic research center, said he feared the ex-technician intends to spill more secrets on his release from prison in April. "I would be lying if I said the thought [assassination] did not go through many of our minds," Shavit said, recalling Mossad debates after the Sunday Times interview that blew away Israel's official policy of ambiguity about its nuclear capabilities. "But Jews don't do that to other Jews. He was a traitor, so in accordance with Jewish morality and Jewish law he paid for it with imprisonment," Shavit said. Vanunu, 49, embraced Christianity and anti-nuclear activism after being fired from the Dimona reactor. He spoke to the newspaper on the promise of undisclosed payment. In jailhouse letters he has vowed to keep campaigning to expose Israel's non-conventional capabilities. Vanunu's revelations, and 60 accompanying photographs, led independent experts to conclude Israel had between 100 and 200 nuclear warheads - making it a military superpower. Israeli officials, who point out that most Arab countries are still formally in a state of war with Israel, make no apologies for the assumed arsenal though they never confirm its existence. Fearing more secrets could become public knowledge when Vanunu winds up his 18-year jail term on April 21, Shavit has been calling for him to be legally silenced. "I propose gagging this man," said Shavit, who retired from Mossad in 1996 and now chairs the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism at the Herzliya Interdisciplinary Center. According to security sources, the Justice Ministry might confiscate Vanunu's passport to prevent him leaving the country, and subject any press interviews he gives to military censors. Any attempt by him to discuss state secrets could mean a new trial. --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals ***************************************************************** 62 [DU-WATCH] Iraq: Japanese Troops Carry Dosimeters Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 23:18:28 -0600 (CST) Fears over depleted uranium lead to GSDF use of dosimeters http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20040205a4.htm By NAO SHIMOYACHI Staff writer Responding to concerns over the use of depleted uranium rounds by the U.S. military during the Iraq war, the Defense Agency is equipping Ground Self-Defense Force troops in the country with hundreds of radiation dosimeters. Defense Agency chief Shigeru Ishiba stressed in a Diet session Wednesday that the dosimeters will "allow (the GSDF) to assess the danger" of radiation, if any. But some experts and nongovernmental organizations have cast doubt on the effectiveness of the devices. They claim the dosimeters that Japanese troops carry are designed to detect only gamma and X-rays, while the most likely danger is posed by alpha rays. Uranium emits alpha and beta particles and gamma and X-rays in the process of its decay. Yuko Fujita, a professor of physics at Keio University, conducted a field trip in May to Iraq, including southern parts of the country where GSDF members are now being deployed. Fujita said he was only able to detect gamma rays from heavily contaminated objects, such as a destroyed Iraqi tank that was heavily riddled with depleted uranium rounds. "To detect gamma rays, you need to have a large amount of radiation," he said. More threatening, he said, are minute alpha particles that can remain in the air. These particles, undetectable by the dosimeters that Self-Defense Forces personnel will carry, are easily inhaled and can spread into a person's internal organs via the circulatory system. "They are only microns in size and hardly detectable," he said. "But still they pose grave threats to human bodies." A Tokyo-based manufacturer won a Defense Agency contract last month to supply dosimeters for the Iraq mission. The agency has reportedly purchased 600 devices at a cost of 45,000 yen each. Makoto Yanagida, a member of the Depleted Uranium Center Japan, a nongovernmental research group, said the GSDF would need to use higher-grade devices to detect alpha rays emanating from depleted uranium. The dosimeters that "do not work" could "do harm by giving GSDF personnel a false sense of safety," Yanagida said. In March, Brig. Gen. Vincent Brooks of the U.S. Central Command said U.S. military forces had used a very small volume of depleted uranium projectiles during the invasion of Iraq. But some experts believe their use was more extensive. For example, Asaf Durakovic, director of the Uranium Medical Research Center, an independent organization with offices in the U.S. and Canada, estimates that 1,700 tons of depleted uranium rounds were used. Durakovic, a former military doctor for the U.S. Defense Department, made a three-week field trip to Iraq in September and October. He is now analyzing samples of substances such as soil, along with tissue from the corpses of Iraqi soldiers, as well as urine samples from civilian residents. The U.S. has admitted it used some 300 tons of depleted uranium during the Gulf War in 1991. The Japan Times: Feb. 5, 2004 (C) All rights reserved [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 63 [RADFOOD] Wegmans Cancels Irrad. Meat! Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 00:16:49 -0600 (CST) please forward widely apologies for cross-posting TWO ITEMS BELOW: NEWS ARTICLE AND ACTION ALERT 1) NEWS: WEGMANS SUPERMARKETS STOP STOCKING IRRADIATED MEAT! Press & Sun-Bulletin, Binghamton Tuesday, February 3, 2004 Irradiated beef gone from markets' coolers DOM YANCHUNAS Meat supplier files for bankruptcy JOHNSON CITY -- Wegmans has notified customers that it no longer will sell irradiated beef, because its provider has gone belly-up. SureBeam Corp. filed for bankruptcy last month. The San Diego-based company has ceased operations. In May 2002, Wegmans became one of the first eastern U.S. supermarket chains to sell irradiated ground beef. It was the first anywhere to sell the beef under its own label, said Jo Natale, a spokeswoman for Rochester-based Wegmans. That announcement was a highly touted moment in the food industry, and SureBeam promised its electron-beam process was the most certain way of thwarting bacteria contamination. It was also controversial; consumer groups including Public Citizen said the technique may not be safe. Wegmans Shoppers Club customers who have purchased the irradiated beef are receiving letters this week explaining that it won't be available for the foreseeable future. Signs have been posted in the store's meat departments. "This is a disappointment for us and our customers," Natale said Monday. "We're very hopeful that we can find an alternative." Price Chopper stores in the Southern Tier have offered SureBeam beef since the spring of 2003. SureBeam's demise is "unfortunate for the small number of our customers who wanted the product," said Mona Golub, spokesman for Schenectady-based Price Chopper. "They felt it provided an extra level of safety." Omaha Steaks, Dairy Queen and many grocers became customers of SureBeam beef, said Ralph Williams, a vice president at former SureBeam owner Titan Corp., which is a creditor in the bankruptcy. He said SureBeam's demise is a shame. "It is a setback in public health," Williams said. "It was, in fact, the safest (beef). For ground beef, it was the same level of security as pasteurization of milk. I personally don't think you'll see the technology disappear." SureBeam was spun off from Titan in August 2002. Last year, SureBeam became embroiled in a dispute with its accounting firm, delayed release of financial results and was delisted from the Nasdaq Stock Market. It filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection about two weeks ago. The rightful owner of the intellectual property is an issue in the bankruptcy. Florida-based Food Technology Service Inc. irradiates meat using a different method. Wegmans is now emphasizing to customers that all beef must be cooked to at least 160 degrees internally. Just because it's brown inside doesn't mean it has reached 160 degrees, Natale said. Use a meat thermometer. e-mail: dyanchunaspressconnects.com ****************************************** 2) TAKE ACTION! SUPPORT PETITION TO END IRRADIATION OF GROUND BEEF! On November 24, 2003, Public Citizen and the Center for Food Safety filed a petition with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requesting that the agency revoke its 1997 approval of irradiation for ground beef. The consumer groups made this request based on a number of findings: ~ The FDA failed to follow its own protocols when it approved irradiation for ground beef; ~ New research has raised safety concerns about some of the chemicals produced in ground beef when it is irradiated; ~ Testing of irradiated ground beef conducted by the groups showed that these chemicals (which do not occur in non-irradiated meat) were present in irradiated ground beef purchased at grocery stores and one fast food restaurant. To view the complete Center for Food Safety/Public Citizen petition, please go to: www.centerforfoodsafety.org/li/petitionrevokebeef.pdf *SEND IN COMMENTS!* Comments must refer to "Citizen Petition No. 4Z4752 on irradiated ground beef." You can submit comments via email to fdadockets@oc.fda.gov or via postal mail to: Division of Dockets Management Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061 (HFA-305) Rockville, MD 20852 -- Sample Comments -- RE: Citizen Petition No. 4Z4752 on irradiated ground beef Dear Sir or Madam: I am writing in support of Citizen Petition No. 4Z4752 to revoke the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) approval of irradiation to treat ground beef. I urge the agency to rescind its approval of irradiation for ground beef for the following reasons: The 1997 FDA approval for irradiation of ground beef was flawed since the agency based its decision on deficient scientific studies; FDA failed to test for the toxicity of unique chemicals formed when ground beef is irradiated. While FDA knew of the existence of these chemicals as early as 1972, the agency failed to test for their potential to cause harm to humans; Recent research from Germany and France indicates that some of these chemicals are harmful to laboratory animals. In addition, the research indicates that there are questions about how these chemicals are metabolized in the bodyan issue that deserves continued research; Consumer groups Public Citizen and Center for Food Safety have demonstrated the existence of these potentially harmful chemicals in irradiated ground beef that is currently being sold in the United States; FDA failed to apply its own protocols when evaluating the safety of the chemicals produced when foods are irradiated. The FDA approval has led to irradiated ground beef being marketed in some 5000 supermarkets across the country. While that meat is required to be labeled so that consumers can make an informed choice, it is disturbing to me that some chain restaurants are offering irradiated ground beef to unwitting customers since information about food prepared with irradiated ingredients does not have to be divulged. The FDA approval has also led the United States Department of Agriculture to remove its prohibition on purchasing irradiated ground beef for the National School Lunch Programthus setting up the potential for our school children to become the largest group of consumers of irradiated ground beef without having complete scientific assurances of its safety. For all of these reasons, I urge you to rescind your approval of irradiation for ground beef. Sincerely, Your Name and Address ******************** If you would like to be removed from the radfood list, send an email to listserv@listserver.citizen.org with the words "unsubscribe radfood" in the message. If you would like to be added to the radfood list, send an email to listserv@listserver.citizen.org with the words "subscribe radfood" in the message. To learn more about food irradiation, visit our website at http://www.citizen.org/cmep/ Questions about the radfood list can be directed to RADFOOD-request@LISTSERVER.CITIZEN.ORG -Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program ***************************************************************** 64 [DU-WATCH] U.S. Planned to Nuke the Moon to Terrorize Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 01:54:34 -0600 (CST) "desocimr" wrote: New York Times The U.S. Planned Nuclear Blast on the Moon, Physicist Says By WILLIAM J. BROAD The United States weighed a plan to detonate a nuclear bomb on the moon as a show of military and technical strength during the feverish post-Sputnik days of the cold war, a physicist involved in the plan said. The physicist, Leonard Reiffel, 72, said yesterday that he was in charge of a highly classified study of the blast's visibility, its possible science benefits and its effects on the moon's face. His research got under way in 1958, sponsored by the Air Force special weapons center in Albuquerque, and involved up to 10 people on his staff, including Carl Sagan, then a young astronomer and later a famous popularizer of science. "The foremost intent was to impress the world with the prowess of the United States," Dr. Reiffel said in an interview. "It was a P.R. device, without question, in the minds of the people from the Air Force." The nuclear flash would have been widely visible from Earth, he said, and would have produced a lunar crater and dust cloud that, because of the moon's lack of atmosphere, would have flown out in all directions rather than in the usual mushroom shape. Dr. Reiffel said the plan called for an explosive device about the size of the atomic bomb that leveled Hiroshima. The Air Force ruled out a hydrogen bomb, he said, because of the difficulty of flying the heavier weapon 235,000 miles to the moon. He said the project ended when Air Force officials decided its risks outweighed its benefits. A spokesman said the Air Force would not comment until it could review records. Dr. Reiffel said the Air Force plan was seen as a way to bolster national confidence after the Soviet Union launched the world's first satellite, Sputnik, into orbit in October 1957. The United States had a hard time catching up, exploding many rockets and succeeding in orbiting a satellite in January 1958 that weighed just 10.5 pounds. Dr. Reiffel said his research was done at the Armour Research Foundation in Chicago, which did work for the Air Force and is now part of the Illinois Institute of Technology. He was the head of physics for the foundation and also led the secret study. >From May 1958 to January 1959, his team reported on blast considerations and likely effects, Dr. Reiffel said, including the visual differences if the moon's face was illuminated by the sun or darkened in shadow. Dr. Reiffel made his role in the project public in a letter in the May 4 issue of the journal Nature. In 1959, the Soviet Union became the first nation to crash a probe into the moon. After several failures, the United States did so in 1962. Dr. Reiffel said his team had no responsibility for the project's moon rocket. But it was to have been an Air Force intercontinental ballistic missile, he said, which had enough range. The United States began deploying ICBM's in October 1959. Dr. Reiffel said he worked with the physicist Enrico Fermi at the University of Chicago and later was a deputy director of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration during the early Apollo program. Dr. Reiffel's letter was in response to a review of "Carl Sagan: A Life" (John Wiley & Sons, 1999) by Keay Davidson, which sketched out some of Dr. Sagan's involvement in the bomb project. The book said Dr. Sagan had broken security in March 1959 to inform a potential patron about the secret work, but a reviewer disparaged that finding. However, Dr. Reiffel agreed with the author. "I wanted to set the record straight," Dr. Reiffel said. "There would have been an outcry if the project had been made public." --- End forwarded message --- [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 65 [du-list] DU news stories Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:46:30 -0800 See links below Steve Taylor National Organizer Military Toxics Project 207-783-5091 (phone) www.miltoxproj.org "Networking for Environmental Justice" 5 February. Gulf war syndrome: the legal case collapses. An eight-year, multimillion pound legal battle by more than 2,000 veterans for compensation for Gulf war syndrome has collapsed because there is not enough scientific evidence to prove their case in court. London Guardian, England [related article]. 5 February. Fears over depleted uranium lead to GSDF use of dosimeters. Responding to concerns over the use of depleted uranium rounds by the U.S. military during the Iraq war, the Japanese Defense Agency is equipping its forces in the country with hundreds of radiation dosimeters. Japan Times, Japan. To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT cd2f59.jpg cd2ffe.jpg ---------- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: * http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ * * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: * du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Attachment Converted: cd2f59.jpg: 00000001,5ca86efa,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: cd2ffe.jpg: 00000001,5ca86efb,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 66 Guardian Editorializes on Food Irradiation Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:46:34 -0800 UPDATE ON VOTE — Irradiated Foods Measure won't come up on Feb 10 The resolution banning irradiated foods will not be on the Feb 10th agenda — it will likely come before the Buildings and Grounds committee on Wed, Feb 25th, and before the full school board on Tues Mar 9th. These dates are still tentative, so stay tuned for further updates. SF Bay Guardian Editorializes on Irradiated Foods in Schools! The editorial and opinion piece below appeared in this week's Guardian. Forward them far and wide! http://www.sfbg.com/38/19/news_ed_rejectnuke.html http://www.sfbg.com/38/19/x_oped.html Reject irradiated food IT'S BEEN ALMOST exactly 19 years since the Bay Guardian first broke the story of how the federal government and the nuclear industry were trying to get into the business of zapping food with gamma rays to kill bacteria and fight disease (see "The New Hot Potato," 2/27/85). At the time it seemed like some science-fiction fantasy gone mad: the people who brought us the Three Mile Island disaster, who were contaminating the ground and water at weapons-processing plants in Colorado, Washington, and South Carolina, and who were building up mountains of highly toxic waste with no place to store it and no way to contain it were about to get their hands on the U.S. food supply. A national coalition, led by San Francisco labor activist Denis Mosgofian, worked to alert the public to the dangers of the practice and managed to slow down wholesale implementation. As Mosgofian points out in an opinion on this page, there is no large-scale food-irradiation infrastructure in the United States. The government and the nuke makers didn't give up, and they've managed to get approval for all sorts of irradiation programs. But the public has never really bought into the plan. Given the choice between irradiated meat and meat that hasn't been dosed with the equivalent of 15 million chest X rays, consumers generally buy the nonnuclear stuff. That's why the U.S. Department of Agriculture recently approved the use of irradiated food in school lunches: the kids don't have a choice. But the San Francisco Board of Education does. As Rachel Brahinsky reported last week (see "Hot Lunch," 1/28/04), board member Mark Sanchez has introduced a measure opposing the use of irradiated food in San Francisco schools. Berkeley and Los Angeles have already banned the stuff, and San Francisco should too. There are all sorts of scientific arguments about the safety and quality of irradiated food. Some studies have shown that the process destroys essential nutrients. Consumer Reports says meat that's been nuked has "a slight but distinct off-taste and smell ... [like] singed hair." And while almost everyone agrees that irradiation does, in fact, kill bacteria, so do soap and water and proper cooking. In fact, decent safety standards in agribusiness (and monitoring by the USDA) would make all of this far less necessary. The whole thing reminds us of physicist Amory Lovins's critique of nuclear power: "It's like cutting butter with a chain saw." Wholesale irradiation requires large amounts of dangerous material that puts workers and the environment at risk. It provides a publicly funded subsidy to an industry that has ignored health and safety concerns for more than half a century. It forces kids to eat unappetizing and possibly nutritionally deficient food ­ and for what? Largely, it appears, to protect the agribusiness industry from having to implement decent food-safety practices. Food irradiation makes no sense and doesn't belong in S.F. schools. The board should adopt Sanchez's resolution and send the nuke makers packing. Opinion by Denis Mosgofian It's about irradiation THE U. S. Department of Agriculture has just approved the distribution of irradiated meat to public school children. This practice will support the government's effort to privatize management of nuclear waste and cover up unsanit ary corporate food processing. Food irradiation is not about food anymore than nuclear power was about electricity. Both were part of the Atoms for Peace program developed in 1953 and '54 under President Eisenhower to convince the public that there were peaceful uses of the atom. The real purpose was to shore up public support for the nation's nuclear weapons program in the face of the huge worldwide movement to ban the bomb. We were told that through nuclear power electricity would be too cheap to meter and through irradiation of food refrigeration would be a thing of the past. San Francisco school board member Mark Sanchez has introduced a resolution similar to that adopted by the Los Angeles and Berkeley school boards to prohibit serving irradiated food in school food programs. It deserves all parents' immediate attention and support. There are three things to look at with food irradiation. First, gamma radiation's impact on food; second, how food is irradiated; and third, why food might need irradiation ­ and what irradiation will cover up. Ionizing radiation affects plants and animals by producing ionic reactions, and these reactions can have a wide range of destructive results. The radiation can damage molecules, disrupt DNA, produce chemical poisons, and permanently disrupt the life cycle of the organism. Molecules in food are not exempt from the effects of the radiation. Nutrients can be affected, and vitamins, such as A, B2, B6, C, E, and K, along with key amino, nucleic, and fatty acids, are vulnerable to destruction. Feeding irradiated food to public school children will mean that many children will receive food even more depleted of nutrients than they get now. Many studies have proved this. The residues of fumigants, pesticides, and insecticides will also be irradiated, and nobody knows all the poisons that process could produce. In a clinical study in Hyderabad, India, children receiving freshly irradiated wheat developed abnormal cells in increasing number as the duration of feeding increased, and they showed a gradual reversal to normal after they stopped eating irradiated food. There is no widespread food-irradiation industry today. The infrastructure has not yet been built. But the Department of Energy hopes it can promote the industry so it can privatize the management of much of the 11 billion curies of radioactive Cesium 137 that will have built up in the United States by 2020. Every community in which the DOE has tried to help build a food-irradiation facility has fought it tooth and nail. But every time a school board approves the use of irradiated food (in a population that has no ability to reject it), the DOE's plan gets a push forward. Proponents say irradiating food kills bacteria and organisms. But in fact the bacteria and organisms found in our food are successfully washed away and killed with proper handling and cooking. The real issue is that our food supply is often contaminated because it is a product of corporate food production and processing. What irradiation will do is institutionalize the worst corporate food-processing practices and make even easier the efforts of industry to kill off Food and Drug Administration and USDA inspections, microbial testing, and regulations. Irradiation will cover up, not clean up, our food. And irradiation will not kill mad cow prions. In the long term, the disease and death resulting from irradiation facilities housing radioactive isotopes in and near our communities will increase and will not change corporate food-processing practices, which need cleaning up, not covering up. Call the school board members and say you support Sanchez's proposal. Denis Mosgofian is a parent of three children who attended San Francisco public schools and was director from 1984 to 1987 of the National Coalition to Stop Food Irradiation. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tracy Lerman Senior Organizer Public Citizen, California Office 1615 Broadway, 9th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 p h: 510-663-0888 x 103 f: 510-663-8569 tlerman@citizen.org www.citizen.org/california Keep irradiated food out of your child's lunch! Visit www.safelunch.org to find out more. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ***************************************************************** 67 [DU-WATCH] Dosimeters in Iraq - what kind of fools are these Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 23:20:52 -0600 (CST) In a sad and ill conceived attempt to pacify public opinion against sending forcs into Iraq, Japan makes a complete fool of itself. Will someone from Defence tell us how dosimeters hanging on your belt can tell you anything about exposure levels due to inhaltion of airborne alpha emitters? What a joke. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/Sj.0lB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 68 [du-list] "One Half Life to Live": NL Uranium Health Article Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:46:39 -0800 Dear Friends, For your interest, below is a feature article on the NL Industries depleted uranium site in Colonie, NY from a weekly newsmagazine, titled "One Half Live to Live." Also, a letter to the editor making a few corrections at the end. Anne Rabe, NL Health Study Commmittee Volume 27 - Number 6 - Feb 5, 2004 cd5196.jpg One Half-Life to Live By Geraldean Hourigan National Lead’s production of depleted uranium shells has left the Capital Region with a toxic legacy—and angry neighbors who want explanaations for their deteriorating health Cover photo by Shannon DeCelle cd51ba.jpg "My neurosurgeon said, ‘Marcia, if we don’t do this surgery now, you are not going to live very much longer,’ †—Marcia Dingly One Half-Life to Live National Lead’s production of depleted uranium shells has left the Capital Region with a toxic legacy—and angry neighbors who want explanations for their deteriorating health By Geraldean Hourigan Photographs by Shannon DeCelle Ron Russo was 3 years old when National Lead Industries began processing uranium at its plant on Central Avenue in 1958. The factory, which occupied an 11.2-acre plot of land that is now just west of the I-90 overpass, spewed tall billowing clouds of smoke into the Colonie sky. Russo grew up four blocks away, and spent most of his childhood playing behind the plant. “Behind the building was the creek,†he said. “We swam back there. We drank back there. We did everything back there.†In October 2002, doctors informed Russo that he had 18 months to live. Now 49, Russo has nodules covering both lungs, liver disease, diabetes, and neuropathy. Russo blames his terminal illnesses, and the death of both of his parents within the last five years, on NL and the microscopic particles of depleted uranium that the plant spat into his old neighborhood for 26 years. Marcia Dingly lived next door to NL on Central Avenue between 1977 and 1984. In 1985, she gave birth to a baby girl with several birth defects, including a hole in her heart and a rare form of Down’s Syndrome. The girl, who would have been 18 this year, died of adult leukemia at age 4. Dingly herself is now living with a rare condition called Cushing’s Disease. A tumor has grown around her pituitary gland and part of her brain, causing the overproduction of cortisol, a hormone released by the adrenal glands in order to maintain proper cardiovascular and metabolic function. Cushing’s disease has attacked her whole body. Dingly, 46, has diabetes, severe osteoporosis, psychiatric disturbances, severe deformation of the body, thyroid disease and two bladder diseases. All are in some way related to the rare brain tumor. Dingly too blames NL for her condition and the premature death of her daughter. Russo and Dingly are not alone. According to a health survey conducted by the Albany-based Citizens’ Environmental Coalition, more than 250 members who lived in the community surrounding the plant during its years of operation have rare diseases or combinations of several health problems, and believe that their illnesses are related to NL’s emissions of depleted uranium. Though the plant has long been closed, residents still want answers about what its emissions did to them—and whether the current polluted site still posess a threat. NL first purchased the Colo nie site in 1937 as a brass foundry, but in 1958 the plant morphed into a government production facility for projectiles containing depleted uranium. The NL plant also manufactured fuel from enriched uranium for experimental reactors between 1966 and 1972. DU is a hard metal that burns on impact and is known for its ability to pierce armor. It is a by-product of the uranium enrichment process used in manufacturing nuclear fuels. It is produced at extremely high temperatures, making it insoluble and therefore indestructible. It is also both radioactive and toxic. Just how dangerous its use is to human health is the subject of vociferous debate. It is primarily dangerous when it is in dust form and is inhaled or ingested. Both the radioactivity and the toxicity can cause DNA mutations. The Pentagon gave DU an “all-clear†stamp in 1999, but veterans suffering from Gulf War Syndrome continue to point to DU as a possible source of their problems. Several hundred tons of DU were fired in both Gulf Wars and over the Balkans. Col. Asaf Durakovic of the Uranium Medical Research Center in Washington refers to prior research on DU exposure as “poorly coordinated†with poor methodology. Newer data suggest a long-term risk of DU internal contamination that requires modification of established policies, he wrote in Military Medicine. Durakovic, chief of nuclear medicine at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs from 1989-1997, says that the battlefields of the Gulf Wars and the Balkans continue to threaten civilians who survived those wars. In 1980, Colonie’s NL plant had 200 employees. Ten stacks, each with a height of roughly 1,000 feet, billowed fine DU particles at high velocities into the air. Large DU particles from explosions in the chip burner were expelled from a side emergency vent system. In 1979, the New York State Supreme Court had ordered NL to restrict production because its uranium emissions were found to be in excess of state standards. Four years later, when it was still found to be releasing 54,000 times the allowed amount of DU, the plant was closed down. Community residents can only wonder how much it was emitting before 1979. cd5213.jpg "Behind the building was the creek. We swam back there. We drank back there. We did everything back there.†—Ron Russo Two researchers at the University at Albany, John Arnason and Barb Fletcher, have shown that there are elevated levels of DU in the overlying soil just downstream of NL in Patroon Creek. After analyzing sediment cores extracted from the creek, Arnason and Fletcher noted that while the sediment contained consistent background levels of uranium below the depth of 1.9 meters (about 6.2 feet), there was a large spike of pure DU near the surface. That suggests a man-made source that suddenly appears around the late 1950’s and ceases abruptly. The DU levels in the surface soils are staggering, Arnason said, anywhere from 25 percent to 97 percent by soil weight. Anne Rabe of the Citizen’s Environmental Coalition echoes many residents when she says the main question the plant left behind is, “What did NL’s toxic and radioactive emissions do to the community’s health?†Over the years, federal and state agencies have conducted three studies to determine whether DU emissions from NL have harmed the health of plant workers and nearby residents. In each instance, their conclusion has been no, but critics say each report has serious flaws. The community is still seeking a full accounting. In 1979, the New York State Department of Health took and analyzed urine and dust samples from the area surrounding the NL site. According to the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, which recently reviewed the DOH’s results, this study showed no measurable levels of radioactive DU. At the time, the test group was given a verbal confirmation of a clean bill of health by the Department of Health. But the actual results of the urinalysis were never included in the report. Some members of the test group have recently set out to get the results on paper from DOH, but so far they haven’t been successful. The results of the test may have been accurate, as far as they go. But according to William Kelleher, a former employee with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the urine samples were taken three to six months after NL stopped production, giving the particles plenty of time to pass through the kidneys and bladder. If people had been exposed previously, or had inhaled rather than ingested particles, this study would not have given them any warnings. The test group also did not represent those people with the highest exposures of DU during that time, says Kelleher. The Department of Health tested residents who lived directly outside NL’s fences. Those people would have mostly been exposed to larger particles blowing out of the emergency vent, but those particles were too big to be inhaled and trapped in the lungs. The finer, and therefore more dangerous, particles would have traveled farther. The state Department of Health conducted a second study of the area surrounding the NL plant in 1993. That study looked at the incidence of cancer in a five-zip-code area surrounding the site. The study noted a high rate of certain cancers, but because the study examined such a large area, researchers determined that the increase had no relation to DU emissions. Last August, the ATSDR issued its own report. That report concluded that there is “no public health hazard†associated with the NL site and surrounding properties. The preliminary report—a revised report is due late this winter following a three-month ccomment period—provoked an angry response from the neighboring Yardbboro Avenue community and has reignited interest in the issue. An outpouring of comments to ATSDR during the comment period for the preliminary report released in August forced the agency to extend the comment period in order to process them all. The comments were mostly from residents, and focused on health concerns, especially for children now living in the area. ATSDR environmental scientist Aimee Treffiletti has been reviewing community responses to the August 2003 health consultation. “I did not expect to see the number of comments that came in,†she says. “Community involvement is good; we value it here.†ATSDR has told community activists that it is reviewing all the comments and that it hasn’t forgotten about the Yardboro Avenue community. Treffiletti also said that the agency will clear up and flesh out some of the community’s concerns. For example, the revision will elaborate on the issue of children being exposed to DU via dirt piles and vegetable gardens. But as for the overall conclusions, Treffiletti says, “The health call will not change.†This frustrates community members and activists who are tired of studies based on partial data “ATSDR had plenty of evidence about NL workers and NL contamination, but none of it was used in the report,†says Rabe. For example, according to Leonard Dietz, an atomic physicist who worked at Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory in Niskayuna for 25 years, the most recent ATSDR report neglects to include DU measurements that New York state made prior to NL being closed down. “The health study does not include former workers of NL,†he adds. And according to Rabe, ATSDR ignored past epidemiological studies by DOH on workers exposed to radiation and DU and health problems associated with this; DOH studies in 1980 saying that people should be concerned about eating root vegetables in the Yardboro Avenue community; and studies given to them from CEC about various exposure pathways to DU. They treat them “with utter disdain,†says Rabe. “We have serious distrust with ATSDR that they would conduct a health study that would not reek of whitewash should they not include the community’s input.†The ATSDR study claims that “touching or accidentally eating [DU particles] would not have made people sick.†Dietz, a certified radiological worker for 25 years, says that under no circumstances should any radiating material be touched with bare hands, much less eaten, no matter how small the quantity. But ATSDR concludes over and over again that there is “no apparent public hazard†associated with playing and gardening in soil contaminated by DU. One point of contention between government sources and local activists is the amount of time that DU particles would exist in a person’s lungs. Dietz said that his concern is “the long-term effects and the radioactivity of the particles.†According to an August 2003 study documented in Military Medicine, the half-life of a radioactive particle in the lungs is about 3.85 years. A radioactive half-life is how long it takes for substance to release approximately half its radioactivity. Based on the particles he studied, however, Dietz believes the half-life of NL’s emissions is much longer—by a couple oof decades. “Anybody who breathes this stuff can expect that the DU will never leave their body,†he said. Dietz believes that DU’s residence time in the environment may be upwards of 100,000 years, giving particles enough time to be resuspended into the atmosphere under the proper conditions. A committee of more than 200 active community members, organized through CEC, hopes to get answers through a new health study. CEC has so far gathered 89 community signatures on a petition strongly urging ATSDR to “conduct a comprehensive health study of the community impacted by NL industries’ pollution, with input from a community-appointed Citizen Advisory Committee.†The committee also wants a more comprehensive cleanup of the site than what has been promised, and financial compensation for victims with related health problems. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is in charge of cleaning up the site, had hoped to complete the remediation process by next October. But site manager James Moore said that the recent discovery of more lead contamination under the site means the job won’t be completed until 2005. cd52af.jpg “NL’s attitude at the time, was not to take samples or keep records because it would incriminate them later.†Prior to the recent setback, the corps was optimistic about future plans for the site. Last year, Moore said publicly that the property would be so pristine that anything could be built on it. But there seems to be a large discrepancy between the Army Corps of Engineers’ cleanup guidelines and what Dietz has calculated to be an acceptable level of DU contamination at the NL site. The Corps uses a cleanup guideline of 35 picocuries per gram of soil. This measure applies for “unrestricted public use.†According to Dietz, however, the Corps’ guidelines would still leave 50 to 100 times as much DU at the Colonie site than would be there naturally And those particles can be resuspended into the atmosphere, potentially to be inhaled by humans, he says. While federal officials seem confident in the outcome of the cleanup, serious questions remain about just how much DU contamination there is already in the surrounding community. Since the ATSDR report came out, Assemblyman Robert Prentiss has been pressuring several state agencies to respond to new information from Kelleher, the ex-DEC engineer, who toured the plant in 1979. According to Kelleher, when he visited, the NL plant contained broken instruments for testing air quality and was missing other basic means of protecting workers. NL’s attitude at the time, he said, was not to take samples or keep records because it would incriminate them later. Kelleher alleges that two state agencies—The Departments of Health and EEnvironmental Conservation—along with the federal Departments of Eneergy and Defense, worked with NL to cover up exposures to DU and other contaminants in order to avoid lawsuits. According to Kelleher, DEC “did not lift a finger†to determine what the exposures to the public were from DU dust, PCBs, dioxins, lead, magnesium fluoride, and hydrofluoric acid. Anybody who attempted to see the records was severely punished, he says. Calls to DEC were not returned. Kelleher also alleges that both DOD and DOE did not want the public to know that burning DU chips contaminated with PCB cutting oils, which produces dioxin, was banned at all nuclear installations by 1960—except National Lead! Prentiss remains uncertain whether the problem is a coverup or simple incompetence, but he is very concerned, and, he says, the state and federal agencies involved clearly need to be investigated. Kelleher believes that DOD and DOE were focused on not letting the public know that since 1960, NL of Colonie had been producing more DU chips than seven other major installations combined. Cathy Nasser grew up a few blocks away from NL, and certainly never received any public disclosures about the plant. “Nobody ever told us,†she says. “NL never had warning signs to get out of here. In the late ’50s there wasn’t even a fence there. My uncles and my father used to play football on the lawn of NL every weekend.†Nasser’s father died at 38 of lung cancer. “My father never smoked a cigarette in his life,†Nasser says. Nasser recalls men walking around her neighborhood at night in hazmat suits using Geiger counters. “Nobody told the community anything,†she says. DU contamination from the NL plant may have gone beyond the Yardboro Avenue community as well. In 1979, Dietz, the atomic physicist, discovered DU particles in weekly air samples taken by environmental air filters on the exterior of Knolls Atomic Power Lab in Niskayuna. In the first week of testing, four DU particles were detected in the air filters. Based on the chemical composition of the particles, Knolls was able to trace their origin back to NL’s smokestacks, some 10 miles southeast of the lab. The four DU particles were less than 5 micrometers in size, says Dietz, making the radioactive particles easily inhaled and trapped in a person’s lungs, where they could perhaps remain indefinitely. As a Knolls Lab employee, Dietz was not at liberty to disclose the information, but he began to talk when he retired in 1983, providing scientific support to claims by members of the Yardboro Avenue community that NL had not taken responsibility for the damage it caused. Dietz said there is also evidence suggesting that DU particles from NL have traveled as far as West Milton’s Naval Training Site, 26 miles northwest of the plant. Given his findings, Dietz is not happy with the geographic scope of the initial state-approved survey of contaminated land, which looked at 200 properties directly adjacent to the NL site. The initial study sites were designated back in the 1980s using wind distribution and pattern data. Based on this initial state-approved standard, no properties outside of a 1-mile radius from the NL plant were studied. Within that radius, the DOE determined that it needed to clean 56 of the 200 properties. But Dietz says that based on the discovery of DU particles far from the NL site, the Capital Region needs a 20-mile radius cleanup that would include Troy and Schenectady. The Army Corps’ Moore stands by the initial survey and doesn’t see the need for a new survey. But he agrees that the ATSDR report failed to include data in its study that was readily available. “There was a wealth of data made available to them [ATSDR], and the agency did not make use of the data,†Moore says. He also questions whether the plant really was emitting 54,000 times the state standard of atmospheric emissions, considering NL’s limited operations between 1979 and 1984. That figure is certain to be amended in the revised version of the report, he says. Among members of the community, the basic concern is that the ATSDR report falls short of addressing the issues that affect families living near the site. The community doesn’t know enough about levels of emissions, the Citizens’ Environmental Coalition says. Just how much DU has been spread over what area? What about children, who in their minds run the highest risk of being exposed? The preliminary report doesn’t address those concerns. And according to the group, New York state has not been forthcoming with data and records that would assist it in getting answers. In contrast, the state of Ohio informed residents of similar levels of exposure to DU contamination from NL’s Fernald Feed Materials Production Center, located 18 miles northwest of Cincinnati. The Fernald Plant, like NL’s plant in Colonie, was a government installation. Like the Colonie plant, the Fernald plant refined uranium and manufactured reactor fuel and targets between 1952 and 1989. Area residents formed a community watchdog group in 1962 to monitor the effects of the plant, and a subsequent investigation by the DOE revealed that 3.1 million pounds of uranium wastes had escaped faulty filtration systems and been released into the atmosphere. In 1984, the advocacy group filed a class-action lawsuit against NL and the U.S. Department of Energy. After an eight-member jury issued a nonbinding verdict awarding the Ohio plaintiffs $136 million in damages, the federal government settled for $73 million in 1989. Locally, environmental advocates are working to put together a potential class-action lawsuit against NL’s operations at the Colonie plant. They hope to use the same New York environmental law firm that represented Fernald residents and plant employees in their suit against NL of Ohio. Last August, the same time the ATSDR report was being released, Marcia Dingly was having brain surgery. Surgeons at Albany Medical were able to remove the portion of the brain tumor located closest to her pituitary gland, but further surgery is needed to remove the part of the tumor that causes her body to produce too much cortisol. For that, she will need an experimental “gamma-knife†radiosurgery procedure. “My neurosurgeon said, ‘Marcia, if we don’t do this surgery now, you are not going to live very much longer,’†she says. “I thought I would be cured after the first brain surgery.†Dingle thinks the extent of NL’s damage may take some work to track down, but that it’s worth doing. She expects there are those who have moved away many years ago that may have unexplained illnesses. “We need to go back and find all the families that were living by NL during its heyday like me,†she says, “and see how they are doing.†Geraldean Hourigan is a science writer and graduate student in Earth Sciences at the University at Albany. Science journalist William Kanapaux contributed to this story. Dear Editor: The "One Half-Life to Live" article gave a very interesting overview of the many community health concerns related to NL Industries devastating radioactive and chemical pollution. There were a few errors in the article. Would you please print these corrections to set the record straight? Thank you. The community wants answers about what NL's toxic emissions did to them. The 250 plus residents who completed a Community Health Survey believe their illnesses and injuries MAY be related to NL's pollution -- and are interested in a health study and assessment to determine if this is the case. While Yardboro Avenue was heavily contaminated, depleted uranium (DU) pollution was found well beyond this street adjacent to NL. Soil surveys found significant DU pollution up to a quarter mile from the factory. Unfortunately, no government soil testing has been done to follow up on physicist Leonard Dietz's critical finding that DU particulates were found up to 26 miles away from NL. The federal health agency, Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry (ATSDR), in its August, 2003 report found NL's emissions were clearly "a public health hazard to the community surrounding the Colonie site" while the plant was operating (Health Consultation, Page 1, 8/15/03). Right now, residents are seeking a comprehensive health study and investigating the possibility of legal action. Sincerely, Anne Rabe Tom Ellis NL Health Study Committee Citizens' Environmental Coalition Anne Rabe, 518-732-4538, annerabe@msn.com 165 Maple Hill Rd., Castleton, NY 12033 cd52ed.jpg To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ---------- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: * http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ * * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: * du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. ---------- Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com Attachment Converted: cd5196.jpg: 00000001,3b7e57cf,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: cd51ba.jpg: 00000001,3b7e57d0,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: cd5213.jpg: 00000001,3b7e57d1,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: cd52af.jpg: 00000001,3b7e57d2,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: cd52ed.jpg: 00000001,3b7e57d3,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 69 [du-list] a new book on d.u.: Depleted Uranium: deadly, Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:46:27 -0800 new book on depleted uranium Anne Gut and Bruno Vitale: Depleted Uranium; Deadly, dangerous and indiscriminate - The full picture; with a foreword by the Campaign Against Depleted Uranium, a preface by Peter Low and a postface by André Gsponer on 4th generation nuclear weapons and their relation to d.u.weapons' deployment. Nottingham: Spokesman and Manchester: CADU, 2003. It is available for £7.99 (with free UK p+p; for worldwide delivery, please add £2) - ISBN 085124685 - orders through Spokesman, elfeuro@compuserve.com or CADU, info@cadu.org.uk; or for the equivalent in dollars, through tara@miltoxproj.org. Depleted Uranium: deadly, dangerous and indiscriminate scrutinises the available evidence of the effects of DU on human health and the environment, and makes the case for stopping completely the manufacture, deployment and use of DU munitions. 'At a time of great power menace with depleted uranium used again in Iraq, this meticulous and vivid book brilliantly puts the case for none of us remaining silent.' - John Pilger Chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT cd24b0.jpg cd251e.jpg ---------- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: * http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ * * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: * du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Attachment Converted: cd24b0.jpg: 00000001,012e807b,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: cd251e.jpg: 00000001,012e807c,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 70 [du-list] Three Minutes to Midnight: Audio and Video Now Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:46:32 -0800 Dear Friends and Colleagues: For those of you who were unable to attend Three Minutes to Midnight: The Impending Threat of Nuclear War, or were able to attend and would like to have an archive of the proceedings, NPRI is pleased to announce that the entire conference is now available on CD audio, and we are taking orders for the DVD set which will be available in just a few short weeks. This is a valuable archive and educational resource for those looking for the latest data and debate on nuclear issues. Topics covered included: · The Medical and Ecological Implications of Nuclear War · Reflections on the War Experience: Bobby Muller, President of the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation · The Hair Trigger: How a Nuclear War Could Start · Nuclear Plans and Nuclear Targeting After the Cold War · Nuclear Labs and Nuclear Development, Post Cold War · The Manhattan Project and Beyond · Regional Nuclear Dangers · Understanding Nuclear Challenges: The Role of the Media Speakers included Dr. Helen Caldicott, William Arkin, Bruce Blair, General Charles Horner, Dr. C. Paul Robinson, Greg Mello, Dr. Raymond Jeanloz, Professor Anatoly Diakov, Jacqueline Cabasso, Dr. Robert Galluci, Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy and others. Buy individual panels on CD or DVD, or you can purchase the entire conference at a substantial discount. Click here to order online via credit card: http://www.3minutestomidnight.org/Portals/57ad7180-c5e7-49f5-b282-c6475cdb7ee7/audio_cds.htm Or visit http://www.3minutestomidnight.org and click on Order Audio and Video Best regards, Charles Sheehan-Miles Executive Director Nuclear Policy Research Institute To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT cd3a22.jpg cd3aba.jpg ---------- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: * http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ * * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: * du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Attachment Converted: cd3a22.jpg: 00000001,67e6c609,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: cd3aba.jpg: 00000001,67e6c60a,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 71 [DU-WATCH] Veteran wins pensions tribunal over DU Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 21:35:58 -0600 (CST) NATIONAL GULF VETERANS & FAMILIES ASSOCIATION PRESS RELEASE Wednesday 3rd February 2004 Landmark Breaking News Another first for Hull based National Gulf Veterans & Families Association (Charity) Scottish Veteran first to win Landmark ruling on Depleted Uranium poisoning from the Gulf War the Tribunal was heard in Edinburgh 02 02 04. Kenny Duncan from Clackmananshire Scotland yesterday became the first British Gulf War Veteran to win his case for Depleted Uranium Poisoning from the gulf War 1991. Kenny served with the Royal Corps of Transport and served as a specialist Tank transporter, it was one of his jobs to move Iraqi Tanks hit and destroyed by Depleted Uranium, it was doing this job that caused his exposure by inhaling the Depleted Uranium Dust from the burnt out tanks hit by DU. All 3 of Kenny and Mandy's children have physical health problems since being born post Gulf War. Kenny won his case at the Pensions appeal Tribunal service at Scotland he was represented by Mr Roy Gibson of the NGVFA based in Hull the National Charity for Gulf War Veterans. The tribunal found that Mr Kenny Duncan's exposure to Depleted Uranium was attributable to service in the 1991 Gulf War. The Chairman and Doctor found the Chromosome Aberrations Tests carried out at the World Health Organisation Laboratories Bremen Institute implicit, it must be noted that these tests had to be paid for by the Charity. We have to thank a German Professor Dr Albrect Schott who recognised the similarities and had the bloods taken and tested at the Bremen Institute. The blood tests show damage by Ionising radiation from the Gulf War and can only be from the Battlefield. We have to thank Dr.Med W.Hoffmann M.P.H WHO Bremen Institute Germany. It must be noted that it is 13 years since the Gulf War 1991 and the Government and the Ministry of Defence have not yet tested British Soldiers for Depleted Uranium Damage and disease, yet the 24hr Urine test has been available since 1996, and the chromosome aberration test since 2000, it begs the question WHY our troops have not been tested and why they have to turn to a small Charity for testing. This result makes for further pressure on the prime minister for a public enquiry into Gulf War Illness. 606 Soldiers that we know of have died since April 1991, 5933 to date have applied for War Pensions due to Disablement. We however believe that this is just the tip of the iceberg and the figures on both accounts are actually double. For further information: Contact Shaun Rusling (Chairman) Professor Malcolm Hooper DU Panel. Advocate Roy Gibson ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 72 [DU-WATCH] Gulf veterans hail urnaium poisoning ruling Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 22:26:56 -0600 (CST) Gulf Veterans Hail Uranium Poisoning Ruling By Rod Minchin, Scottish Press Association A former soldier has become the first veteran to win a war pension appeal after suffering depleted uranium poisoning during the Gulf War, it emerged today. Kenny Duncan took the Ministry of Defence to the Pension Appeal Tribunal Service over his claim that he suffered depleted uranium poisoning during active service in Iraq. The National Gulf Veterans and Families Association (NGVFA) said the tribunals verdict added to its call for a full public inquiry into Gulf War illnesses. The father of three, from Clackmannanshire, served with the Royal Corps of Transport as a specialist tank transporter during the first Gulf War in 1991. Part of his job was to move Iraqi tanks destroyed by depleted uranium shells. The campaign group said the Edinburgh-based tribunal, which ruled in Mr Duncans favour yesterday, accepted his claims that he was poisoned from inhaling depleted uranium dust from the burnt-out tanks. The tribunal found that Mr Duncans exposure to the uranium was attributable to his service in the Gulf. Shaun Rusling, chairman of the NGVFA, said the verdict was justice. He said: The finding by the Pensions Appeal Tribunal was absolutely tremendous and extremely significant for Kenny Duncan. It proves that his ill health was due to depleted uranium poisoning and it is great news for Kenny and his wife to at long last have his condition recognised. The National Gulf Veterans and Families Association is extremely pleased that justice has been done. Mr Rusling, a former Parachute Regiment medical officer, said that prior to the Gulf War the use of depleted uranium was extremely experimental. He said: Prior to the war the Ministry of Defence advised the Army, who were based in Saudi Arabia, of the dangers of depleted uranium but the information never made it down to the troops. Troops should not be exposed to anything experimental the Ministry of Defence knew this. But he went on to again demand that the Government hold a public inquiry into Gulf War illnesses. It is now 13 years since the Gulf War and no depleted uranium tests have been made available to former servicemen this is despicable and unacceptable, he said. There should be a public inquiry into the ill health suffered by Gulf War veterans. Mr Blair talks about social justice but he still refuses to give servicemen a public inquiry and depleted uranium tests. According to the association, 606 Gulf servicemen have died from ill health and a further 5,933 have applied for a war pension due to disablement. In November a coroner ruled that the death of Major Ian Hill was linked to his service in the Gulf War. Lawyers for his family described the verdict as a landmark decision, saying it would give hope to around 2,000 other veterans. The 54-year-old from Knutsford, Cheshire, died in March 2001 from a heart attack. He blamed a decade of failing health on Gulf War Syndrome caused by vaccinations and tablets he was given upon enlisting. In June the High Court refused to overturn a landmark ruling recognising the existence of the syndrome for the first time. But the Government still does not recognise the syndrome although it does accept some veterans did become ill. ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/Sj.0lB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 73 [DU-WATCH] Legal case for GWS to collapse in UK/Fewer Veteran Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 00:29:16 -0600 (CST) Legal case for Gulf war syndrome to collapse in UK : report www.chinaview.cn 2004-02-05 19:53:51 (Xinhuanet) http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2004-02/05/content_1300677.htm LONDON, Feb. 5 -- An eight-year, multimillion pound legal battle by more than 2,000 British veterans for compensation for Gulf war syndrome has collapsed due to lacking enough scientific evidence to prove their case in court, a British newspaper reported on Thursday. The Legal Services Commission (LSC), which was estimated to have spent about 4 million pounds (about 7.3 million US dollars), was expected to withdraw legal aid this month after being told by the veterans' lawyers that the action has no real chance of success, the Guardian newspaper said. Taking the case to trial in the high court could cost a further4 million pounds in legal aid, it added. To succeed in their claim against the British Ministry of Defense (MoD), the veterans would have to produce scientific evidence not only that their illness was caused by service in the 1991 Gulf War, but that the MoD had been negligent, the paper said. But a trawl by scientists through 10 years of research worldwide, overseen by the veteran's lawyers and funded by the LSC, has found no evidence which establishes any specific cause for the range of health problems they suffer and there was also scant evidence of negligence on the part of the MoD, the paper added. Many of the 55,000 British troops who served in the Gulf have experienced a range of symptoms, including muscle weakness, neurological symptoms, headaches, depression, fatigue, short-term memory loss and difficulty in concentrating, joint and muscle pain, sleep disturbances, skin rashes and shortness of breath. The syndrome has been attributed to stress, smoke from oil-burning wells, injections, depleted uranium ammunition and other causes, although many believe the nebulous condition could be psychosomatic. The United States and Britain have refused to accept a direct link between the war and the syndrome, even though they have spent hundreds of millions of dollars researching possible causes. ---- Fewer than 10 Gulf war troops had uranium poisoning IAN BRUCE, Defence Correspondent, February 05 2004 UK Herald http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/9323-print.shtml FEWER than 10 of the 70,000 British troops involved in operations in Iraq over the past 11 months have tested positive for signs of depleted uranium (DU) contamination, according to figures obtained by The Herald. All of those affected were hit by shrapnel from DU tank or aircraft cannon shells during "friendly fire" incidents in the advance on Basra and have since received treatment for "very low-level" radiation poisoning. The news comes a day after a Scottish veteran of the 1991 Gulf conflict became the first British soldier to win a war pension for DU poisoning. Kenny Duncan, a father of three from Clackmannanshire, convinced a pensions tribunal that his subsequent ill health was directly attributable to inhaling uranium dust from burned-out armoured vehicles he was ordered to carry back from the front lines on his tank transporter 13 years ago. Successive governments have resisted calls for a public inquiry into the harmful effects of depleted uranium ammunition to avoid compensation claims, which could potentially cost them hundreds of millions of pounds. DU is the waste product of nuclear power stations and is 1.7 times as dense as lead, making it perfect for penetrating tank armour. Shaped into rods and fired from either tank guns or the rapid-fire cannon on American A10 "tankbuster" aircraft, it also produces intense heat on impact. Both the MoD and the US Defence Department still insist that the radioactive dust plume produced when a round strikes its target is only harmful if inhaled, swallowed or in wounds caused by shrapnel when the shell fragments. Veterans' organisations claim the dust, relatively harmless outside the body, can lodge in the lymph glands if ingested and cause cancer. Every serviceman or woman who took part in last year's Iraq campaign or has since been posted to Basra on garrison duty has been offered the chance of supplying a urine sample to determine whether there is DU in his or her body. An MoD spokeswoman said only 275 have submitted samples. All have tested negative for contamination. ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 74 [DU-WATCH] Baby is Gulf War Syndrome Victim Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 01:53:14 -0600 (CST) BABY IS GULF WAR SYNDROME VICTIM Feb 1 2004, Sunday Mirror By Mike Hamilton and David Hudson FIGHTING for breath with a mass of tubes keeping him alive, tiny Scott Bowen is Britains youngest victim of Gulf War Syndrome. Weighing just 2lb 4oz, the tragic tot was born two months prematurely after both his parents returned from serving in Iraq. Dad Justin, 27, and mum Vicky, 20, had multiple vaccinations before going to war last year and developed symptoms of the Syndrome. They are now sure the cocktail of jabs especially the controversial anthrax shot is behind their new-borns desperate condition. And last night a Gulf War Syndrome expert said he was almost certain Scotts severe heart valve and bladder problems was caused by his parents roles in the Iraq war. Professor Malcolm Hooper a member of the MoDs independent Vaccine Panel said: This is an extremely disturbing case. If it is nothing to do with Gulf War Syndrome I would be amazed. Baffled doctors have told his parents they cannot think of an explanation for his conditions. Scott will have to undergo a bladder operation when he is a year old, and medics fear he may be growth-retarded. Justin, a private with the Royal Army Medical Corps, and Vicky, a member of the Queen Alexandras Royal Army Nursing Corps, were both called up for service in January last year. Vicky was given two anthrax jabs plus inoculations for yellow fever, hepatitis B and typhoid. She declined to complete the voluntary course of four anthrax injections when she was in the Gulf over fears about their safety. Justin had had two anthrax jabs in Colchester in November 2002. He was advised to start the course again when he reached Kuwait in February and had six in total. The Government pledged not to give troops multiple jabs, which have been blamed for making thousands of Gulf War 1 veterans sick. Defence secretary Geoff Hoon even said a year ago: A key lesson learned about inoculations is that it is not sensible to inflict on our forces a large number simultaneously. The couple were both home in Gosport, Hants, by the end of May last year, and within weeks Vicky was pregnant. Scott had to be delivered by caesarean section on January 7 after scans showed problems in the womb. Vicky says: I suddenly started having contractions. I was in hospital for three days as doctors tried to stop my labour. Then Scotts heart rate dropped. Because of the way he was lying, the doctors could not be sure if he had developed all his organs. His only chance of survival was to be delivered. Vicky recalled how a midwife described her placenta as the weirdest colour she had ever seen. Scott was placed on a life-support machine at Arrow Park Hospital, C heshire, and made steady progress until last week when he was put back on a ventilator. Vicky says: Scott has bladder and heart valve problems which we have since learnt are both associated with anthrax. We blame the Army. They never warned us it was dangerous for me to get pregnant. Military chiefs advised troops it was dangerous to conceive within six months of returning from the 1991 Gulf War. But Army sources say this advice was not given to forces in last years conflict. Campaigners say Gulf War Syndrome has hit 9,000 veterans of the first conflict, but the MoD officially denies it exists. Justin now suffers constant stomach pains and in December Vicky suddenly developed such a bad case of pneumonia that she had to be taken to hospital near their Army married quarters in Gosport. It was there, on Christmas Eve, that medics noticed problems with Scotts development. She and Justin went to stay with his family in Wallasey on the Wirral for the New Year and Vicky went into labour. She has since left the Army. Justin is on compassionate leave. A doctor at the hospital said: Scott is still obviously in danger and being constantly monitored. The Sunday Mirror has highlighted cases of soldiers who have fallen ill since last years conflict. But Scott is the first baby feared to have fallen victim to the illness. Children of male veterans are prone to heart problems while those of female veterans tend to suffer urino- genital defects. Scott has both. Professor Hooper said: This poor baby seems to have inherited the worst of both worlds. The MoD needs to address issues like this but has not done so although it is 13 years since the first Gulf War. Shaun Rusling of The National Gulf Veterans and Families Association said: There should be a public inquiry into the vaccine regime given to troops. -THE NGVFAs helpline number is 01482 833812. ________________________________________________________________________ BT Yahoo! Broadband - Free modem offer, sign up online today and save #80 http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 75 [du-list] Depleted Uranium: Deadly, Dangerous and Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:46:24 -0800 Depleted Uranium. Deadly, Dangerous and Indiscriminate - The Full Picture. Authors: Anne Gut and Bruno Vitale, with a foreward by the Campaign Against Depleted Uranium, a preface by Peter Low and a postface by André Gsponer on 4th generation nuclear weapons and their relation to d.u.weapons' deployment. It is available for £7.99 (with free UK p+p, for worldwide delivery please add £2) - ISBN 085124685 - orders through Spokesman, elfeuro@compuserve.com or CADU, info@cadu.org.uk; or for the equivalent in dollars, through tara@miltoxproj.org. 'At a time of great power menace with depleted uranium used again in Iraq, this meticulous and vivid book brilliantly puts the case for none of us remaining silent.' - John Pilger Depleted Uranium: Deadly, Dangerous and Indiscriminate scrutinises the available evidence of the effects of DU on human health and the environment, and makes the case for stopping completely the manufacture, deployment and use of DU munitions. ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 76 [du-list] DU in the news - 7th Feb 04 - URANIUM: CONTROVERSIES Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:46:40 -0800 URANIUM: CONTROVERSIES ON CORPORAL MELIS' DEATH Agenzia Giornalistica Italia - Italy ... Yesterday - he went on - I was writing a letter on depleted uranium and on the 23 casualties and 263 sick people it caused. When ... <http://www.agi.it/english/news.pl?doc=200402052036-1244-RT1-CRO-0-NF11&page=0&id=agionline-eng.oggitalia> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ---------- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: * http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ * * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: * du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. ***************************************************************** 77 [du-list] More UK Parliamentry questions on DU munitions Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:46:28 -0800 2 Feb 2004 : Column 747W Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Llew Smith) of 12 January 2004, Official Report, column 537W, on Iraq, how many military vehicles hit by depleted uranium munitions have been identified within the southern sector of Iraq under British control; if he will list the options open to coalition forces to deal with these vehicles; when he expects work to begin; what risk assessment of Iraqi (a) adults and (b) children has been carried out; and if he will make a statement. [150356] Mr. Ingram: To date eight military vehicles have been identified as having been hit by depleted uranium (DU) munitions within the southern sector of Iraq under British military control. All these vehicles have been clearly marked. Arrangements are currently being negotiated with the US for a contractor to collect and securely store these military vehicles. Generic assessments of the potential risks from DU munitions have been carried out by organisations such as the Royal Society and the United Nations Environment Programme and are available on the world wide web at: www.postconflict.unep.ch/ and www.royalsociety.ac.uk/du/ The levels of DU contamination found by MOD personnel are much lower than those predicted from these theoretical risk assessments. 28th January 2004 Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information he has received on the smelting plant near Basra which is melting down tanks and armoured vehicles contaminated by depleted uranium; and what efforts are being made to identify and close down such facilities in the area controlled by British forces. [148056] Mr. Ingram: There is no known legitimate operational smelting plant in the Basra region. A small number of illegal mobile smelting plants used for smuggled copper and aluminium have been found and closed down. There is no evidence they had been used to smelt tanks. Military vehicles known to have been hit by DU munitions within the southern sector of Iraq controlled by the British military have been clearly marked. Arrangements are currently being negotiated with the US for a contractor to collect and store these military vehicles. Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what strategy he is pursuing to (a) recover and (b) dispose of weaponry contaminated by depleted uranium in Iraq; and if he will make a statement. [148054] Mr. Ingram: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 12 January 2004, Official Report, column 537W, to my hon. Friend the Member for Blaenau Gwent (Llew Smith). 19th January Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the total volume is of depleted uranium tipped weapons used in Iraq between March and May 2003; and if he will make a statement. [148295] Mr. Ingram: There are no depleted uranium tipped weapons in UK service. However, UK forces in Iraq used a depleted uranium (DU) round in anti-armour operations. The round comprises an outer casing or "sabot" that surrounds a long rod penetrator made of DU, plus charge and igniter components. 1.9 tonnes of DU were expended by British Challenger tanks during the recent conflict in Iraq. ****************************************************************************** *************** The Campaign Against Depleted Uranium, Bridge 5 Mill, 22a Beswick Street, Ancoats, Manchester, M4 7HR Tel./Fax.: +44 (0)161 273 8293 E-Mail info@cadu.org.uk Website: http://www.cadu.org.uk Affiliation costs to CADU are £8 a year unwaged/student and £10 a year waged. For this you will receive campaigning materials and CADU's quarterly newsletter. Our newsletter is also available free of charge by E-Mail (send us a message with 'Subscribe CADU News' as the subject). Please send your cheque draft or postal order in £ sterling to the address above. ****************************************************************************** *************** To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 78 [du-list] Medact report on the Legality of DU weapons Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 18:46:26 -0800 The following is extracted from a report by a UK charity named Medact on the health consequences of DU weapons. The working paper two is on the legality of DU weapons and other weapons.The report can be seen in full at: http://www.medact.org/tbx/pages/sub.cfm?id=775. Please note the use of bold is the author's own. Depleted Uranium Status in international humanitarian law: No international treaty currently bans the production or use of DU weapons. Indeed, DU weapons are not chemical or biological weapons, therefore they cannot be considered to be illegal under the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention and the 1996 Chemical Weapons Convention. They are not nuclear weapons either and thus cannot be banned under the 1970 Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty. However: (1) the use of DU weapons goes against established principles of humanitarian law, notably principles of the Geneva Conventions and some UN guidelines relative to: - the protection of civilian populations (See Articles 48 and 51.4 above) - the limitation of unnecessary human suffering (Art.35.2) - the limitation of damage to the environment (Art. 35.3 and 55.1) Art. 35.2: It is prohibited to employ weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering Art. 35.3: It is prohibited to employ methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long- term and severe damage to the natural environment Art. 55.1: Care shall be taken in warfare to protect the natural environment against widespread, long-term and severe damage. This protection includes a prohibition of the use of methods or means of warfare which are intended or may be expected to cause such damage to the natural environment and thereby to prejudice the health or survival of the population Until scientific studies establish the precise health impact of DU on the human body, armed forces should refrain from using DU weapons on the battlefield, and especially in built-up areas, for fear of committing potential “war crimes” (Doug Rokke, The Sunday Mirror 3.8.03). The effects of depleted uranium are indiscriminate and even when used on military targets, DU weapons leave a chemical and radioactive toxic residue which can spread over large areas. As for the environmental damage, several studies by the UN Environment Programme (Unep) highlight the negative environmental effects of DU. Through studies in Kosovo, Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Unep found that contamination levels are generally very low, limited to a couple of metres around the impact of the projectile, and do not constitute an immediate radioactive or toxic hazard for the environment or human health (Unep 2003b). But the report on Bosnia and Herzegovina, published in March 2003, while confirming low levels of ground contamination, found proof of groundwater contamination (seven years after the conflict) and recommended the use of alternative water sources. Also, Unep scientists detected air contamination in some of the sites studied and recommended a decontamination of the buildings in use on these sites. If damage to the environment is thus proved, the use of DU should be contrary to article 35.3 of Protocol I. (2) after NATO's use of DU weapons in the Kosovo campaign in 1999, the Council of Europe parliamentarians called for a world ban on the production, testing, use and sale of DU weapons, asserting that NATO's use of DU would have "long term effects on health and quality of life in South-East Europe, affecting future generations" (Council of Europe 24.1.01). (3) the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities issued two Resolutions (United Nations 1996a; United Nations 1997) on the need to stop the production and use of weapons of mass destruction, including DU weapons: “The Sub-Commission […] urges all States to be guided in their national policies by the need to curb the production and the spread of weapons of mass destruction or with indiscriminate effect, in particular nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, fuel- air bombs, napalm, cluster bombs, biological weaponry and weaponry containing depleted uranium” (United Nations 1996b) Although DU weapons are not illegal, their use goes against basic principles of international humanitarian law as (1) they have the potential to contaminate groundwater reserves and pollute the air (2) they have the potential to cause cancer and have other long- term negative health effects on combatants and civilians. Moreover, the use of anti-tank DU weapons and bunker buster DU-tipped bombs on above ground civilian targets in the centre of Baghdad during the war increased urban populations’ exposure to DU, which can only exacerbate the potential negative effects of DU on civilians. This is why many people believe that DU should be made illegal under international customary law. ********************************************************************************************* The Campaign Against Depleted Uranium, Bridge 5 Mill, 22a Beswick Street, Ancoats, Manchester, M4 7HR Tel./Fax.: +44 (0)161 273 8293 E-Mail info@cadu.org.uk Website: http://www.cadu.org.uk Affiliation costs to CADU are £8 a year unwaged/student and £10 a year waged. For this you will receive campaigning materials and CADU's quarterly newsletter. Our newsletter is also available free of charge by E-Mail (send us a message with 'Subscribe CADU News' as the subject). Please send your cheque draft or postal order in £ sterling to the address above. ********************************************************************************************* To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT cd1f9c.jpg cd205c.jpg ---------- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: * http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ * * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: * du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Attachment Converted: cd1f9c.jpg: 00000001,544c0c31,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: cd205c.jpg: 00000001,544c0c32,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 79 EUpolitix: Nuclear safety laws delayed A package of EU laws on nuclear safety has stalled after four member states failed to back them on Thursday. Four member states are unhappy with the three proposals known as the 'nuclear package' and are set to form a blocking minority in a formal vote planned for March. But the European Commission has now said it will redraft and present a new proposal in early April. The package, which covers nuclear safety, radioactive waste and funding for nuclear power plants, has already been redrafted several times since its release in November 2002. Nuclear industry sources are divided as to why the commission has withdrawn the current drafts. One said that Brussels wants to "cling on to the proposals" at any cost as failure to get a positive vote would be seen as a defeat for energy commissioner Loyola de Palacio, a staunch supporter of the package. But delaying the vote by few months could also be aimed at putting pressure on the countries opposing the package. The four opponents – Germany, the UK, Sweden and Finland - may not have a blocking minority when the EU enlarges to 25 countries in May. And another industry source even speculated the commission may threaten to toughen up the package to persuade the blocking countries to back the current draft. The four member states oppose the new safety rules over fears that they will undermine national regulators better equipped to control nuclear plant safety. They also claim there is no need to replace the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has worldwide jurisdiction for regulating nuclear safety. Germany in particular thinks the proposed laws do not sufficiently clarify rules on what should be done with decommissioning funds. Published: Fri, 6 Feb 2004 15:53:05 GMT+00 Anna McLauchlin ©2004 EUpolitix.com ***************************************************************** 80 AGI: URANIUM: CONTROVERSIES ON CORPORAL MELIS' DEATH Agenzia Giornalistica Italia - News In English Saturday February 7, 2004 h.04.02 Today in Italy Special service by AGI on behalf of the Italian Prime Minister's office Rome, Italy, Feb.5 - The death of corporal Melis, who died, after four missions in the Balkans, of Hodgkin's disease (a type of leukemia), has caused many reactions, even in the political sphere. The quaestor of the Chamber of Deputies, Edouard Ballaman (Northern League) said: "fortune is blind, but hard luck has an excellent eyesight. Yesterday - he went on - I was writing a letter on depleted uranium and on the 23 casualties and 263 sick people it caused. When I got to know about this 24th death, considering that many politicians still go on about the therapeutic effects of depleted uranium, I feel I must make another appeal to the investigation committee, to propose a new regulation". According to Ballaman, "by this stage, while the Mandelli committee keeps on saying that all these deaths and diseases are just 'hard luck', we can say that hard luck is a real sniper, considering it seems to haunt only the militaries who operated in the former Yugoslavia. I am outraged by the slowness of the Defence Ministry, which isn't dealing with the sick, nor with the victims' families, and keeps on denying that the disease is linked to operational activities". Even the Left Democrats agree on the institution of an investigation committee. Senator Lorenzo Forcieri said that "corporal Valery Melis is unfortunately the umpteenth Italian soldier who died after having been on peace-keeping missions in the Balkans and in other areas where depleted uranium weapons were used. There are also many sick people, and this means that there will probably be more deaths. That's why I insist that an investigation committee be established". Forcieri, president of the Italian parliamentary delegation to NATO, also wrote to Left Democrats senators' president Gavino Angius, to ask that the Party's group at the senate propose "the bill for the institution of the investigation committee". "The text - said Forcieri - has been signed by 36 colleagues so far, including a member of the majority. Nevertheless, the senate has not included this item on its agenda. I get the impression we're getting hindered when we try to shed light on this case. There must be great transparency in the transitory phase between military service and a professional army. We must shed light on what caused the death of the Italian soldiers who accept to represent our country in missions abroad". Roberta Pinotti, Silvana Pisa and Beppe Lumia, of the Left Democrats-Olive Tree, ask that the Defence Minister intervene now: "the death of Valery Melis forces the government to investigate clearly on this issue, which regards thousands of Italian soldiers deployed in the Balkans" they wrote in a letter sent to the Defence Minister. They point out that Melis' relatives "had asked the state to acknowledge that the death is due to duty, but it wasn't. Minister Martino had promised, when visiting the US base in Sardinia, that everything would be done to solve an "unsolved case". Victims' and military associations reported the many cases of diseases developed after having gone on duty in the Balkans". Finally, they ask "how were Melis and his family supported in these 5 years spent suffering the disease, and what results has the Mandelli commission reached after its investigation?". "Unfortunately, it's too later to obtain serious answers to these questions - said Enrico Buemi (SDI) - I had asked once again for an investigation on the desperate case of corporal Melis. Today, we can only mourn the loss of the soldier, and show all our solidarity to his family and to the soldiers who are in a bad state, abandoned by those who didn't inform on the existence of weapons featuring depleted uranium, which cause irreversible and often fatal diseases. By this stage - concluded Buemi - minister Martino, even in honour of private Melis, must provide some clear explanations on this situation, and tell us what he intends to do to avoid further similar cases". (AGI) . 052036 FEB 04 COPYRIGHTS 2002-2003 AGI S.p.A. [Invia questo articolo] ***************************************************************** 81 NBC: Weapons Lab Employees' Compensation Mess NBC Nightly News NBC TV January 1, 2004, 7:15 PM [BROADCAST EXCERPT] CAMPBELL BROWN: NBC News "In Depth" tonight. Government workers feeling doubly betrayed. First they found out their jobs made them sick. Then, when it was time to be compensated for the harm done to them, an unbelievable political and bureaucratic mess left them out in the cold. "In Depth" tonight, here's NBC's senior investigative correspondent, Lisa Myers. LISA MYERS: During seven years of work at a nuclear weapons plant, Janine Anderson was poisoned by some of the most hazardous materials known to man. Only 50 years old, she now has severe tremors and damage to most major organs. JANINE ANDERSON [Patient]: I never dreamed that I was getting exposed to things that would change my life forever. MYERS: In 2000, Congress decided that Anderson and thousands of victims like her deserved compensation. But three years later, she and many others have not received a dime. JANINE ANDERSON [Patient]: There has been no justice for these sick workers. MYERS: How can this happen? It's a classic Washington story. First, the compensation program was split between two agencies. One, the Department of Labor has performed well, compensating almost 10,000 deserving workers. But at the Department of Energy not a single worker has gotten anything. DAVID MICHAELS [Former Dept. of Energy Official]: They hired a contractor who is very well politically connected, but really had no background in running programs like this and the result is the mess we are in today. MYERS: That contractor, Science and Engineering Associates, or SEA, of Louisiana, has been paid about $20 million so far, yet admits it had trouble developing a data base for the program. To fix matters, this Fall Senator Charles Grassley proposed shifting the entire program to the Labor Department. But that would cut SEA out of the picture and out of millions of dollars. So the company flexed its political muscle. Documents obtained by NBC News show the company spent a half million dollars on lobbyists on this and other issues over the last two years. These talking points written by an SEA lobbyist were adopted almost word for word in a letter by the company's home state senators, Louisiana's John Breaux and Mary Landrieu. RICHARD MILLER [Government Accountability Project]: They pushed every button there was to push, led by the Louisiana delegation, which was acting as their advocate in Congress to try to kill this legislation. MYERS: The senators would not comment. SEA argues Grassley's plan would not have fixed anything because the real problem is how Congress structured the law, requiring DOE to work through states to pay workers. In the end, the company won. RICHARD MILLER [Government Accountability Project]: This is really a story about how the little guy's been trumped by big money. MYERS: Janine Anderson says she hopes to live long enough to see the program actually work. The company and Energy Department insist they are making progress, but congressional investigators estimate it will take seven years just to work through the backlog of claims. Lisa Myers, NBC News, Washington. ***************************************************************** 82 Las Vegas SUN: Berkley worries new energy committee chair will help Yucca plan ASSOCIATED PRESS LAS VEGAS (AP) - Nevada's Democratic congresswoman said she's worried that an ardent supporter of burying nuclear waste in Nevada will succeed Rep. Billy Tauzin as chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee. "This is a disaster for the state of Nevada," Rep. Shelley Berkley said after Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, announced he wants to succeed Tauzin, R-La. "Joe Barton's name might as well be Joe Nuclear," she said. But Nevada's two Republican congressmen saw the change having little effect on Yucca Mountain legislation. "It doesn't really change much," Amy Spanbauer, spokeswoman for Rep. Jim Gibbons said Friday. "Both (Tauzin and Barton) are Yucca Mountain supporters. It's always been 49 states against one." Rep. Jon Porter noted that both Tauzin and Barton come from states that support burying nuclear waste in Nevada. Tauzin's announcement that he'll step down as chairman Feb. 16 came as Nevada added a transportation expert to its legal team challenging the Yucca Mountain Project. State Attorney General Brian Sandoval announced that Reno lawyer Paul Lamboley, 63, a former member of the federal Interstate Commerce Commission, had signed a $350-per-hour retainer to work with the state's lead anti-Yucca lawyer, Joe Egan of McLean, Va. The Energy Department has not identified transportation routes from 39 states to Nevada, but announced plans in December to study and develop a 319-mile rail line across Nevada to transport nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain. In Washington, Berkley said a Barton promotion would increase the nuclear power industry's clout and help supporters of the Yucca Mountain project, which Nevada is fighting in federal court. Barton, 54, currently heads the energy and air quality subcommittee. He is a proponent of fossil and nuclear energy, and construction of a single national repository for nuclear waste. Others said the 57-member energy committee is dominated by lawmakers who support development of nuclear power and other energy sources, no matter who chairs it. Michele Boyd, of the Public Citizen Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program, said the focus now is on Yucca Mountain project spending, which is handled by other committees. Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal -- ***************************************************************** 83 NRC: In the Matter of Louisiana Energy Services, L.P. (National FR Doc 04-2550 [Federal Register: February 6, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 25)] [Notices] [Page 5873-5879] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr06fe04-115] Enrichment Facility); Notice of Receipt of Application for License; Notice of Availability of Applicant's Environmental Report; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of License; and Notice of Hearing and Commission Order Commissioners: Nils J. Diaz, Chairman, Edward McGaffigan, Jr., Jeffrey S. Merrifield. I. Receipt of Application and Availability of Documents Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) received on December 15, 2003, an application, safety analysis report, and environmental report from Louisiana Energy Services, L.P. (LES), for a license to possess and use source, byproduct, and special nuclear material and to enrich natural uranium to a maximum of 5 percent U-235 by the gas centrifuge process. The plant, to be known as the National Enrichment Facility (or NEF), would be constructed in Eunice, New Mexico. LES is a limited Partnership whose general Partners are Urenco Investments, Inc. (a subsidiary of Urenco, Ltd.) and Westinghouse Enrichment Company. In addition, there are six limited Partners. Copies of LES's application, safety analysis report, and environmental report (except for portions thereof subject to withholding from public inspection in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, Availability of Public Records) are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR) at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. These documents are also available for review and copying using any of the following methods: (1) Enter the NRC's Gas Centrifuge Enrichment Facility Licensing Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/materials/fuel-cycle-fac/gas-centrifuge.html#c orrespondence ; (2) enter the NRC's Agency wide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.htm , where the accession number for LES's application (including LES's safety analysis report and LES's environmental report) is ML040020261; or (3) contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) by calling (800) 397-4209, faxing a request to (301) 415-3548, or sending a request by electronic mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Hard copies of the documents are available from the PDR for a fee. The NRC has now accepted LES's application for docketing and accordingly is providing this notice of hearing and notice of opportunity to intervene on LES's application for a license to construct and operate a centrifuge enrichment facility. Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, (Act) the NRC staff will prepare a safety evaluation report after reviewing the application and making findings concerning the public health and safety and common defense and security. In addition, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR part 51, NRC will complete an environmental evaluation and prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) before the hearing on the issuance of a license is completed. The preparation of the EIS will be the subject of a separate notice in the Federal Register. When available, the NRC staff's safety evaluation and its EIS (except for portions thereof subject to withholding from public inspection in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390) will also be placed in the PDR and in ADAMS. Copies of correspondence between the NRC and LES, and transcripts of prehearing conferences and hearings (except for portions thereof subject to withholding from public inspection in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390) will be similarly made available to the public. If following the hearing, the Commission is satisfied that LES has complied with the Commission's regulations and the requirements of this Notice and Commission Order and the Commission finds that the application satisfies the applicable standards set [[Page 5874]] forth in 10 CFR 30.33, 40.32, and 70.23, a single license will be issued authorizing: (1) The receipt, possession, use, delivery, and transfer of byproduct (e.g., calibration sources), source, and special nuclear material in the National Enrichment Facility; and (2) the construction and operation of the National Enrichment Facility. Prior to commencement of operations of the National Enrichment Facility if it is licensed, in accordance with section 193(c) of the Act and 10 CFR 70.32(k), NRC will verify through inspection that the facility has been constructed in accordance with the requirements of the license for such construction and operation. The inspection findings will be published in the Federal Register. II. Notice of Hearing A. Pursuant to 10 CFR 70.23a and Section 193 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act), as amended by the Solar, Wind, Waste, and Geothermal Power Production Incentives Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101- 575), a hearing will be conducted according to the rules of procedure in new 10 CFR part 2, subparts A, C, G, and to the extent that classified information becomes involved, subpart I (final rule published at 69 FR 2182, January 14, 2004).\1\ The hearing will be held under the authority of sections 53, 63, 189, 191, and 193 of the Act. The applicant and NRC staff shall be parties to the proceeding. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \1\ By its terms, the new 10 CFR part 2 applies to licensing actions the notice of hearing for which was issued on or after the effective date of the new rule, February 13, 2004. See 69 FR 2182. By this order, the Commission directs the application of the new 10 CFR part 2 for the LES Proceeding. Accordingly, references in this Notice and Order are to the new 10 CFR part 2. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- B. Pursuant to 10 CFR part 2, Subpart C, the hearing shall be conducted by an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) appointed by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. Notice as to the membership of the Board will be published in the Federal Register at a later date. C. The matters of fact and law to be considered are whether the application satisfies the standards set forth in this Notice and Commission Order and the applicable standards in 10 CFR 30.33, 40.32, and 70.23, and whether the requirements of 10 CFR part 51 have been met. D. If this proceeding is not a contested proceeding, as defined by 10 CFR 2.4, the Board will determine the following, without conducting a de novo evaluation of the application: (1) Whether the application and record of the proceeding contain sufficient information and whether the NRC staff's review of the application has been adequate to support findings to be made by the Director of the Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, with respect to the matters set forth in paragraph C of this section, and (2) whether the review conducted by the NRC staff pursuant to 10 CFR part 51 has been adequate. E. Regardless of whether the proceeding is contested or uncontested, the Board will, in its initial decision, in accordance with Subpart A of part 51: Determine whether the requirements of sections 102(2) (A), (C), and (E) of NEPA and Subpart A of part 51 have been complied with in the proceeding; independently consider the final balance among conflicting factors contained in the record of proceeding with a view to determining the appropriate action to be taken; and determine whether a license should be issued, denied, or conditioned to protect the environment. F. If the proceeding becomes a contested proceeding, the Board shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law on admitted contentions. With respect to matters set forth in paragraph C of this section but not covered by admitted contentions, the Board will make the determinations set forth in paragraph D without conducting a de novo evaluation of the application. G. By April 6, 2004, any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written petition for leave to intervene. Petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 2.309. Interested persons should consult the new 10 CFR part 2, section 2.309 (69 FR 2182, 2238), which is available at the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, MD (or call the PDR at (800) 397-4209 or (301) 415-4737). NRC regulations are also accessible electronically from the NRC's Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site, at http://www.nrc.gov. If a petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission will issue an order determining standing and refer petitions from persons with the requisite standing to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board for further processing in the proceeding. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition must provide the name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner and specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors: (1) The nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order that may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. A petition for leave to intervene must also include a specification of the contentions that the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the hearing. For each contention, the petitioner must provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted, as well as a brief explanation of the basis for the contention. Additionally, the petition must demonstrate that the issue raised by each contention is within the scope of the proceeding and is material to the findings the NRC must make to support the granting of a license in response to LES's application. The petition must also include a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinions which support the position of the petitioner and on which the petitioner intends to rely at hearing, together with references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely. Finally, the petition must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact, including references to specific portions of the application that the petitioner disputes and the supporting reasons for each dispute, or, if the petitioner believes that the application fails to contain information on a relevant matter as required by law, the identification of each failure and the supporting reasons for the petitioner's belief. Each contention must be one that, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that person's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence and to submit a cross-examination plan for cross-examination of witnesses, consistent with NRC regulations, policies, and procedures. The Board will set the time and place for any prehearing conferences and evidentiary hearings, and the respective notices will be published in the Federal Register. A petition for leave to intervene and proffered contentions must be filed with [[Page 5875]] the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff, or may be delivered to the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, by the above date. Because of continuing disruptions in delivery of mail to United States Government offices, it is requested that petitions for leave to intervene and requests for hearing be transmitted to the Secretary of the Commission either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-1101 or by e-mail to hearingdocket@nrc.gov. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Associate General Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement, and Administration, and because of continuing disruptions in delivery of mail to United States Government offices, it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415- 3725 or by e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to James Curtiss, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1400 L Street, Washington, DC 20005-3502, attorney for the applicant. Non-timely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, and supplemental petitions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition should be granted, based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). H. A State, county, municipality, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agencies thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as an interested entity under 10 CFR 2.309(d)(2). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission by April 6, 2004. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in paragraph G, above, for petitions submitted under 10 CFR 2.309, except that State and Federally recognized Indian tribes do not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d)(1). The Commission will rule on petitions filed under 10 CFR 2.309(d)(2). The entities listed above could also seek to participate in a hearing as a non-party pursuant to 10 CFR 2.315(c). I. Any person who does not wish, or is not qualified, to become a party to this proceeding may request permission to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of position on the issues, but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to such limits and conditions as may be imposed by the Board. Persons desiring to make a limited appearance are requested to inform the Secretary of the Commission by April 6, 2004. III. Commission Guidance A. Contentions on Environmental Justice The Commission will make the determination as to whether contentions associated with environmental justice matters will be admitted in this proceeding. Parties responding to such contentions pursuant to 10 CFR 2.309(h) shall submit their answers to the Commission's Secretary as noted above with copies to the other parties and Board. The Commission itself will rule on the admissibility of such contentions and provide appropriate guidance on the litigation of such contentions. B. Presiding Officer Determination of Contentions For contentions other than environmental justice (addressed in III.A. above), the presiding officer shall issue a decision on the admissibility of contentions no later than sixty (60) days after the petitions and contentions are referred to the ASLB. C. Novel Legal Issues If rulings on the admissibility of contentions or the admitted contentions themselves raise novel legal or policy questions, the Commission will provide early guidance and direction on the treatment and resolution of such issues. Accordingly, the Commission directs the Board to promptly certify to the Commission in accordance with 10 CFR 2.319(l) and 2.323(f) all novel legal or policy issues that would benefit from early Commission consideration should such issues arise in this proceeding. D. Discovery Management (1) All parties, except the NRC staff, shall make the mandatory disclosures required by 10 CFR 2.704 within forty-five (45) days of the issuance of the order admitting that contention. (2) The presiding officer, consistent with fairness to all parties, should narrow the issues requiring discovery and limit discovery to no more than one round for admitted contentions. (3) All discovery against the Staff shall be governed by 10 CFR 2.336(b) and 2.709. The Staff shall comply with 10 CFR 2.336(b) no later than 30 days after the ASLB order admitting contentions and shall update the information at the same time as the issuance of the Safety Evaluation Report (SER) or the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Discovery under 10 CFR 2.709 shall not commence until the issuance of the particular document, i.e., SER or EIS, unless the ASLB in its discretion finds that commencing discovery against the Staff on safety issues before the SER is issued, or on environmental issues before the FEIS is issued will expedite the hearing without adversely impacting the Staff's ability to complete its evaluations in a timely manner. (4) No later than 30 days before the commencement of the hearing at which an issue is to be presented, all parties other than the Staff shall make the pretrial disclosures required by 10 CFR 2.704(c). E. Hearing Schedule The Commission believes that a reasonably-achievable schedule would result in a final NRC decision on the pending application within about two and a half years of the date the application was received, and the Commission thus will impose a 30-month milestone schedule for this proceeding. The Commission recognizes, however, that legislation currently being considered would require the NRC to issue decisions on new enrichment facility applications within two years of receipt of the application; consequently, the Commission will endeavor to identify efficiencies, and provide the pertinent resources, to further reduce the time the agency needs to complete reviews and reach decisions in licensing uranium enrichment facilities. In the interest of providing a fair hearing, avoiding unnecessary delays in the NRC's review and hearing process, and producing an informed adjudicatory record that supports the licensing determination to be made in this proceeding, the Commission directs that both the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board and the NRC staff, as well as the applicant and other parties to this proceeding, follow the applicable requirements contained in the new 10 CFR part 2 and the guidance in the Commission's Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings, CLI-98-12, 48 NRC 18 (1998) [63 FR 41872 (August 5, 1998)] to the extent that such guidance is not inconsistent with specific guidance in this Order. [[Page 5876]] The guidance in the Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings is intended to improve the management and the timely completion of the proceeding and addresses hearing schedules, parties' obligations, contentions, and discovery management. Consistent with that guidance, the Commission directs the Licensing Board to expeditiously decide legal and policy issues that may resolve threshold issues or expedite this proceeding. Threshold environmental legal and policy issues need not await issuance of the final EIS. In addition, the Commission is providing the following direction for this proceeding: (1) The Commission directs the Licensing Board to set a schedule for the hearing in this proceeding consistent with this order that establishes as a goal the issuance of a final Commission decision on the pending application within two and a half years (30 months) from the date that the application was received. Formal discovery against the Staff shall be suspended until after the Staff completes its final SER and EIS in accordance with the direction provided in paragraph D.(3), above. (2) The evidentiary hearing with respect to issues should commence promptly after completion of the final staff documents (SER or EIS) unless the Licensing Board in its discretion finds that starting the hearing with respect to one or more safety issues prior to issuance of the final SER \2\ (or one or more environmental contentions directed to the applicant's Environmental Report) will expedite the proceeding without adversely impacting the Staff's ability to complete its evaluations in a timely manner. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \2\ The Commission believes that, in the appropriate circumstances, allowing discovery or an evidentiary hearing with respect to safety-related issues to proceed before the final SER is issued will serve to further the Commission's objective, as reflected in the Statement of Policy on Conduct of Adjudicatory Proceedings, CLI-98-12, supra, to ensure a fair, prompt, and efficient resolution of contested issues. For example, it may be appropriate for the Licensing Board to permit discovery against the staff and/or the commencement of an evidentiary hearing with respect to safety issues prior to the issuance of the final SER in cases where the applicant has responded to the Staff's ``open items'' and there is an appreciable lag time until the issuance of the final SER, or in cases where the initial SER identifies only a few open items. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- (3) The Commission also believes that issuing a decision on the pending application within about two and a half years may be reasonably achieved under the rules of practice contained in the new 10 CFR part 2 and the enhancements directed by this order. We do not expect the Licensing Board to sacrifice fairness and sound decision-making to expedite any hearing granted on this application. We do expect, however, the Licensing Board to use the techniques specified in this order and in the Commission's policy statement on the conduct of adjudicatory proceedings (CLI-98-12, supra) to ensure prompt and efficient resolution of contested issues. See also Statement of Policy on Conduct of Licensing Proceedings, CLI-81-8, 13 NRC 452 (1981). (4) If this is a contested proceeding, the Board should adopt the following milestones, in developing a schedule, for conclusion of significant steps in the adjudicatory proceeding: \3\ ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \3\ This schedule assumes that the SER and Final EIS are issued essentially at the same time. If these documents are not to be issued very close in time, the Board should adopt separate schedules but concurrently running for the safety and environmental reviews consistent with the time frames herein for each document. Within 10 days of the Commission's Persons found to have standing order determining standing and or entities participating admission of any environmental justice under 10 CFR 2.309(d) may contentions: submit a motion for reconsideration (see, below, at Section IV.B).* Within 20 days of the Commission's Persons found to have standing order determining standing: or entities participating under 10 CFR 2.309(d) may respond to any motion for reconsideration. Within 60 days of the Commission's ASLB decision on admissibility order determining standing and of remaining contentions. referring the petition and contentions to the ASLB: Within 30 days of the ASLB decision Staff prepares hearing file. determining admission of contentions: Within 90 days of the ASLB decision Completion of discovery on determining admission of contentions:. admitted contentions, except against the Staff (including contentions on environmental issues arising under NEPA). Within 110 days of the ASLB decision Deadline for summary determining admission of contentions: disposition motions on admitted contentions.** Within 150 days of the ASLB decision ASLB decision on summary determining admission of contentions: disposition motions on admitted contentions. Date of issuance of final SER/EIS: Staff updates hearing file. Within 20 days of the issuance of final Motions to amend contentions; SER/EIS: motions for late-filed contentions. Within 40 days of the issuance of final Completion of answers and SER/EIS: replies to motions for amended and late-filed contentions. Within 50 days of the issuance of final ASLB decision on admissibility SER/EIS: of late-filed contentions; deadline for summary disposition motions on remaining admitted contentions.*** Within 80 days of the issuance of final Completion of discovery on late- SER/EIS: filed contentions; ASLB decision on summary disposition motions on remaining contentions. Within 90 days of the issuance of final Direct testimony filed on SER/EIS: remaining contentions and any amended or admitted late-filed contentions. Within 100 days of the issuance of Cross-examination plans filed final SER/EIS: on remaining contentions and any amended or admitted late- filed contentions. Within 105 days of the issuance of Evidentiary hearing begins on final SER/EIS: remaining contentions and any amended or admitted late-filed contentions. Within 135 days of the issuance of Completion of evidentiary final SER/EIS: hearing on remaining contentions and any amended or admitted late-filed contentions. Within 180 days of the issuance of Completion of findings and final SER/EIS: replies. Within 240 days of the issuance of ASLB's initial decision. final SER/EIS: * Motions for reconsideration do not stay this schedule. ** The schedule presumes that a prehearing conference order would establish the deadline for filing of summary disposition motions 20 days after close of discovery consistent with 10 CFR 2.710(a), answers to be filed 10 days after filing of any motion, replies to be filed 10 days after any answer, and the ASLB to issue a decision on any summary disposition motion 20 days thereafter. *** No summary disposition motions on late-filed contentions are contemplated. [[Page 5877]] To meet these milestones, the Licensing Board should direct the participants to serve all filings by electronic mail (in order to be considered timely, such filings must be received by the Licensing Board and parties no later than midnight Eastern Time on the date due, unless otherwise designated by the Licensing Board), followed by conforming hard copies that may be sent by regular mail. If participants do not have access to electronic mail, the Licensing Board should adopt other expedited methods of service, such as express mail, which would ensure receipt on the due date (``in-hand''). If pleadings are filed by electronic mail, or other expedited methods of service which would ensure receipt on the due date, the additional period provided in our regulations for responding to filings served by first-class mail or express delivery shall not be applicable. See 10 CFR 2.306. In addition, to avoid unnecessary delays in the proceeding, the Licensing Board should not grant requests for extensions of time absent unavoidable and extreme circumstances. Although summary disposition motions are included in the schedule above, the Licensing Board shall not entertain motions for summary disposition under 10 CFR. 2.710, unless the Licensing Board finds that such motions are likely to expedite the proceeding. Unless otherwise justified, the Licensing Board shall provide for the simultaneous filing of answers to proposed contentions, responsive pleadings, proposed findings of fact, and other similar submittals. (5) Parties are obligated in their filings before the Licensing Board and the Commission to ensure that their arguments and assertions are supported by appropriate and accurate references to legal authority and factual basis, including, as appropriate, citation to the record. Failure to do so may result in material being stricken from the record or, in extreme circumstances, in a party being dismissed from the proceeding. (6) The Commission directs the Licensing Board to inform the Commission promptly, in writing, if the Licensing Board determines that any single milestone could be missed by more than 30 days. The Licensing Board must include an explanation of why the milestone cannot be met and the measures the Licensing Board will take to mitigate the failure to achieve the milestone and restore the proceeding to the overall schedule. F. Commission Oversight As in any proceeding, the Commission retains its inherent supervisory authority over the proceeding to provide additional guidance to the Licensing Board and participants and to resolve any matter in controversy itself. IV. Applicable Requirements A. The Commission will license and regulate byproduct, source, and special nuclear material at the National Enrichment Facility in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Section 274c.(1) of the Act was amended by Public Law 102-486 (October 24, 1992) to require the Commission to retain authority and responsibility for the regulation of uranium enrichment facilities. Therefore, in compliance with law, the Commission will be the sole licensing and regulatory agency with respect to byproduct, source, and special nuclear material for the National Enrichment Facility, and with respect to the control and use of any equipment or device in connection therewith. Many rules and regulations in 10 CFR chapter I are applicable to the licensing of a person to receive, possess, use, transfer, deliver, and process byproduct, source and special nuclear material in the quantities that would be possessed at the National Enrichment Facility. These include 10 CFR parts 19, 20, 21, 25, 30, 40, 51, 70, 71, 73, 74 , 95, 140, 170, and 171 for the licensing and regulation of byproduct, source, and special nuclear material, including requirements for notices to workers, reporting of defects, radiation protection, waste disposal, decommissioning funding, and insurance. With respect to these regulations, the Commission notes that this is the second proceeding involving the licensing of an enrichment facility. The Commission issued a number of decisions in an earlier proceeding regarding a proposed site in Homer, Louisiana. These final decisions, Louisiana Energy Services (Claiborne Enrichment Center), CLI-92-7, 35 NRC 93 (1992); Louisiana Energy Services (Claiborne Enrichment Center), CLI-97-15, 46 NRC 294 (1997); and Louisiana Energy Services (Claiborne Enrichment Center), CLI-98-3, 47 NRC 77 (1998), resolve a number of issues concerning uranium enrichment licensing and may be relied upon as precedent. Consistent with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations, the Commission is providing the following direction for licensing uranium enrichment facilities: 1. Environmental Issues (a) General: 10 CFR part 51 governs the preparation of an environmental report and an environmental impact statement (EIS) for a materials license. LES's environmental report and the NRC staff's associated EIS are to include a statement on the alternatives to the proposed action, including a discussion of the no-action alternative. (b) Treatment of depleted uranium hexafluoride tails: As to the treatment of the disposition of depleted uranium hexafluoride tails (depleted tails) in these environmental documents, unless LES demonstrates a use for the uranium in the depleted tails as a potential resource, the depleted tails may be considered waste. In addition, if such waste meets the definition of ``waste'' in 10 CFR 61.2, the depleted tails are to be considered low-level radioactive waste within the meaning of 10 CFR part 61 in which case an approach by LES to transfer to DOE for disposal by DOE of LES'' depleted tails pursuant to Section 3113 of the USEC Privatization Act constitutes a ``plausible strategy'' for dispositioning the LES depleted tails. The NRC staff may consider the DOE EIS in preparing the staff's EIS. Alternatives for the disposition of depleted uranium tails will need to be addressed in these documents. As part of the licensing process, LES must also address the health, safety, and security issues associated with the storage of depleted uranium tails on site pending removal of the tails from the site for disposal or DOE dispositioning. (c) Environmental Justice: As to environmental justice matters, past Commission decisions are relevant precedent. These include Louisiana Energy Services (Claiborne Enrichment center), CLI-98-3, 47 NRC 77 (1998) and Private Fuel Storage, L.L.C. (Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation), CLI-02-20, 56 NRC 147 (2002) that limit treatment of certain issues in NRC proceedings. In addition, the Commission notes that it recently issued for comment a draft Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions, 68 FR 62642 (November 5, 2003). As noted above in Section III, the admissibility of proffered environmental justice contentions will be determined by the Commission. 2. Financial Qualifications Review of financial qualifications for enrichment facility license applications is governed by 10 CFR part 70. In Louisiana Energy Services (Claiborne Enrichment Center), CLI-97-15, 46 NRC [[Page 5878]] 294, 309 (1997), the Commission held that the part 70 financial criteria, 10 CFR 70.22(a)(8) and 70.23(a)(5), could be met by conditioning the LES license to require funding commitments to be in place prior to construction and operation. The specific license condition approved in that proceeding, which addressed a minimum equity contribution of 30% from the parents and affiliates of LES partners prior to construction of the associated capacity and having in place long term enrichment contracts with prices sufficient to cover both construction and operating costs, including a return on investment, for the entire term of the contracts prior to constructing or operating the facility, is one way to satisfy the requirements of part 70. 3. Antitrust Review The LES enrichment facility is subject to licensing pursuant to sections 53 and 63 of the Atomic Energy Act (Act), and is not a production and utilization facility licensed under section 103. Consequently the NRC does not have antitrust responsibilities for LES similar to the antitrust responsibilities under section 105 of the Act. The NRC will not entertain or consider antitrust issues in connection with the LES application in this proceeding. 4. Foreign Ownership The LES application is governed by sections 53 and 63 of the Act, and consequently issues of foreign involvement shall be determined pursuant to section 57 and not section 103, 104 or 193(f). Section 57 of the Act requires, among other things, an affirmative finding by the Commission that issuance of a license for NEF will not be ``inimical to the common defense and security.'' 5. Creditor Requirements Pursuant to section 184 of the Act, the creditor regulations in 10 CFR 50.81 shall apply to the creation of creditor interests in equipment, devices, or important component parts thereof, capable of separating the isotopes of uranium or enriching uranium in the isotope U 235. In addition, the creditor regulations in 10 CFR 70.44 shall apply to the creation of creditor interests in special nuclear material. These creditor regulations may be augmented by license conditions as necessary to allow ownership arrangements (such as sale and leaseback) not covered by 10 CFR 50.81, provided it can be found that such arrangements are not inimical to the common defense and security of the United States. 6. Classified Information All matters of classification of information related to the design, construction, operation, and safeguarding of the NEF shall be governed by classification guidance in ``Joint NRC/DOE Classification Guide for Louisiana Energy Services Gas Centrifuge Plant (CG-LCP-1)'' (1992) (Confidential--Restricted data) and any later versions. Any person producing such information must adhere to the criteria in CG-LCP-1. All decisions on questions of classification or declassification of information shall be made by appropriate classification officials in the NRC and are not subject to de novo review in this proceeding. 7. Access to Classified Information Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 25 Portions of LES' application for a license are classified Restricted Data or National Security Information. Persons needing access to those portions of the application will be required to have the appropriate security clearance for the level of classified information to which access is required. Access to certain classified Third Agency or Foreign Government Information may be subject to special controls and require the prior approval of the Director, Division of Nuclear Security, NSIR. Access requirements apply equally to intervenors, their witnesses and counsel, employees of the applicant, its witnesses and counsel, NRC personnel, and others. Any person who believes that he or she will have a need for access to classified information for the purpose of this licensing proceeding, including the hearing, should immediately contact the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Facilities and Security, ADM, Washington, DC 20555, for information on the clearance process. Telephone calls may be made to Cheryl M. Stone, Chief, Security Branch. Telephone: (301) 415-7404. 8. Obtaining NRC Security Facility Approval and for Safeguarding Classified Information Received or Developed Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 95 Any person who requires possession of classified information in connection with the licensing proceeding may process, store, reproduce, transmit, or handle classified information only in a location for which facility security approval has been obtained from the NRC's Division of Nuclear Security, NSIR, Washington, DC 20555. Telephone calls may be made to A. Lynn Silvious, Chief, Information Security Section. Telephone: (301) 415-2214. B. Reconsideration: The above guidance does not foreclose the applicant, any person admitted as a party to the hearing, or an entity participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c) from litigating material factual issues necessary for resolution of contentions in this proceeding. Persons found by the Commission to have standing and entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c) as of the date of the Commission's order on standing may also move the Commission to reconsider any portion of Section IV of this Notice and Commission Order where there is no clear Commission precedent or unambiguously governing statutes or regulations. Any motion to reconsider must be filed within 10 days after the Commission's order on standing. The motion must contain all technical or other arguments to support the motion. Other persons granted standing and entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), including the applicant and the NRC staff, may respond to motions for reconsideration within 20 days of the Commission's Order. Motions will be ruled upon by the Commission. A motion for reconsideration does not stay the schedule set out above in section III.E.(4). However, if the Commission grants a motion for reconsideration, it will, as necessary, provide direction on adjusting the hearing schedule. V. Pending Energy Legislation The Energy Policy Act of 2003, H.R. 6, is currently pending in Congress. H.R. 6, as currently constituted, contains provisions that address the manner in which certain issues are to be dealt with and a schedule for overall Commission consideration of an application for licensing a uranium enrichment facility. In the event that H.R. 6 is enacted, the Commission may need to issue an additional order to conform guidance and schedules for the LES application to any new statutory requirements. VI. Notice of Intent Regarding Classified Information As noted above, a hearing on this application will be governed by the new 10 CFR part 2, Subparts A, C, G, and to the extent classified material becomes involved, Subpart I. Subpart I requires in accordance with 10 CFR 2.907 that the NRC staff file a notice of intent if, at the time of publication of Notice of Hearing, it appears that it will be impracticable for the staff to avoid the introduction of Restricted Data or National Security Information into a proceeding. The applicant has submitted portions of its application [[Page 5879]] that are classified. The Commission notes that, since the entire application becomes part of the record of the proceeding, the NRC staff has found it impracticable for it to avoid the introduction of Restricted Data or National Security Information into the proceeding. It is so ordered. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of January, 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 04-2550 Filed 2-5-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 84 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Backer in line to flex muscle Friday, February 06, 2004 Repository foes worry congressman will get Energy, Commerce post By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- One of Congress's most ardent supporters of nuclear waste burial in Nevada is in line to become chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, lawmakers and lobbyists said Wednesday. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, is considered the front-runner to succeed Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-La., who announced late Tuesday he was stepping down from the chairmanship on Feb. 16 and won't seek re-election. "This is a disaster for the state of Nevada," said Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev. "Joe Barton's name might as well be Joe Nuclear." Barton, 54, heads the energy and air quality subcommittee. A proponent of fossil and nuclear energy development, he has advanced bills supporting the construction of a single, permanent repository for nuclear waste. In 2002, Barton was the main House sponsor of the bill that overturned Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto of the Yucca Mountain Project. The bill cleared the way for Congress to ratify the mountain ridge, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as the repository site. The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported Wednesday that Tauzin has received an offer to become president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturing Association. Barton said in a statement that he is seeking the chairmanship and has discussed it with House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. Berkley said a Barton promotion would increase the clout of the nuclear power industry. She was unaware of any other candidates. "He did everything he could to promote Yucca Mountain as a repository. He will continue to lead the charge to bury nuclear waste in Nevada, except now he will have more power to do it." Others said changes might be less noticeable. The 57-member energy committee is dominated by lawmakers who support development of nuclear power and other energy sources no matter who would be at the helm, some said. "They've always been pro-Yucca. I don't see much changing," said Michele Boyd, legislative representative for the Public Citizen Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program, a group that opposes the repository. Also, Boyd said the focus has evolved to how much money should be spent on the Yucca Mountain Project each year, a matter that is debated in other committees. Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., said Yucca Mountain fights largely have shifted to the courts, although utilities could still try to get bills passed allowing early nuclear waste shipments to the site. "We continue to watch those guys," Porter said. "Members of Congress represent their states, and their states want nuclear waste in Nevada." Members on the Energy and Commerce Committee have broad responsibilities. The panel considers telecommunications matters, health care, consumer protection and product liability bills and environmental pollution in addition to energy development. Brian O'Connell, an executive with the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, said Barton will have much more on his plate than nuclear waste. "You could argue he'll be able to pay less attention to any individual thing because he will be juggling a broader agenda," O'Connell said. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 85 Las Vegas RJ: State adds transportation expert to anti-Yucca team Friday, February 06, 2004 By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada has added a transportation expert to its legal team challenging the Yucca Mountain Project. Attorney General Brian Sandoval announced Wednesday the hiring of Reno lawyer Paul Lamboley, a former member of the federal Interstate Commerce Commission. State officials said the hiring signals Nevada is preparing to open a new front against the Energy Department's bid to build a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "We're getting a lot more serious about transportation issues. We are looking to challenge DOE decisions that are pending or may come out soon," said Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. Loux said Lamboley will bill the state $350 an hour and will be utilized on an "as-needed" basis. He will become a part of the state's nuclear waste legal team assembled by Virginia attorney Joe Egan. The Energy Department in December announced plans to study and develop a 319-mile railroad line to transport nuclear waste from Caliente to the Yucca site. The waste would arrive in Caliente, 150 miles northeast of Las Vegas, mostly by rail from government sites and nuclear power plants in 39 states. Lamboley, 63, was appointed by President Reagan in 1982 to the Interstate Commerce Commission. The ICC was an independent agency that regulated railroads, trucking companies, bus lines, water carriers and oil pipelines. It was disbanded in 1995, with its responsibilities transferred to a new Surface Transportation Board. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 86 Las Vegas RJ: Yucca opponents sway lawmaker from Minnesota Friday, February 06, 2004 Meetings with Nevada leaders prompt callfor limits on nuclear waste transportation By ERIN NEFF REVIEW-JOURNAL Minnesota state Rep. Frank Hornstein jumped at the chance to visit Yucca Mountain when the Department of Energy invited him and other members of his state's energy task force. But when the official trip didn't include a chance to talk with Nevada politicians about their opposition to the plan, Hornstein called around to get the other side of the story. So compelling was his talk with Gov. Kenny Guinn, state lawmakers and citizen activist Peggy Maze Johnson that Hornstein has decided to sponsor legislation in Minnesota that would restrict transportation of nuclear waste through densely populated areas like the south end of Minneapolis, which he represents. "It makes Yucca Mountain an immediate issue for us," Hornstein, a Democrat, said by telephone from St. Paul, Minn. Local Democrats and Johnson pledged Thursday to try to make the United States aware, one state lawmaker at a time. As a Union Pacific freight train chugged and then ground to a halt behind them, Nevada lawmakers again warned of the transportation risks associated with storing 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "Prior to the last year or so, this has been Nevada's problem," said Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins, D-Henderson, bracing against a strong wind across the rail line downtown. "We're finding that many, many more of them are coming to the side of Nevada." Perkins has been meeting with other lawmakers in his role as speaker and through his association with national associations of state legislators. He said Nevada is shifting its fight to individual states through which the waste is projected to travel if the planned national nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain is licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, said that while she considered it important to make residents of other states aware of the transportation issue, she also said it was important for voters to consider the political issue. She issued a call to action to Nevada Republicans, saying they can't oppose Yucca Mountain and support the re-election of President Bush. The president recommended Yucca Mountain for the repository, despite unresolved scientific questions about the safety of the site. In 2000, as a presidential candidate, he told Nevada voters he would base his decision on "sound science." Titus pointed to Republican Attorney General Brian Sandoval, who presented some of Nevada's arguments in court, but who is co-chair of the Bush campaign in Nevada. "We can no longer afford for it to be a half-baked effort," Titus said. "You can't take money from Republican leadership in Washington, can't support the president and go wink-wink to the nuclear power industry." Chris Carr, executive director of the Nevada Republican Party, called the message "the same rhetoric." "They're constantly bringing up Yucca," Carr said. "They're using the same anger and pessimism against our president and our party." Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 87 Las Vegas SUN: Business leader warns of Yucca nuclear waste perils By Richard N. Velotta The only thing that could stop another era of growth in Southern Nevada would be an accident in the transportation of nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, a leading opponent of the proposed underground repository northwest of Las Vegas said. Drawing on his experience of watching in amazement as his parents led the development of the Green Valley community in Henderson, Brian Greenspun, president and editor of the Las Vegas Sun, on Thursday said Southern Nevada could withstand water shortages and air pollution problems. "But the dump?" Greenspun said. "That's a killer. A nuclear waste dump is a showstopper for Nevada." Besides the Sun, Greenspun's family owns development giant American Nevada Company, which has commercial and residential projects in Henderson and North Las Vegas. He made his remarks Thursday night in a keynote address to the Las Vegas chapter of the International Association of Business Communicators. The local IABC chapter was gathered at the Anthem Center in Henderson for the presentation of its annual Bronze Quill Awards recognizing communications excellence. Greenspun said he would have never imagined years ago that Del Webb would develop the hills along the southern periphery of Henderson into what is now Anthem. (Home-building giant Del Webb is now a subsidiary of Pulte Homes Inc.) "If you went to the tops of the hills and looked south toward Primm, all you would see is desert," Greenspun said. And that, he said, was what the view was like looking south from second-floor buildings on Fremont Street in the 1940s when there was virtually no development south of downtown Las Vegas. Greenspun said his father, Hank, bought property little by little and had a vision for what would someday become Green Valley. The elder Greenspun eventually acquired 8,400 acres and told his son that the one thing he didn't foresee was the massive development that would occur in their lifetimes -- he thought it would be something that his great-grandchildren would do. Now, Greenspun said, development dreams of others are in peril because of political decisions to transport and store 77,000 tons of highly toxic nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain. "There will be an accident," Greenspun said. "The only question is, where or when it will happen." Greenspun, who has been a vocal opponent of Yucca Mountain through numerous "Where I Stand" columns he has written for the Sun, said he was greatly troubled by news earlier this week that President Bush plans to spend $880 million on the Yucca Mountain project in his fiscal 2005 budget. But Greenspun said Republicans weren't the only ones to blame for "plans to poison Nevada." He said as a lawmaker, Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards also cast votes to ship nuclear waste to Nevada. "We can't encourage the dreamers who have vision by putting obstacles in their way," Greenspun said. ***************************************************************** 88 Las Vegas SUN: Lawmakers welcome anti-nuke help Today: February 06, 2004 at 10:09:05 PST Legislator from Minnesota opposes waste transport ASSOCIATED PRESS Two Nevada legislators and an anti-nuclear activist hailed a Minnesota state lawmaker's promise Thursday to fight shipping radioactive waste through Minneapolis. Nevada Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins and Senate minority leader Dina Titus said they hoped state Rep. Frank Hornstein, D-Minneapolis, will help broaden support for Nevada's fight against locating the nation's nuclear waste dump in the desert 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas . "Prior to this, it was mostly about Nevada," Perkins, D-Henderson, said as a Union Pacific freight train rumbled past an outdoor news conference in downtown Las Vegas. "But we're reaching out to representatives in other states. We're hoping he's the first of many." Hornstein, who visited the repository at Yucca Mountain with eight other Minnesota lawmakers last week, said he will submit a bill asking his Legislature to ban the shipment of nuclear waste through densely populated areas in his state. "People need to start asking questions," Hornstein said by telephone from St. Paul, Minn. "I don't think people are generally aware that their communities could be possible routes for (shipments of) fairly high volumes of nuclear waste." Hornstein acknowledged his position was not shared by all eight members of the Minnesota legislative Electric Energy Task Force who toured the Yucca Mountain site on Jan. 27. Some favor the plan and others are undecided. Before the tour, Hornstein and three other members of the delegation heard an anti-Yucca pitch from Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn, state and county officials and anti-Yucca activist Peggy Maze Johnson of the Las Vegas-based Citizen Alert advocacy group. Hornstein noted Minnesota Sens. Mark Dayton and Paul Wellstone, both Democrats, voted against the Yucca Mountain project when Congress approved it July 2002. Wellstone died in a plane crash in October 2002, and has been succeeded by Republican Sen. Norm Coleman. Nevada has challenges pending in federal court against the Energy Department plan to entomb 77,000 tons of the nation's most radioactive nuclear waste in tunnels below Yucca Mountain beginning in 2010. Spent nuclear fuel and industrial and military waste is stored in 39 states, including two nuclear power plants in Minnesota. Johnson displayed a map showing shipping routes through 43 states to Nevada. The Energy Department has not identified truck or rail routes, although it picked a preferred rail route across Nevada that would avoid Las Vegas and the vast federal Nevada Test Site and Nellis Air Force Base bombing range. Allen Benson, spokesman for the Energy Department and the Yucca Mountain project, said the agency has overseen 3,000 shipments of radioactive waste during the past 30 years to nuclear facilities around the nation with no release of radioactive material. Yucca Mountain engineers foresee perhaps 50,000 truckloads, or fewer rail shipments, during the 24 years it would take to fill the repository, he said. Perkins, a deputy Henderson police chief, said he was worried about the safety of the shipments. "When it's mobile, it passes too many place where it can be ambushed," he said. ***************************************************************** 89 Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Cost/benefit analysis on Yucca needed Today: February 06, 2004 at 10:09:06 PST Joseph Strolin's Feb. 4 letter to the Sun contended that the costs of the Yucca Mountain repository outweigh the benefits. It would be useful to all stakeholders in Nevada and in the other states to see a cost/benefit analysis performed by a qualified and neutral party using standard procedures. I am not aware that the Energy Department has done such as study, but I suspect there would be some critics of the repository program who would not agree the department is a sufficiently neutral party. I wish to quibble with Strolin's reference to the forecast that property values along "likely" transportation routes to the repository could decline between $5.6 and $8.8 billion if some unspecified accident were to occur. We will set aside for later contemplation whether property values in the Las Vegas Valley would ever decline short of a national depression. I have seen some of the studies done by the Urban Environmental Research consultant for Clark County and I seem to recall there were some debatable assumptions about the risk of accidents and, for that matter, the routes that the theorized waste shipments would take through Clark County. Should not those assumptions be revisited in view of the fact that the Energy Department has chosen preferred rail shipping corridors that circumvent the highly developed portions of Clark County? Speaking of which, I wonder if the benefits of those preferred corridors outweigh the almost tripled cost of building a shorter rail line through the Las Vegas Valley? BRIAN O'CONNELL Editor's note: Brian O'Connell is director of the Nuclear Waste Program Office for the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners. ***************************************************************** 90 The Sun News: U.S. delays conversion plant work until '05 | 02/05/2004 | [sunnews.com - The sunnews home page] PLUTONIUM The Associated Press 'Because the Russian facility is delayed, so is the U.S. facility.' Bryan Wilkes spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration COLUMBIA - A facility that would convert weapons-grade plutonium into fuel for commercial nuclear power plants won't begin construction in 2004, after all. Disagreements between Russia and U.S. contractors have delayed the construction of the mixed-oxide facility until at least May 2005, a federal official said. The United States and Russia have committed to disposing of 68 metric tons of plutonium in parallel programs. Construction of the facility at the Savannah River Site near Aiken was scheduled to begin as early as this spring. "Because the Russian facility is delayed, so is the U.S. facility," said Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration, a division of the Department of Energy. "I can't emphasize enough that this delay does not in any way diminish the U.S. commitment for proceeding with plutonium disposition." The plant, expected to cost about $3.8 billion and create about 500 jobs, has been criticized by antinuclear activists who favor encasing excess plutonium in glass and burying it in Nevada. And the delay didn't please former Gov. Jim Hodges, who had vowed to lie down in front of plutonium shipments headed to SRS because he feared the material would be stored there indefinitely. Hodges took the U.S. Energy Department to court to stop the shipments, but he ultimately lost. "If these delays continue or, God forbid, they shelve the project, then SRS has moved into the status of a long-term storage facility for plutonium, which is dangerous," Hodges said recently. Congress has been committed to spending money on the program, giving it about $400 million last year to start building the plant. President Bush has proposed $368 million for the plant next year. There also are penalties if the Energy Department fails to begin producing the fuel by 2011. Sen. Lindsey Graham's spokesman Kevin Bishop said a law approved in 2002 requires the government to finish the project, process the plutonium and ship it out of South Carolina. The plutonium-blended fuel will be burned in two Duke Energy power plants near Charlotte, N.C. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission also must OK a construction license for the plant, but it has been slowed because the Energy Department wants its chief contractor to move a radiation boundary closer to the plant's site. Tom Clements with Greenpeace said the delay could make it harder for the department to get more funding. "They will have an extremely difficult time justifying to Congress why they need construction money for fiscal year 2005 when they were not able to spend all the money Congress gave them in 2004," Clements said. The disagreement with Russia is over liability issues. U.S. contractors want legal protection in the event the U.S.-designed Russian plant encounters problems. ***************************************************************** 91 IEER: Comments on proposed uranium enrichment plant in N.M. Comments of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research on the proposed uranium enrichment plant in New Mexico[1] Arjun Makhijani[2] 7 January 2004 There are three main issues of serious concern (other than industrial accidents at the plant): 1. Depleted uranium management and disposal: DU is about three times more radioactive per unit weight than the threshold for transuranic waste.  However, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is likely to allow its disposal as Class A low level radioactive waste – which would likely pose a significant threat to the environment and especially to groundwater resources. 2. Non-Proliferation: The building of a new uranium enrichment plant is likely to slow down the downblending of excess Russian and U.S. highly enriched uranium to reactor fuel, because of fears that a rapid pace will adversely affect market prices.  This has already occurred in the past.  The pace of downblending needs to be stepped up, not slowed down. 3. Transport, processing, and storage of uranium hexafluoride: An enrichment plant will require that natural uranium hexafluoride be transported in and the enriched uranium hexafluoride be transported out.  A. Radiological Characteristics of depleted uranium The table below compares the specific activity of depleted uranium to TRU waste and to a uranium ore with 0.4 percent uranium content, a typical value for U.S. uranium ores historically (since one proposal is to dispose of DU in uranium mines).   Specific Activities of Various Forms of Depleted Uranium Compared to TRU Waste and Uranium Ores Chemical form Specific activity, nanocuries per gram Comments Depleted uranium metal (U)   360 Specific activity may be higher, depending on U-234 content Depleted uranium dioxide (UO2)   320 Most likely disposal form Depleted uranium hexafluoride (UF6)   240 on-site storage form (in cylinders) TRU waste (alpha-emitting long-lived transuranic activity)   100 or more Not including plutonium-241, a beta-emitter with a relatively short half-life of 14.4 years 0.4 %       8 decay products are included, up to and including radium-226 It is clear that, pound for pound, depleted uranium is two-and-half to three-and-half times more radioactive than the threshold that defines transuranic waste.  It is far more radioactive than typical uranium ores, because the ore is mixed with large quantities of non-radioactive materials.  Thus, putting depleted uranium in mines is not comparable to replacing the original ore that was mined out of the ground.  Rather it is analogous to putting TRU waste in the ground.  In other words, it would be like disposing of TRU waste in shallow dumps, a practice that even the Atomic Energy Commission abandoned as unsound in 1970. Moreover, DU radioactivity consists principally of alpha particles, as is the case for radioactivity in TRU waste.  The main constituents of both DU and TRU waste are long-lived; DU constituents are actually far more long-lived than most TRU waste constituents. IEER has, for many years, opposed the classification of DU as low-level waste.  DU should be disposed of in a deep geologic repository in a manner comparable to TRU waste.  That repository cannot be WIPP, because WIPP does not have enough room for the TRU waste in the DOE complex. Hence, before a private company can be permitted to generate large amounts of DU: + DU should be classified as waste that is comparable to TRU waste and that must be disposed of in a new deep geologic repository. + The generator of DU should be required to present a plan for developing such a repository, including a siting process and cost estimates. + The generator should be required to put forth monies in advance that will ensure that the DU does not pile up onsite and that it will be disposed of in a deep repository as it is generated (a delay of a few years after the start of generation might be reasonable if a specific repository has been identified and is actually being developed). It is true that the DOE has a very large amount of DU already.  However, this cannot be an argument for putting more DU in the hands of a government agency that has mismanaged DU and other forms of radioactive waste. The DOE does not have a plan for a new repository for its DU. Simply passing the DU to the DOE and assuming the problem would be solved would be to continue the waste shell game that has bedeviled radioactive waste management. Needless to say, a deep repository will cost a lot of money, but should be factored into the cost of a new uranium enrichment plant. B. Markets and non-proliferation The need for a new enrichment plant must be assessed according to two primary criteria: 1. the market for enrichment services in light of existing supply as well as demand; 2. national security considerations, including the current, projected, and desirable downblending of both Russian and U.S. highly enriched uranium (HEU) for the purposes of fulfilling non-proliferation and disarmament goals as well as for reducing the risks of nuclear diversion, especially in the aftermath of the tragic events of September 11, 2001. The analysis by LES submitted at the time of the Tennessee proposal did not provide an analysis of either of these considerations. Rather it made reference to “Congressional policy pronouncements” that there is an established need for a domestic source of uranium enrichment capacity. This is a completely insufficient basis for asserting the need for a project that will have a major impact on the supply of enrichment services as well as on national and global security. LES must provide the documentation and analysis on the basis of which it is asserting the need for the project.  If it is going to rely on congressional policy pronouncements, then the economic and technical basis of those pronouncements must be set forth in sufficient detail for an independent assessment of their validity to be made.  There is no way in which the NRC or any other body can assess the soundness of LES’s assertion unless such documentation and analysis are provided. The current enrichment capacity as well as the existing commitments and projects to downblend surplus military HEU in Russia and the United States into LEU reactor fuel taken together indicate that there is no need for the LES project in the short- and medium-term. + There is enough LEU (Low Enriched Uranium) for about 6 years to fuel all the U.S. reactors at the current rates of consumption from the down-blending of the remaining 350 metric tons of Russian surplus HEU at Portsmouth Ohio by USEC (US Enrichment Corporation), assuming 1.5 percent enriched blendstock. + The down blending of 120 metric tons of surplus HEU will provide fuel for the reactors for about 1.5 years at the current rate of consumption, assuming natural uranium blendstock. This means that a total of about 7.5 years of U.S. demand for enrichment services is already in the pipeline due to the downloading of military HEU that has been declared surplus. In addition, the United States Enrichment Corporation has an agreement with the U.S. DOE to keep the Paducah plant open until it brings a centrifuge plant on line. The downblending program and the Paducah plant together already create surplus enrichment capacity of about 40 percent over the actual present U.S. requirements for reactor fuel. Thus, there is already a significant surplus of reactor fuel in the commercial pipeline for the next decade. Furthermore in 1993, the RAND Corporation estimated that in the year 2003 the U.S. surplus of HEU would be 339 tons. IEER has estimated that 600 metric tons of U.S. HEU could be declared surplus (including that which has already been so declared). There is also the potential for additional surplus Russian HEU, the amount of which would depend on suitable pricing and political agreements with the United States. Finally, declaring more highly enriched uranium surplus in the U.S. and Russia is very desirable for security reasons, especially as further downblending will remove large amounts of weapons usable HEU from potential diversion. Approval of a project to build a new enrichment will hinder declarations of more surplus HEU. There are likely to be commercial pressures against such declarations in the face of a continuing glut in LEU market when both commercial SWU capacity and equivalent SWU capacity from downblending are taken into account.  Moreover, LES has not specified whether and how its planned project would affect the government’s plan to develop advanced centrifuge technology in collaboration with the United States Enrichment Corporation. A new enrichment plant will compromise national and global security by hindering the best single non-proliferation policy that the U.S. and Russia are currently implementing themselves (rather than just advocating non-proliferation for others).  This policy has had, and continues to have, bi-partisan support. C. Uranium Feed and DU transport, storage and processing Uranium feed and enriched uranium product will be transported to and from the plant in hexafluoride form.  DU will be stored at the site in the same chemical form.  Uranium hexafluoride is highly reactive chemically, yielding hydrofluoric acid and uranyl fluoride on contact with the moisture in the air.  Both are very dangerous. Since New Mexico air is relatively dry, complete hydrolysis of any uranium hexafluoride released in an accident or terrorist event would likely take longer; hence the acid and the uranyl fluoride might spread over larger distances than in other areas.  This would make the plume more dilute, but it would affect more people.  The problem of uranium hexafluoride transport and storage needs special attention in New Mexico.  Generic analysis should be unacceptable. Transport of a vast quantity of DU out of the state for disposal (or to DOE or both) would present special problems.  Transport of large quantities of DU in the form of hexafluoride would present risks proportional to the number of shipments.  If the hexafluoride were processed into safe uranium dioxide form before shipment, the risks arising from processing onsite should be evaluated. Processing uranium hexafluoride into uranium dioxide will yield hydrofluoric acid that is slightly contaminated with uranium.  In the past (in the Tennessee proposal, for instance), LES has assumed that it will be able to market this contaminated acid as non-contaminated material.  This is quite fanciful.  If the acid is required to be processed as radioactive waste, it will present a new, large-scale waste problem, with associated processing, packaging, and disposal costs. D. Conclusions 1. This is an especially inopportune time to build a uranium enrichment plant for nonproliferation reasons.  In my view, a new plant should be ruled out just on that score. 2. DU should be classified as waste comparable to TRU waste and not as low-level waste. 3. If the plant is built, it will be crucial to take into account the fact that even gas centrifuge technology, which is better than gaseous diffusion technology in its routine operational characteristics, involves problems of waste and uranium hexafluoride transport, storage, and processing.  These will present severe challenges to any state that hosts the plant.  They must be squarely addressed before a decision to license and build a plant is made. ----------------------------------------------------------------- [1] For more detail see the comments of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in November 2002, when the LES uranium enrichment plant was proposed to be cited in Tennessee. The full memorandum is on our website at http://www.ieer.org/comments/LESNov02.html. [2] Arjun Makhijani is president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research in Takoma Park, Maryland. Also on this site: + IEER Comments on White papers presented by LES regarding the proposed enrichment plant at Hartsville, Trousdale County, Tennessee(14 November 2002) + Uranium Factsheet Institute for Energy and Environmental ResearchComments to Outreach Coordinator: ieer[“at”]ieer.org Takoma Park, Maryland, USA Posted February 5, 2004 ***************************************************************** 92 Pahrump Valley Times Barton: Lawmaker seen as pro Yucca Mountain February 6, 2004 By STEVE TETREAULT PVT WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON - One of the most ardent federal promoters of nuclear waste burial at Yucca Mountain is in line to become chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee, lawmakers and lobbyists said Wednesday. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, is considered the frontrunner to succeed Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-La., who announced late Tuesday he was stepping down from the chairmanship on Feb. 16 and won't be running for re-election. "This is a disaster for the state of Nevada," said Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev. "Joe Barton's name might as well be Joe Nuclear." Others said the impact might not be that severe. Barton, 54, presently is head of the energy and air quality subcommittee. A proponent of fossil and nuclear energy development, he has advanced bills supporting a repository for permanent storage of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel now kept in 39 states. Barton in 2002 was the main House sponsor of the bill that overturned Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto of the Yucca Mountain Project. The bill cleared the way for Congress to ratify the mountain ridge 50 miles from Pahrump and 20 miles north and east of Amargosa Valley and Beatty, respectively. The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported Wednesday that Tauzin has received an offer to become president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturing Association. Barton said in a statement he is actively seeking the chairmanship and has discussed it with House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas. It was not clear when a new leader would be named. Berkley said a Barton promotion would increase the clout of the nuclear power industry. She said she was unaware of any other candidate and most lawmakers believe Barton has sewed up the promotion. "He did everything he could to promote Yucca Mountain as a repository," Berkley said. "He will continue to lead the charge to bury nuclear waste in Nevada, except now he will have more power to do it." Others said changes might be less noticeable. The 57-member energy committee is dominated by lawmakers who support development of nuclear power and other energy sources no matter who would be at the helm, some said. "They've always been pro-Yucca, I don't see much changing," said Michele Boyd, legislative representative for the Public Citizen Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program, a watchdog group that opposes the repository. Also, Boyd said the focus has evolved to how much money should be spent on the Yucca Mountain Project each year, a matter that is debated in other committees. Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., said Yucca Mountain fights largely have shifted to the courts, although utilities could still try to get bills passed allowing early nuclear waste shipments to the site. "We continue to watch those guys," Porter said. "Members of Congress represent their states, and their states want nuclear waste in Nevada." Members on the Energy and Commerce Committee have some of the broadest responsibilities on Capitol Hill. The panel considers major telecommunications matters, health care, consumer protection and product liability bills and environmental pollution in addition to energy development. Brian O'Connell, an executive with the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, said Barton now would have much more on his plate than nuclear waste. "You could argue he'll be able to pay less attention to any individual thing because he will be juggling a broader agenda," O'Connell said. And, he said, for the most part nuclear waste has diminished as a big issue since Congress finalized the Yucca Mountain pick in 2002. "For average members of Congress, many of them have the sense that this has all been decided," O'Connell said. "The rest is just implementation as far as they're concerned." Electric utilities are Barton's largest financial backers, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which monitors congressional campaign finances. Among industry contributors during the current election cycle, TXU Corp., a Texas utility that operates the Comanche Peak nuclear stations, has donated $10,250 to the lawmaker. Exelon Corp., the largest nuclear utility, gave $5,000 while American Electric Power gave $4,000. "A lot of the large supporters of Barton are firmly committed to the expansion of coal and nuclear power. You will see continued support of more subsidies to the nuclear power industry," said Tyson Chandler, research director of the Critical Mass Energy and Environment Project. Lobbyists said they were eager to see who replaces Barton as chairman of the energy and air quality subcommittee, which is where nuclear waste bills get their initial airing. Chandler said it probably wouldn't make a difference. "I seriously doubt that he would allow the chairmanship of that subcommittee to go to someone who doesn't share his position on Yucca Mountain," he said. For comment or questions, please e-mail webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2003 ***************************************************************** 93 Pahrump Valley Times: Nevada adds to its YMP legal team February 6, 2004 PVT WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON - Nevada has added a transportation expert to its legal team challenging the Yucca Mountain Project. Attorney General Brian Sandoval announced Wednesday the hiring of Paul H. Lamboley, a Reno lawyer and former member of the federal Interstate Commerce Commission. State officials said the hiring signals Nevada is preparing to open a new front against the Energy Department's bid to develop a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. "We're getting a lot more serious about transportation issues. We are looking to challenge DOE decisions that are pending or may come out soon," said Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. Loux said Lamboley will bill the state $350 an hour and will be utilized on an "as-needed" basis. He will become a part of the state's nuclear waste legal team assembled by Virginia attorney Joe Egan. The Energy Department in December announced plans to study and develop a 319-mile railroad line to transport nuclear waste from Caliente to the Yucca site. The waste would arrive in Caliente, 150 miles northeast of Las Vegas, mostly by rail from government sites and nuclear power plants in 39 states. Lamboley, 63, was appointed by President Reagan in 1982 to the Interstate Commerce Commission and was re-appointed in 1985. The ICC was a former independent agency that regulated railroads, trucking companies, bus lines, water carriers and oil pipelines. It was disbanded in 1995, with its remaining responsibilities transferred to a new Surface Transportation Board. "Paul is a world-class rail lawyer," Sandoval said in a statement. "And as a Nevadan, we know his heart is in the right place on DOE's Yucca proposal." For comment or questions, please e-mail Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2003 ***************************************************************** 94 Salt Lake Tribune: Company seeking funding for uranium recycling program February 06, 2004 By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune The U.S. Department of Energy has said it will not help fund a new recycling program at the International Uranium Corp. mill in southeastern Utah, and the company now is looking for alternative financing. "They [at the Energy Department] turned down that proposal because of budget constraints," said International Uranium President Ron Hochstein. "So, we are looking at other potential commercial arrangements for the program." The project, a joint venture with Tennessee-based Nuclear Fuel Services, would have taken uranium waste from Energy Department cleanups, run it through International Uranium's White Mesa Mill and produced uranium "yellowcake" for use in nuclear power plants. Hochstein said the recycling could create as much as 6 million pounds of yellowcake, about three times the amount produced in the United States annually. But, after more than a year and a couple of attempts to interest the Energy Department to invest up to $60 million in the program, the company has begun looking elsewhere for support. With uranium prices increasing from $10 to $15.50 a pound in the past year, the venture might look more appealing to investors, according to International Uranium, which is based in Canada. Still, the company has put its license amendment application with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on hold, said Hochstein. Meanwhile, the environmental community in southern Utah is delighted that the joint venture is dead, at least for now. "I hope IUC does not continue to pursue that material," said Sarah Fields, a Moab environmentalist and critic of the Blanding uranium mill. She said input materials, which are ground to a flourlike consistency for processing, would contain plutonium and other fission products that could easily become airborne. "Should there be any accident or spillage, that material would be all over the place," she said, vowing to fight the proposal. Hochstein said these materials would not contain the pollutants radium and thorium, which normally are in the materials processed at the mill. He added that, without recycling, the DOE would be forced to bury the material as waste. fahys@sltrib.com Copyright Salt Lake City Tribune ***************************************************************** 95 Tennessean: Oak Ridge's nuclear waste heading west - Friday, 02/06/04 OAK RIDGE — The first of as many as 700 shipments of nuclear waste bound for disposal sites in Nevada and New Mexico have left the Energy Department's weapons and research operations in Oak Ridge. ''We're very pleased that we're finally moving the radioactive materials out of Oak Ridge,'' said Bud Cherry, president and CEO of New Jersey-based Foster Wheeler Environmental Corp. The first truck shipment left Foster Wheeler's new $76 million waste-processing plant in Oak Ridge on Jan. 26, headed for the government's Nevada Test Site. ''It's a big deal,'' Gary Riner, project manager at the Energy Department, said of the effort to rid Oak Ridge of some of its most radioactive wastes. Foster Wheeler will receive about $2.5 million per waste shipment during the next few months until it recovers about 75% of the processing plant's capital costs; payments thereafter will be based on the quantity shipped. The earliest shipments are of solidified radioactive liquids drawn from sludge storage tanks. The material is considered low-level radiation and eligible for disposal at the Nevada site. — Associated Press © Copyright 2003 The Tennessean A Gannett Co. ***************************************************************** 96 Rocky Mountain News: Flats cleanup firm fined Safety violations at former weapons site will cost $522,500 By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News February 6, 2004 The federal Department of Energy is fining the company dismantling the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant more than $500,000 for safety violations that resulted in the contamination of 10 employees and risked "significant adverse consequences" involving plutonium. Kaiser-Hill, which is being paid $7 billion to demolish and clean up the sprawling bomb factory 17 miles northwest of downtown, said it will not dispute the $522,500 fine. The most dangerous violations involved improper storage of weapons-grade plutonium and combustible materials at various times in 2002, the Department of Energy said. No harm actually occurred, but if there had been a fire, radioactive material could have been released outdoors, DOE spokesman Jeff Sherwood explained. "In some cases, these violations existed for years without detection," DOE said. The violations are defined as "Level 2," involving a "significant lack of attention or carelessness," Sherwood said. DOE said Rocky Flats' 2006 scheduled closure was not affected. Kaiser-Hill spokesman John Corsi said: "We take the issues seriously. We didn't meet our high expectations for safety management." He said the company has corrected some problems and is working on others. But he also noted that Rocky Flats has shipped to South Carolina all of the usable plutonium cited in the most serious violations. Kaiser-Hill also was cited for failing to place plutonium in double containers, for failing to vent drums of plutonium, and for leaving four containers of plutonium outside a vault, the DOE said. On March 31, 2003, the DOE said, a badly taped air hose slipped loose and radioactive contamination spread throughout a room. Two workers inhaled radioactive material, although their exposure did not exceed limits established for Rocky Flats. Just five days earlier, on March 26, workers hooked up air blowers to a ventilation system without proper checking. Suddenly the flow of air reversed, sending contamination into several rooms of the building. Workers did not realize this until radiation alarms sounded. Kaiser-Hill also was cited because workers didn't dispose of contaminated towels, which are suspected of causing a fire in a glovebox on May 6. Two workers fought that fire even though rules called for their immediate evacuation. Kaiser-Hill was cited, too, for failing to evacuate the entire building immediately. The Department of Energy said that since the investigation that led to the fine there has been one other accident: In December, workers changed the filters on a piece of cleaning equipment without respirators. imsea@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-892-5438 ***************************************************************** 97 Knox News: Officials investigate nuke-alarm 'tampering' By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com February 6, 2004 OAK RIDGE - Officials are investigating the possibility that a nuclear alarm that malfunctioned Wednesday may have been "tampered with," a spokesman confirmed Thursday. About 250 cleanup workers were evacuated Wednesday from a section of the K-25 building after a "criticality alarm" sounded, indicating there may have been a nuclear accident. Safety personnel investigating the situation did not find any evidence of radiation in the area but upon inspecting the alarm system found that all three fuses had been removed "and partially reinserted," said Dennis Hill, a spokesman for Bechtel Jacobs Co. Bechtel Jacobs is the U.S. Department of Energy's environmental manager in Oak Ridge. The company is overseeing the cleanup of K-25, a mammoth building once used to process uranium for nuclear bombs and reactor fuel. Workers removing asbestos and other materials in a portion of K-25 were allowed to return to work today, Hill said. The investigation, however, is continuing, he said. Duratek Federal Services is performing the cleanup work under a subcontract with Bechtel Jacobs. Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329. Copyright Clearance] Copyright 2004, Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 98 Knox News: Research reactor at ORNL back in action Part damaged during refueling when it was dropped replaced By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com February 6, 2004 OAK RIDGE - Oak Ridge National Laboratory's world-class research reactor resumed operations this week after workers replaced an important part that was damaged during a January refueling procedure. Jim Roberto, an associate director at ORNL, said Thursday the reactor's normally scheduled outage for maintenance and refueling was extended by about two weeks in order to have a new part manufactured and installed. The High Flux Isotope Reactor is used for materials research and production of isotopes for medical and industrial purposes. The reactor was restarted Tuesday after workers replaced the "shroud," a stainless-steel cylinder that fits on top of the reactor and directs water through the interior chambers. The reactor component is 42 inches high, with a 17-inch diameter, Roberto said. "It's kind of like a piece of pipe, but it's flared," he said. The problem occurred a few weeks ago when a worker used a special piece of equipment to lift the shroud and prepare for refueling. The reactor sits in a 20-foot-deep pool of water. The connection failed during the lifting operation, and the shroud fell about three feet onto a reactor flange, knocking the steel part "out of round." "We do not completely understand what went wrong," Roberto said. The U.S. Department of Energy last year cited ORNL for a string of safety violations at the reactor and associated facilities and issued a fine of $151,250. UT-Battelle did not contest the penalty. Roberto said Thursday the latest incident is not related to work-control issues cited last fall or evidence of a lax safety culture at the nuclear reactor. "It was something we preferred not to happen and something we work very hard to prevent," he said. "But I believe this was not indicative of culture problem." In its November report, DOE said it was concerned about the failure of ORNL's senior management to identify and correct recurring "deficiencies" at the reactor. The Oak Ridge reactor was built in the 1960s. It has been refurbished and modernized in recent times to prepare for another 30 years of operation. New experimental facilities are under construction to enhance the reactor's research status. The lab is planning a commemorative event for later this year when the High Flux Isotope Reactor enters its 400th fuel cycle. Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329. Copyright Clearance] Copyright 2004, Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. ***************************************************************** 99 DenverPost.com: Flats cleanup contractor is fined Friday, February 06, 2004 By Theo Stein Denver Post Environment Writer The contractor responsible for cleaning up the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant will pay a $522,500 fine for mishaps that occurred last year. The Department of Energy on Thursday said the fine included a series of penalties for two releases of radioactive material and a fire last spring. Several workers were exposed to radiation but in doses below federal limits, DOE officials said. John Corsi, a spokesman for cleanup contractor Kaiser-Hill, said the company had agreed to pay the fine. "We understand the serious safety implications of these incidents, which demonstrate a need for continued vigilance," Corsi said. "The bottom line is, we did not meet our own high expectations for worker safety. We will not contest that fine in any way." Last year, the final shipments of plutonium-contaminated waste left the plant that once made trigger components for hydrogen bombs. Corsi said the company will focus on adhering to federal safety rules as it switches from the cleanup of radioactive waste to the demolition of structures. DOE spokeswoman Karen Lutz said the agency has worked with Kaiser-Hill to correct safety violations over the last 18 months. In 2001, the company was fined $385,000 for violations that occurred in the fall of 2000. The $7.3 billion cleanup is scheduled to be completed by December 2006, but decisions on soil remediation, residual contamination levels and water management remain to be made before the 6,200- acre site becomes a national wildlife refuge. --> All contents Copyright 2004 The Denver Post or other ***************************************************************** 100 Paducah Sun: Find may force DOE to expand tests for beryllium - Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com--270.575.8650 Friday, February 06, 2004 beryllium High levels of toxic dust were found at Portsmouth, where DOE The U.S. Department of Energy may expand testing now that new uranium enrichment work at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. DOE said previously that workers were exposed to beryllium only during the Cold War while temporarily milling the metal in the dismantling of nuclear weapons parts. But internal records obtained by the Louisville Courier-Journal show that unexpectedly high levels of beryllium dust were found last month on 40-year-old aluminum compressor blades at Paducah's closed companion plant near Portsmouth, Ohio. Before that discovery, the Energy Department had said beryllium was never used at Portsmouth. Compressors are used to push uranium hexafluoride gas through miles of piping to make it suitable for use in nuclear fuel. Although blades at Paducah haven't been tested for beryllium, they are similar to those in Ohio. "We're definitely going to incorporate what we're finding in Portsmouth into the Paducah sampling plan," said Bill Murphie, DOE cleanup manager for the two plants. "We weren't expecting the source to be compressor blades or something other than weapons material." Previous tests have not shown unsafe levels of beryllium dust in production areas, particularly in the air. Four current or former Paducah workers have chronic beryllium disease and several have sensitivity, which means they could eventually get the disease, said plant retiree James Harbison Sr., who volunteers with a separate screening program through the atomic workers union. Under the Department of Labor program, a positive blood test indicating reaction to the toxin qualifies a worker for free medical screening for the rest of his life. If he contracts beryllium disease, he qualifies for a $150,000 lump-sum payment. As of Jan. 14, about $135 million in claims had been paid to Paducah plant workers or their survivors. The Labor Department was unable to clarify Thursday how many claims were paid for beryllium disease versus radiation-induced cancers. Wayne O’Keefe of Vienna, Ill., said he has had one positive and one negative test, and last summer underwent a free lung biopsy showing he did not have the disease. However, he has some symptoms, such as stiff joints, dizziness and hot flashes. Incurable but treatable by steroids, the malady can cause loss of lung function, serious respiratory trouble or death. O’Keefe, 80, retired in 1985 after 28 years at the plant in two stints, the first starting in 1951 when construction began. During the last few years, he worked in a building housing the machine shop. He worked for many years around compressors and helped changed seals in the equipment. "I don't remember ever hearing it (beryllium) discussed," O'Keefe said. "But the union says the people with sensitivity worked all over the plant. One was just an office worker. If beryllium was in production, that would explain it because most everybody would have been in those areas on occasion." Beryllium was used in the lab, machine shop and smelter during weapons work, Harbison said. "We've got people who didn't work in any of those areas that have tested positive." Philip Foley coordinated the screening program before taking over as president of the Paducah union local last month. He said the Energy Department has never responded to two Freedom of Information requests — one filed four years ago and another more than a year ago — about beryllium at the plant. "We've never been confident that we had all the information that was available, but we couldn't prove it," he said. "This may shed more light on it." The Department of Labor claims office in Paducah is in Barkley Centre off Blandville Road. The phone number is 534-0599. ***************************************************************** 101 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 21:56:07 -0800 (PST) NETWORK passed on nuclear design Guardian - UK Taken out of Libya a fortnight ago and flown to the US, a crate of documents which detail how to build a nuclear bomb was being scrutinised yesterday by ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.guardian.co.uk/pakistan/Story/0,2763,1142019,00.html MALAYSIAN PM's son subject of nuclear probe Taipei Times - Taipei,Taiwan ... company controlled by the son of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is being investigated for possibly supplying machine parts bound for Libya's nuclear ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/02/06/2003097659 CIA Chief Says US, British Intelligence Uncovered Pakistani ... Voice of America - USA The director of the Central Intelligence Agency says the activities of Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan were uncovered in large part by US and ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm%3FobjectID%3DD209AF85-AD18-4265-997A90F20225C343 This daily-once News Alert is brought to you by Google News (BETA)... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove this News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts/remove?s=92d1672a1b037a07&hl=en Create another News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en Try Google News: http://news.google.com/ ***************************************************************** 102 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 01:02:05 -0800 (PST) NUCLEAR leaker receives pardon Atlanta Journal Constitution - Atlanta,GA,USA ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- Pakistan's president pardoned the country's top nuclear scientist Thursday for leaking weapons technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://ajc.com/news/content/news/0204/06pakistan.html NUCLEAR programme compromised : Imran . Hi Pakistan - Lahore,Pakistan Imran Khan feared closure of the Khan Research Laboratories (KRL) after the government admitted to charges of nuclear proliferation. ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.hipakistan.com/en/detail.php%3FnewsId%3Den52915%26F_catID%3D%26f_type%3Dsource This daily-once News Alert is brought to you by Google News (BETA)... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove this News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts/remove?s=92d1672a1b037a07&hl=en Create another News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en Try Google News: http://news.google.com/ ***************************************************************** 103 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 04:04:31 -0800 (PST) STRIKE held for nuclear scientist BBC News - London,England,UK Fifty hardline Islamists have been arrested in Karachi amid a strike call in support of disgraced Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan. ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3464971.stm MALAYSIAN firm denies supplying parts for Libya's nuclear ... Channel News Asia - Singapore KUALA LUMPUR : The Malaysian company accused of supplying parts for Libya's nuclear weapons programme has denied the charges, insisting it has no knowledge of ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/southeastasia/view/69850/1/.html ENSURE No More Nuclear Proliferation, American Asks Pakistan IndoLink - San Ramon,CA,United States 6 (NNN): An American State Department official, asked to comment on Pakistan’s decision to pardon country’s top nuclear scientist Dr Qadeer Abdul Khan who ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.indolink.com/displayArticleS.php%3Fid%3D020604121028 ATOMIC energy agency concerned over Pakistan nuclear leaks ABC Online - Australia The Atomic Energy Agency's Mohamed El Baradei believes Doctor Abdul Qadeer Khan was not acting alone when he passed on Pakistan's nuclear secrets to Libya ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2004/s1039770.htm HUNT widens for nuclear leaks middlemen IrishExaminer.com - Ireland The hunt for middlemen who worked with the father of Pakistan’s nuclear programme to supply rogue regimes with weapons technology has widened to Japan and ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.irishexaminer.com/breaking/2004/02/06/story132979.html PAKISTAN nuclear case merely 'tip of an iceberg' Seattle Times - Seattle,WA,USA VIENNA — Pakistani weapons scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who was pardoned yesterday for passing nuclear weapons secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea ... This daily-once News Alert is brought to you by Google News (BETA)... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove this News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts/remove?s=92d1672a1b037a07&hl=en Create another News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en Try Google News: http://news.google.com/ ***************************************************************** 104 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 07:02:33 -0800 (PST) PAKISTAN Nuclear Threat 'Different' to Iraq - Straw The Scotsman - Edinburgh,Scotland,UK Iraq’s alleged proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was “a different situation” from Pakistan’s spread of nuclear arms secrets, Foreign ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm%3Fid%3D2499197 PAKISTAN: anger over nuclear leak pardon ABC Online - Australia MARK COLVIN: Pakistan's opposition parties have called for a nation wide strike following the confession and pardon of the country's top nuclear scientist on ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1039926.htm MALAYSIA Downplays Involvement in Nuclear Black Market Voice of America - USA Malaysia is downplaying allegations that a company controlled by the prime minister's son has been involved in transferring parts for Libya's nuclear weapons ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm%3FobjectID%3DD6403EEC-19FF-4997-9D416E7321EF2940 UN watchdog tells of nuclear 'supermarket' The Age - Melbourne,Victoria,Australia The United Nations' top nuclear official has called for a new international regime to destroy the flourishing black market in nuclear technology, describing ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/02/06/1075854060741.html This daily-once News Alert is brought to you by Google News (BETA)... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove this News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts/remove?s=92d1672a1b037a07&hl=en Create another News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en Try Google News: http://news.google.com/ ***************************************************************** 105 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 09:59:20 -0800 (PST) RUSH for closure of the nuclear 'supermarket' Hindustan Times - New Delhi,India International agencies and nuclear inspectors are reportedly "racing" to close the vast international nuclear supermarket that enabled Iran, Libya, North Korea ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_562930,00050003.htm KHAN'S illicit nuclear network said to span globe Forbes - USA VIENNA, Feb 6 (Reuters) - The illicit network the father of Pakistan's atom bomb used to skirt sanctions and sell Iran, Libya and North Korea nuclear ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.forbes.com/iraq/newswire/2004/02/06/rtr1249389.html INSPECTORS zeroing in on nuclear dealers Sify - Delhi,India London: Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf's pardoning of Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan has not stopped international agencies and nuclear inspectors from probing more ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php%3Fid%3D13382295 BLACK market in nuclear technology must be stopped: IAEA 4ni.co.uk - UK The head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency has called for "urgent action" against nuclear proliferation black marketeers, warning that recent cases ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.4ni.co.uk/nationalnews.asp%3Fid%3D25507 NUCLEAR arms smuggling cases found so far ‘just tip of iceberg ... UN News Centre 6 February 2004 – Warning that cases of covert nuclear proliferation discovered so far are "just the tip of the iceberg," the head of the United Nations ... NUCLEAR safety laws delayed EUpolitix - Brussels,Belgium A package of EU laws on nuclear safety has stalled after four member states failed to back them on Thursday. Four member states ... See all stories on this topic: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.eupolitix.com/EN/News/200402/6400b7c2-d853-4e9b-ae64-3c01225dbd62.htm This daily-once News Alert is brought to you by Google News (BETA)... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove this News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts/remove?s=92d1672a1b037a07&hl=en Create another News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en Try Google News: http://news.google.com/ ***************************************************************** 106 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 13:05:39 -0800 (PST) A Khan of Worms | Pakistan's Nuclear Strategy Shaky Times of India - India The most crucial fallout of the exposure of Pakistan 's two-decade-old involvement in the international smuggling network related to nuclear proliferation is ... See all stories on this topic: PAKISTAN'S Nuclear ' Bombshell , ' The Standoff In Tehran And ... Radio Free Europe - Prague,Czech Republic ... 2004 (RFE/RL) -- Among the issues discussed in some of the major dailies today is freedom of movement within an expanded European Union, Pakistan's nuclear ... See all stories on this topic: ASHTRAY or nuclear component? Malaysian machinists say it's ... San Francisco Chronicle - San Francisco,CA,USA The CIA says this nondescript factory on the outskirts of Malaysia's largest city was, in fact, churning out components for Libya's nuclear weapons program. ... See all stories on this topic: PAK rejects Indian nuclear statement Sify - Delhi,India ... on Friday dismissed as unwarranted a statement by the External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha that the disclosure by the architect of the countrys nuclear ... IRAN ’ s Nuclear Debacle in Vienna DEBKAfile - Israel Teheran’s confidence in its ability to press on with its prohibited nuclear weapons program while blowing hot and cold on international threats was rudely ... See all stories on this topic: 'DON'T be a source of nuclear proliferation' Economic Times - New Delhi,India WASHINGTON: Amidst demands for international monitoring of Pakistan's nuclear programme in the wake of its top scientists providing sensitive technology to Iran ... See all stories on this topic: This daily-once News Alert is brought to you by Google News (BETA)... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remove this News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts/remove?s=92d1672a1b037a07&hl=en Create another News Alert: http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en Try Google News: http://news.google.com/ ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************