*****************************************************************
03/07/04 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 12.57
*****************************************************************
   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 Guardian Unlimited: 'If we ignore threats, we are in mortal danger'
2 BBC: Blair's 'international community'
3 AP Wire: Iraqi Defector Blames CIA Over Weapons
4 UK Independent: Blair confronts war critics: I was right, and I stil
5 UK Independent: Tony Blair: 'It is my task to expose the global thre
6 Guardian Unlimited: Blair lacked critical thinking, says Blix 
7 Las Vegas SUN: Iraqi Defector Blames CIA Over Weapons
8 Las Vegas SUN: Iran Says U.N. Should Wrap Up Nuke Review
9 Washington Times: Iran's nuclear menace
10 BBC: Iran seeks nuclear file closure 
11 Kashmir Telegraph: Iran Admits Nuclear Program Successful
12 AF: Lack of trust prevents resolution of N.Korean nuclear crisis
13 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Kerry Will Oppose N Korean Nukes   
14 US: NYT: U.S. Lags in Recovering Fuel Suitable for Nuclear Arms
15 US: WorldNetDaily: Bush wrong on nuke treaty 'fix'
16 Nigerian Nuke Weapons? US Missing Enough HEU For Potentially Thousan
17 BBC: Libya ships out last WMD parts 
18 FT: Nuclear concerns bring a stream of visitors to Pakistan's door
19 Daily Times: IAEA may take up nuclear black market tomorrow 
20 Hi Pakistan: Powell due for talks on terrorism, N-issue     --> 
21 Hi Pakistan: Straw lauds Pak role in war against terror     --> 
22 Hi Pakistan: The guest from Britain     --> 
23 Hi Pakistan: N-tech transfer allegations baseless - Aref  
24 Guardian Unlimited: War chief reveals legal crisis 
25 Kashmir Telegraph: Nuclear Secret Papers Show Link To Pak     
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
26 US: JS Online: Opposition to energy pricing system unifies state, 
27 US: WSJ: Head of WPL packs a lot of energy in small package 
28 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Indian Point contract ratified
29 Xinhuanet: China has little information about alleged DPRK uranium
30 US: Toronto Star: Power is blowin' in the wind
31 Sify: NPCIL plans greenfield facilities             
32 US: The Advocate: Water pump, turbine malfunction, shutting Millston
33 US: SouthofBoston: Weak forecast stalls Entergy application
34 US: Herald-Palladium: Cook environmental review hearings set
35 US: WFSB: Annoying sound from the Millstone Power Plant
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
36 [NukeNet] French Govt. Accused of Lacking Nuclear Crisis Plan
37 [NukeNet] Atoms For War: US Missing Enough HEU For Potentially
38 Sunday Herald: MPs' depleted credibility  
39 US: GLW: Documentary reveals New Mexico nuclear horror
40 PM MARSHALL ISLANDS: US Criticised for Cutting Back Nuclear Monitori
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
41 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Goshute dissidents rebuffed by federal court,
42 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Many questions, few answers on shipping nucle
43 Washington Times: Radioactive waste threatens Central Asia
44 KTNV: Controversy Brewing Over Nuclear Waste
45 US: Times-Standard: PG displays exhibits to explain spent nuclear fu
46 Las Vegas RJ: NEVADA VIEWS: Nuke shipments are safe 
47 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Rail corridor plan faces scrutiny 
48 Las Vegas RJ: Budget plan reduces Yucca spending 
49 US: KC Chronicle: Elburn hires firm to deal with radium removal plan
50 Sunday Herald: Fears over bid to lower toxic waste limits 
51 KLAS: Water is Center of Heated Nukes Debate
52 Las Vegas SUN: Federal budget plan calls for limited Yucca Mountain 
 
                         NUCLEAR WEAPONS
 
53 US: 50 Years of Nuclear Testing Fallibility.  Bravo?
54 [EMMAS] Call For Vanunu's Unconditional Release
55 BulletinWire News: 50 years ago: The day the sun rose twice         
56 Kashmir Telegraph: Sleeping with the Nuclear Snake
57 US: Guardian Unlimited: Observer review: The Fly
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
58 Tennessean: Oak Ridge reactor back in working order 
59 Tri-Valley Herald: No small nukes, despite debates
60 Tri-City Herald: Opinions Hanford worker safety is community concern
 
                          OTHER NUCLEAR
 
61 The Sunflower - March 2004 - Issue 82
62 Google News Alert - nuclear
63 Google News Alert - nuclear
64 FT: Do we really need a fusion scheme?  
65 Idaho Statesman: WGI lands $1.5 billion contract
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 Guardian Unlimited: 'If we ignore threats, we are in mortal danger'

Guardian Newspapers Limited

PM sets out new credo and tries to draw line under war row             
 		
Sarah Hall, political correspondent
Saturday March 6, 2004
The Guardian 		
 		
Tony Blair gave his most detailed defence for going to war so far 
yesterday, saying that Britain was in "mortal danger" of 
underestimating the threat of global terrorism as he urged his 
critics to draw a line under the issue. 

In what amounted to a personal testimony of his reasons for 
taking the country into conflict, the prime minister said the 
September 11 terrorist attacks had been a "revelation" that had 
convinced him of the need to tackle rogue states and "religious 
fanatics" prepared to "bring about Armageddon". 

Speaking in his Sedgefield constituency, he suggested that 
international law should be reformed in light of a security 
threat that was "of a different nature from anything the world 
has faced before". 

For the first time he conceded that Saddam Hussein might not have 
acted if the allies had not taken military action, but he 
stressed that, against the backdrop of global terrorism and the 
proliferation of WMD, he could not have "erred on the side of 
caution". 

In combative mood, he said: "It is monstrously premature to think 
the threat has past." 

Using Churchillian language, he added: "This war is not ended. It 
may only be at the beginning of the end of the first phase." 

Mr Blair was given a standing ovation after delivering his speech 
to 150 regional businesspeople. But the speech was aimed at a far 
wider audience: the growing body of the public questioning his 
justification for going to war. 

As he is dogged by renewed questions about the legality of going 
to war and calls for him to publish the attorney general's 
advice, the speech was an acknowledgment that the issue is 
preventing him drawing attention to the domestic agenda, which he 
hopes to return to, with a general election possibly only 15 
months away. 

Describing the decision to go to war as the most divisive he had 
ever had to make, Mr Blair admitted that the issue could not 
"just be swept away". 

But he suggested that the reasons for attacking Iraq needed to be 
debated, not to curb attacks on his integrity but to remind 
critics - preoccupied with the "elaborate smokescreen" of rows 
about the war - of the gravity of the security risk. 

While giving a passionate account of his reasoning, he adopted a 
far more conciliatory tone towards those opposed to the war than 
he has used before, telling his audience: "I have never disagreed 
with those who disagreed with the decision ... 

"There was a core of sensible people who faced with this decision 
would have gone the other way for sensible reasons. The argument 
is one I understand totally". 

He suggested such people were misguided, however, in not 
appreciating the extent of the threat. 

"We are in mortal danger of mistaking the nature of the world in 
which we live ... The threat we face is not conventional. It is a 
challenge of a different nature from anything the world has faced 
before." 

Mr Blair went on to argue that even before September 11 the 
traditional justification for military action had changed, as 
support grew for the the notion of intervening - as in Kosovo - 
on humanitarian grounds. 

September 11 crystallised this thinking. "September 11 was for me 
a revelation ... What galvanised me was that it was a declaration 
of war by religious fanatics who were prepared to wage war 
without limit." 

He referred to the growing amount of intelligence he received on 
terrorism and WMD, and stressed that, as prime minister, he did 
not "have the luxury" of not coming to a decision. 

Admitting that Saddam Hussein might not have acted, he said: "Do 
we want to take the risk? That is judgment. And my judgment then 
and now is that the risk of this new global terrorism and its 
interaction with states or organisations or individuals 
proliferating WMD is one I simply am not prepared to run. 

"This is not a time to err on the side of caution." 

In a move backed by the Tory leader, Michael Howard, he also 
repeated his call for reform of the United Nations, to make its 
security council fit for the 21st century, and suggested a 
shake-up of international law so that action could be taken 
against tyrannical states. 

"It may well be that under international law as presently 
constituted a regime can systematically brutalise and oppress its 
people and there is nothing anyone can do ... This may be the 
law, but should it be?" 

The Tory leader said it was "right that we have a serious debate 
about whether international law needs to be reviewed. This raises 
three important questions - Is reform necessary? What form should 
it take? Can it be delivered?" 

But Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs 
spokesman, said: "If the UK is to embrace a doctrine of 
pre-emptive strikes, that will be a major departure from the 
foreign policy principles of successive governments since the 
creation of the UN." 

His leader, Charles Kennedy, accused the prime minister of being 
"astonishingly defensive" and of deliberately mixing up the 
issues of global terrorism and Iraq in an attempt to construct a 
justification for the war. 

But the veteran Labour MP Tam Dalyell, an arch critic of the war, 
denounced the speech as "passionate, self-justifying drivel".
 	
 	
politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk

[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
*****************************************************************
 2 BBC: Blair's 'international community'
 
  Last Updated: Saturday, 6 March, 2004
 
By Paul Reynolds BBC News Online world affairs correspondent   

To intervene or not to intervene? That is the question 
increasingly on the minds of world leaders at the start of the 
21st Century. 

[British Prime Minister Tony Blair]                             
Blair warned of the "mortal danger" of under-estimating terror 
attacks                       
			   		
To President Bush's doctrine of pre-emptive action, we now have 
to add British Prime Minister Tony Blair's doctrine of 
"international community." 

This is a kind of half-way house between the freedom of action Mr 
Bush seeks to preserve and the rules of the United Nations 
Charter which allow intervention only in certain circumstances, 
such as reversing an act of aggression. 

It is highly unlikely that the UN would want to go too far down 
the interventionist path. The UN exists to try to make individual 
action unnecessary. 

And to some a doctrine of international community is a doctrine 
of international interference. 

'Serbia' precedent 

But the old rules are already under strain. 

Nato's attack on Serbia over Kosovo in 1999 established the rule 
of a humanitarian intervention. It followed the worldwide guilt 
felt at the failure by the UN, or anyone else, to intervene in 
Rwanda. 

[Belgrade under Nato air attack. Picture: 1999] Nato's said its 
Serbia campaign was a humanitarian intervention                                                            

Now Mr Blair wants to take the process further. 

International terrorism post-11 September and the spread of 
weapons of mass destruction require a further redefinition of the 
rights of a nation-state, he argued in a speech on Friday. 

He even mentioned the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. That 
basically ended the religious wars in Europe and began the modern 
system of the nation-state, whose rights, he suggested, should be 
further curtailed. 

He wondered whether international law should not be developed to 
avoid situations where "a regime can systematically brutalise and 
oppress its people and there is nothing anyone can do, when 
dialogue, diplomacy and even sanctions fail, unless it comes 
within the definition of a humanitarian catastrophe". 

Tony Blair in fact first mentioned his doctrine of international 
community (and world figures like to be known for their 
doctrines) in a speech in Chicago in 1999. It was at the time of 
the Kosovo war. 

'Five rules' for intervention 

It was a speech which Saddam Hussein should have read. It 
illustrated Mr Blair's inclination for action. 

	 		
[Ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein after his capture]  
The capture of Saddam has not stopped attacks by Iraqi insurgents                                                              

He outlined five rules for intervention - be sure of your case, 
exhaust all other options first, ask if military operations can 
be "sensibly" undertaken, prepare for the long-term and identify 
if your interests are involved. 

Ideally, Mr Blair suggested in both speeches, the UN would lead 
the way. But the implication is that individual countries should 
act if the UN did not. 

His problem of course is that "intervention" for some is 
"aggression" for others. His speech is also under attack from his 
critics for being too much of a justification of the war in Iraq. 

UN's 'wise men' 

Meanwhile, the UN itself is also trying to redefine intervention. 

All Members shall refrain their international relations from the 
threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or 
political independence of any state Article 2 of the UN Charter     

Last September, the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, set up a 
committee of "wise men and women" to make recommendations about 
the UN's future role. It will report this December. 

There are 16 members of the committee, an array of the 
international great and the good (and some say the deja vu). 

The members include President Bush senior's National Security 
Adviser Brent Scowcroft, who opposed the latest war against Iraq, 
and former Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland, who 
always has the interests of the developing world at heart. 

It is not a panel likely to recommend pre-emptive military 
action. 

Lord Hannay, a former senior British diplomat and another member, 
indicated the limits of the committee's aims. 

"The UN should get involved with countries under stress," was how 
he put it to the BBC. 

'Different perceptions' 

"We support a collective response to stop a state from sliding 
down the slope," he said. 

Lord Hannay pointed out that there were "different perceptions" 
about what a threat was in different parts of the world. To some, 
poverty and Aids were the problem, not terrorism. 

The thorn the committee may or may not grasp is the UN's Article 
39 which itself accepts that the UN can act in advance of an 
overt act of war by one state against another. 

"The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat 
to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall 
make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken," it 
states. 

This article means that the UN can take its own collective 
pre-emptive action - and of a military kind. It could one day 
declare that, say North Korea, is a "threat to the peace." 

That is really what Mr Bush and Mr Blair are on about. If the UN 
does not act, they argue, then individual states may do so 
themselves. 

That in turn would be a long way from Article 2 of the UN Charter 
which says: "All Members shall refrain in their international 
relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial 
integrity or political independence of any state." 

*****************************************************************
 3 AP Wire: Iraqi Defector Blames CIA Over Weapons

| 03/06/2004 | 

Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Even though the CIA continually questioned the 
credibility of Iraqi defectors, the Bush administration largely 
used information from them to build a case for invading Iraq, 
says the man who led many of the defectors to the CIA. 

Ahmad Chalabi, a member of the Iraqi Governing Council, said he 
is being unfairly attacked for the failure to find weapons of 
mass destruction in Iraq and wants to testify in an open session 
of the Senate Intelligence Committee to make his case. 

"Intelligence people who are supposed to do a better job for 
their country and their government did not do such a good job," 
Chalabi said in an interview to be telecast Sunday on CBS' "60 
Minutes." The program made his comments available to The 
Associated Press on Saturday. 

As President Saddam Hussein's government fell in Baghdad, the 
Pentagon flew Chalabi into the country from exile. He heads the 
Iraqi National Congress, an anti-Saddam exile group that the 
administration expected to be a major player in postwar Iraq. 

In the CBS interview, Chalabi said he still expects illegal 
weapons to be found, despite the failure of two sets of 
inspectors and scores of thousands of U.S., British and other 
troops to find them. 

Based largely on information from defectors supplied by Chalabi, 
the Bush administration said Saddam had to be brought down 
because of huge supplies of chemical and biological weapons and 
elements of a nuclear-weapons program that he had. 

Chalabi blamed the CIA in the interview for the lack of weapons 
so far. 

"This is a ridiculous situation. Every story that comes out in 
the press says: `Defectors have an ax to grind, don't believe 
them.' ... Before the war, they kept saying that, ... so why did 
the CIA believe them so much?" Chalabi asked. 

CIA officials were skeptical, he said: "Now you're telling me 
that despite all this public evidence, the United States 
government took our word without checking out the people?" 

One example was Khidhir Hamza, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist 
who defected in 1994 and wrote a memoir titled "Saddam's 
Bombmaker." During dozens of media appearances, articles and 
testimony before Congress in the past two years, he claimed Iraq 
was actively trying to build an atomic bomb. 

Like prewar claims made by other defectors, Hamza's were not 
borne out by the evidence.   

*****************************************************************
 4 UK Independent: Blair confronts war critics: I was right, and I still am
 
By Paul Waugh, Deputy Political Editor
 
06 March 2004

Tony Blair confronted his critics over the war on Iraq yesterday
with a warning that he was prepared to launch similar
pre-emptive strikes against rogue states and terrorists that
threatened Britain and the world. 

Revealing a new British doctrine that echoes the "total war" of
President George Bush, the Prime Minister said he would never
put the country at risk by not acting, even if that meant
operating outside the UN. 

Mr Blair called for reform of international law to allow states
to intervene against brutal dictatorships and vowed to "wage war
relentlessly" against those who sought to exploit religious
hatreds to attack the West. 

He conceded that the Government could not "move on" from the
controversy over the war and that he should instead explain the
new approach. Echoing Winston Churchill after the Battle of
Britain, he said: "The war is not ended. It may only be at the
beginning of the end of the first phase." 

Speaking in his Sedgefield constituency, Mr Blair said that when
confronted with terrorists it was clear that containment would
not work. "Emphatically I am not saying that every situation
leads to military action. But we surely have a duty and a right
to prevent the threat materialising; and we surely have a
responsibility to act when a nation's people are subjected to a
regime such as Saddam's. Otherwise, we are powerless to fight
the aggression and injustice which over time puts at risk our
security and way of life." 

Mr Blair accepted that a "sensible core" of his critics had
legitimate concerns that Saddam posed no imminent threat. But he
warned: "Here is where I feel so passionately that we are in
mortal danger of mistaking the nature of the new world in which
we live. This is not a time to err on the side of caution, not a
time to weigh the risks to an infinite balance. It is
monstrously premature to think the risk has passed." 

Mr Blair described the 11 September attacks as a "revelation"
that had proved to him the scale of the terrorist threat and the
danger of rogue states such as Iraq developing weapons of mass
destruction. 

In a scathing assessment of the United Nations' failure to act
against atrocities in Kosovo and elsewhere, he said that it was
"strange that the UN is so reluctant to enforce" its own
declaration on human rights. He was worried that the threat of
terrorists bent on "Armageddon" would go unchallenged if the UN
Security Council was paralysed by political disagreement. 

Mr Blair said the future would see "a new type of war", in which
leaders relied on intelligence to a far greater degree.
Addressing critics of the government dossier on Iraqi WMD, he
asked: "Would you prefer us to act, even if it turns out to be
wrong? Or not to act and hope it's okay? And suppose we don't
act and the intelligence turns out to be right, how forgiving do
you think people will be?" 

Mr Blair stressed that it would take more than military means to
thwart the terrorists, saying that the "spread of our values" of
freedom and tolerance was the only way to ensure lasting global
peace. 

The Prime Minister was accused by the Liberal Democrat leader,
Charles Kennedy, of mixing the issues of global terrorism and
Iraq to construct a justification for the war. Mr Kennedy said
that "many people in this country would be very concerned" if
the Prime Minister adopted President Bush's doctrine of
pre-emptive attack. 	           


UK Independent Ltd.
*****************************************************************
 5 UK Independent: Tony Blair: 'It is my task to expose the global threat, whatever
the political cost'
 
06 March 2004

This is an edited version of Tony Blair's speech yesterday: 

No decision I have ever made in politics has been as divisive as 
the decision to go to war to in Iraq. It remains deeply divisive 
today. I know a large part of the public want to move on. 

But I know, too, that the nature of this issue over Iraq, 
stirring such bitter emotions as it does, can't just be swept 
away as ill-fitting the preoccupations of the man and woman on 
the street. 

This is not simply because of the gravity of war; or the 
continued engagement of British troops and civilians in Iraq; or 
even because of reflections made on the integrity of the Prime 
Minister. 

It is because it was in March 2003 and remains my fervent view 
that the nature of the global threat we face in Britain and round 
the world is real and existential and it is the task of 
leadership to expose it and fight it, whatever the political 
cost. 

And that the true danger is not to any single politician's 
reputation but to our country if we now ignore this threat or 
erase it from the agenda in embarrassment at the difficulties it 
causes. 

Each week brings a fresh attempt to get a new angle that can 
prove it was all a gigantic conspiracy. 

Most recently is the attempt to cast serious doubt on the 
Attorney General's legal opinion. But let's be clear. Once this 
row dies down, another will take its place and then another and 
then another. 

All of it in the end is an elaborate smokescreen to prevent us 
seeing the real issue: which is not a matter of trust but of 
judgement. Iraq in March 2003 was an immensely difficult 
judgement. It was divisive because it was difficult. 

There was a core of sensible people who faced with the decision 
would have gone the other way, for sensible reasons. Their 
argument is one I understand totally. 

It is that Iraq posed no direct, immediate threat to Britain; and 
that Iraq's WMD, even on our own case, was not serious enough to 
warrant war, certainly without a specific UN resolution mandating 
military action. And they argue: Saddam could, in any event, be 
contained. 

In other words, they disagreed then and disagree now 
fundamentally with the characterisation of the threat 

Of course the opponents are boosted by the fact that though we 
know Saddam had WMD, we haven't found the physical evidence of 
them in the 11 months since the war. But, in fact, everyone 
thought he had them. That was the basis of UN Resolution 1441. 

But the key point is that it is the threat that is the issue. The 
characterisation of the threat is where the difference lies. Here 
is where I feel so passionately that we are in mortal danger of 
mistaking the nature of the new world in which we live. 

The threat we face is not conventional. It was defined not by 
Iraq but by 11 September. That day did not create the threat 
Saddam posed. But it altered crucially the balance of risk as to 
whether to deal with it or simply carry on, however imperfectly, 
trying to contain it. 

11 September was, for me, a revelation. 

Here is the crux. My judgement then and now is that the risk of 
this new global terrorism and its interaction with states or 
organisations or individuals proliferating WMD, is one I simply 
am not prepared to run. 

This is not a time to err on the side of caution; not a time to 
weigh the risks to an infinite balance; not a time for the 
cynicism of the worldly wise who favour playing it long. 

Their worldly wise cynicism is actually, at best, naivete and, at 
worst, dereliction. When they talk, as they do now, of diplomacy 
coming back into fashion in respect of Iran or North Korea or 
Libya, do they seriously think that diplomacy alone has brought 
about this change? 

Yet it is monstrously premature to think the threat has passed. 
The risk remains in the balance here and abroad. 

Sit in my seat. Here is the intelligence. Here is the advice. Do 
you ignore it? But, of course intelligence is precisely that: 
intelligence. It is not hard fact. It has its limitations. But in 
making that judgement, would you prefer us to act, even if it 
turns out to be wrong? Or not to act and hope it's OK? And 
suppose we don't act and the intelligence turns out to be right, 
how forgiving will people be? 

I have no doubt Iraq is better without Saddam; but no doubt 
either, that as a result of his removal, the dangers of the 
threat we face will be diminished.That is not to say the 
terrorists won't redouble their efforts. They will. This war is 
not ended. It may only be at the end of its first phase. 

Containment will not work in the face of the global threat that 
confronts us. The terrorists have no intention of being 
contained. Emphatically I am not saying that every situation 
leads to military action. But we surely have a duty and a right 
to prevent the threat materialising; and we surely have a 
responsibility to act when a nation's people are subjected to a 
regime such as Saddam's. 

I understand the worry the international community has over Iraq. 
It worries that the US and its allies will by sheer force of 
their military might, do whatever they want, unilaterally and 
without recourse to any rule-based code or doctrine. But our 
worry is that if the UN - because of a political disagreement in 
its Councils - is paralysed, then a threat we believe is real 
will go unchallenged. 

This dilemma is at the heart of many people's anguished 
indecision over the wisdom of our action in Iraq. 

It means reforming the United Nations so its Security Council 
represents 21st century reality; and giving the UN the capability 
to act effectively as well as debate 

But in the meantime, the threat is there and demands our 
attention. 

It is a new type of war. It will rest on intelligence to a 
greater degree than ever before. It demands a difference attitude 
to our own interests. It forces us to act even when so many 
comforts seem unaffected, and the threat so far off, if not 
illusory. 

In the end, believe your political leaders or not, as you will. 
But do so, at least having understood their minds.                 


UK Independent Ltd.
*****************************************************************
 6 Guardian Unlimited: Blair lacked critical thinking, says Blix 

[UP] 

Richard Norton-Taylor and David Leigh 
Saturday March 6, 2004
The Guardian 		
		
Hans Blix, the UN's former chief weapons inspector, last night 
delivered a robust critique of Tony Blair's defence of the 
invasion of Iraq, questioning the prime minister's judgment, 
especially his response to claims made by the intelligence 
agencies. 

Asked about Mr Blair's admission yesterday that intelligence was 
not "hard fact", Mr Blix told the Guardian that was precisely how 
it was presented to the UN in the run-up to war. Britain and the 
US "were selling it as such", he said. 

Mr Blair's claims about his thought processes in the run-up to 
the war are markedly different from the moment-by-moment picture 
painted today by Mr Blix in extracts of his memoirs - published 
exclusively in the Guardian - of his dealings with the prime 
minister. 

Mr Blair yesterday played down his reliance on pre-war 
intelligence, describing himself as a man haunted by the risk 
that terrorists and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) might come 
together one day, but who recognised the limits of intelligence 
material. 

In Mr Blix's accounts of meetings with him, a different Mr Blair 
emerges: a man convinced to the point of credulity by 
intelligence reports, and fuelled by a religious enthusiasm of 
his own, to do battle with evil. 

President Jacques Chirac of France, by contrast, said that the 
west's intelligence services, including his own, were 
"intoxicating each other"; believed that Iraq's WMD did not 
exist; and predicted that a war would be the worst outcome, 
inflaming anti-western feeling among Muslims. 

In his memoirs, Mr Blix describes Mr Blair in the month before 
the war as saying "the intelligence was clear that Saddam had 
reconstituted his weapons of mass destruction programme". 

"Blair clearly relied on the intelligence and was convinced," he 
said. 

Speaking from his home in Stockholm, Mr Blix last night insisted 
he was not accusing the prime minister of bad faith: "What I am 
saying is there was a lack of critical thinking." 

He highlighted the notorious 45-minute claim, played down 
yesterday by the prime minister in his speech. The claim, said Mr 
Blix, was clearly meant to convey something "ominous". 

By the end of January last year, he said, UN inspectors had been 
to a number of key sites named by British and US intelligence. 
"Nowhere did we find WMD," he added. 

It seemed at times Britain and the US were acting like "witch 
doctors", he said. They should have allowed UN inspectors to 
continue their work. 

"Gradually [the British and US governments] ought to have 
realised there was nothing. Gradually they would have found that 
the defectors' information was not reliable." 

Mr Blix added: "Inspection proved its value. We were independent 
and therefore did have legitimacy". 

So too did the security council, he added, referring to Mr 
Blair's remark that the UN's top body should represent "21st 
century reality". Did the prime minister mean he wanted the 
security council to be more "trigger happy", asked Mr Blix. 

He said he agreed in principle with the British proposal to send 
Saddam an ultimatum with a number of "benchmarks" he had to 
satisfy. However, he asked, how were the Iraqis able "prove a 
negative" - proving they had not got weapons the US and UK said 
they had? 

Prewar wrangling in the UN collapsed not over the principle of 
benchmarks but because Britain and the US reserved the right to 
judge for themselves whether they had been fulfilled, said Mr 
Blix. Other countries, notably France, had no faith in that, Mr 
Blix told the Guardian. 

He said that it seemed President George Bush had decided to go to 
war once 300,000 troops were amassed in the Gulf and the hot 
season was approaching. 

Mr Blair yesterday said he was not prepared, before he decided to 
go to war, to take a "risk" with Saddam. It is unlikely that the 
US congress or the British parliament would have accepted that as 
a reason to invade Iraq, Mr Blix said.
	
Guardian Newspapers Limited
*****************************************************************
 7 Las Vegas SUN: Iraqi Defector Blames CIA Over Weapons

Today: March 07, 2004 at 4:07:37 PST 
 
ASSOCIATED PRESS 

WASHINGTON (AP) - 

Even though the CIA continually questioned the credibility of
Iraqi defectors, the Bush administration largely used
information from them to build a case for invading Iraq, says
the man who led many of the defectors to the CIA. 

Ahmad Chalabi, a member of the Iraqi Governing Council, said he
is being unfairly attacked for the failure to find weapons of
mass destruction in Iraq and wants to testify in an open session
of the Senate Intelligence Committee to make his case. 

"Intelligence people who are supposed to do a better job for
their country and their government did not do such a good job,"
Chalabi said in an interview to be telecast Sunday on CBS' "60
Minutes." The program made his comments available to The
Associated Press on Saturday. 

As President Saddam Hussein's government fell in Baghdad, the
Pentagon flew Chalabi into the country from exile. He heads the
Iraqi National Congress, an anti-Saddam exile group that the
administration expected to be a major player in postwar Iraq. 

In the CBS interview, Chalabi said he still expects illegal
weapons to be found, despite the failure of two sets of
inspectors and scores of thousands of U.S., British and other
troops to find them. 

Based largely on information from defectors supplied by Chalabi,
the Bush administration said Saddam had to be brought down
because of huge supplies of chemical and biological weapons and
elements of a nuclear-weapons program that he had. 

Chalabi blamed the CIA in the interview for the lack of weapons
so far. 

"This is a ridiculous situation. Every story that comes out in
the press says: `Defectors have an ax to grind, don't believe
them.' ... Before the war, they kept saying that, ... so why did
the CIA believe them so much?" Chalabi asked. 

CIA officials were skeptical, he said: "Now you're telling me
that despite all this public evidence, the United States
government took our word without checking out the people?" 

One example was Khidhir Hamza, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist
who defected in 1994 and wrote a memoir titled "Saddam's
Bombmaker." During dozens of media appearances, articles and
testimony before Congress in the past two years, he claimed Iraq
was actively trying to build an atomic bomb. 

Like prewar claims made by other defectors, Hamza's were not
borne out by the evidence. 

-- 


 
*****************************************************************
 8 Las Vegas SUN: Iran Says U.N. Should Wrap Up Nuke Review

Today: March 07, 2004 at 3:40:35 PST 

 By ALI AKBAR DAREINI ASSOCIATED PRESS 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran has taken steps toward reassuring the
world its nuclear program is peaceful and wants the U.N. atomic
watchdog agency to finish its review, Iran's top nuclear
negotiator said Sunday. 

Hasan Rowhani made his comments a day before the International
Atomic Energy Agency is scheduled to discuss Iran's nuclear
program. 

"We have two goals ahead of us that we must achieve - one is
ending Iran's nuclear dossier with the IAEA board of governors.
Iran's dossier has to be completely taken out of the IAEA board
of governors' agenda," Rowhani told a meeting of the Experts
Assembly, the body that advises the supreme leader, Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei. 

The other goal, he said, is to have Iran recognized globally as
a nuclear country. 

Rowhani, who also chairs the Supreme National Security Council,
did not say when the review should be closed and did not
threaten to end Iran's cooperation with the IAEA. 

"We took steps toward confidence-building," he said. "We believe
it is a world of give and take." 

Rowhani also reiterated suggestions that Iran likely will resume
its uranium enrichment program. Iran temporarily stopped its
enrichment program last year to signal its intent to cooperate
with the IAEA and signed an additional protocol to the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty allowing unfettered IAEA inspections of
its nuclear sites. 

"There is nothing permanent. We signed the additional protocol
... and when to resume is in the hands of our system (the ruling
Islamic establishment)," Rowhani said. 

"We want Iran to be recognized as a member of the nuclear club
... This is very difficult for the world to accept." 

An enrichment program also would be necessary for producing
nuclear weapons, which Iran repeatedly has said is not its
intent. The United States maintains Iran is seeking to develop
nuclear weapons and has been seeking a declaration that Iran is
in breach of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. 

Tehran says its nuclear program is entirely peaceful and aimed
at generating electrical power. 

IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said recently that Iran's relations
with the U.N. agency had improved considerably over the past
year, despite IAEA inspectors' discoveries of traces of
radioactive elements and advanced equipment in Iran that could
be used to make atomic weapons. 

ElBaradei, however, has refused to speculate on how the IAEA's
board might react when it convenes in Vienna, Austria, on Monday
to discuss Iran's nuclear program. 

Iran is hoping a positive declaration from the agency could put
the matter to rest and lead to the resumption of trade talks
with the European Union. 

-- 


 
*****************************************************************
 9 Washington Times: Iran's nuclear menace
 
  March 07, 2004 			   
 
LONDON. 
 
The myth of protection offered by global antiproliferation
regimes  including the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Fissile Materials Cutoff
Treaty  was shattered last month when investigators for the
International Atomic Energy Agency began unraveling a
clandestine nuclear black market network run by a Pakistani
metallurgist, Abdul Qadeer Khan. 
 
Iran, Libya and North Korea were primary recipients of
Pakistan's nuclear technology. Other countries and terrorist
groups may yet be exposed as clients of Mr. Khan's network. 
 
But nowhere has the damage done by Mr. Khan's illicit
activities been more apparent than in Iran, where sham elections
two weekends ago returned hard-liners to power, and where now
the real possibility exists of nuclear tests being conducted
without political opposition. 
 
Iran's mullahs have longed for nuclear bombs since coming to
power in 1980. Their pacifying statements and superficial
compliance with IAEA inspection teams are masking an unrelenting
drive to buy time for their scientists to complete work on the
first Shi'ite Islamic bomb. 
 
There is not a minute to waste in stopping them. With
centrifuge technology far more advanced than previously
believed, Iran's scientists have been frantically working away
on obtaining critical bomb fuel with as many as three separate
programs. The first employs the P-1 centrifuges transferred by
Mr. Khan's network, as well as the far more sophisticated P-2
centrifuges recently revealed to be in Iran's possession. 
 
The second track makes use of Belarus-Russian filtering and
high-temperature melting technologies for uranium enrichment.
These facts were revealed by Ahmad Shirzad, a member of Iran's
Parliament representing Isfahan, in late 2003 as he passionately
argued Iran's children were starving while the mullahs processed
uranium at secret underground facilities near Parchin (southeast
of Tehran) and in the mountains between Qazvin and Karaj
(northwest of Tehran). 
 
The third program, in its early stages of development, uses
Chinese chemical separation formulas to separate plutonium from
Russian-supplied spent uranium fuel rods. Add to these three
parallel enrichment programs recently uncovered evidence Tehran
possesses Polonium, a key catalyst for fissionable reactions, as
well as blueprints to build Chinese-style implosion nuclear
devices and that the mullahs are hosting a large contingent of
Georgian atomic scientists (first revealed by deposed President
Eduard Shevardnadze late last year) and it becomes difficult to
believe Iran's nuclear program is for "peaceful purposes only." 
 
Strong measures are needed urgently to deal with the growing
threat posed by rogue nations and nonstate actors to deal with
the proliferation of radiological materials, or worse, when
combined with sophisticated plastic explosives  miniaturized
"dirty" bombs. 
 
We should start immediately by pressuring Pakistan, where
all this started, to provide a fuller picture of Tehran's
current nuclear capabilities. 
 
CIA Director George Tenet's recent secret visit to Pakistan,
reported in the press last week, to begin applying such pressure
was a good start. We can only hope his interrogation of Mr. Khan
filled in important blanks about who exactly bought what from
Pakistan's brazenly glitzy nuclear brochures. 
 
Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf had promised complete
transparency when his scientists were caught red-handed in their
nuclear mischief. He has good reason to comply with U.S.
requests to smoke out the Iranian program because ironically, it
was Iran's mullahs who first revealed the extent of Mr. Khan's
illegal transfers to IAEA inspectors. 
 
Mr. Tenet and others in the business of preventing
proliferation need to urgently find out from Pakistan whether
other vital components for building atomic weapons (detonation
switches, spherical bomb casings, simulators to model implosion
data, testing software, etc) also were transferred by Mr. Khan's
network to Iran's scientists. 
 
The Pakistani data, if made fully available, would enable
U.S. diplomats, including Secretary of State Colin Powell, to
demand intrusive inspections in Iran of the type Col. Moammar
Gadhafi was forced to accept when faced with undeniable evidence
of Libya's nuclear guilt last December. It could also empower
the U.S. to build a coalition of nations to bring sufficient
diplomatic, economic and military pressure to bear upon Tehran's
mullahs to totally dismantle their nuclear program. 
 
The Powell doctrine of endlessly negotiating and maneuvering
with Iran's clerics is a recipe for nuclear disaster. He
approved the January visit of Iran's ambassador to the United
Nations to speak at a Washington think-tank. 
 
He encouraged Britain's Prince Charles to make a goodwill
visit to Tehran and Bam, the earthquake site. He has thus far
futilely negotiated for the hand-over of senior al Qaeda
operatives hiding in Iran or being sent back into Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, the atomic clock keeps on ticking. 
 
To prevent Iran's ascension into the nuclear club, each of
the important countries in a joint U.S.-European-led diplomatic
coalition could freeze select Iranian government assets as an
insurance policy against potential nuclear tests until
dismantling was agreed to and completed. 
 
European Union states could quietly pressure Tehran with
economic and trade sanctions, as perhaps Germany did in December
when its citizens were kidnapped in Iran and later freed. At the
first indication any atomic bomb tests were beyond initial
planning stages, the U.S. could move the A2 carrier battle group
into the Persian Gulf. 
 
To ensure the mullahs understand how near the end of their
nuclear vision might be, visibly positioning several B-2 stealth
bombers in Qatar might also send a clear message. 
 
Iran is on the verge of becoming perhaps the world's most
dangerous nuclear state, one capable of proliferating without
regard for international agreements and standards of state
behavior. This is precisely what Mr. Khan had in mind when he
first envisioned the metastasis of his nuclear cancer 
contaminate one cell and let others infect the rest. 
 
The disarray and confusion over Iran policy in Washington,
Paris, London and Berlin must not allow nuclear tests to take
place that could forever change the course of history. 
 

 
Mansoor Ijaz, a nuclear scientist, is chairman of Crescent
Investment Management in New York; his father was an early
pioneer in Pakistan's nuclear program. Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney
(U.S. Air Force retired) was Air Force assistant vice chief of
staff. 
 

 
*****************************************************************
 10 BBC: Iran seeks nuclear file closure 
 
  Last Updated: Sunday, 7 March, 2004
 
[Hassan Rowhani]                                
Rowhani made two demands of the IAEA                                                            

A senior Iranian official has urged the UN's atomic watchdog to 
close its files on the country's nuclear programme, and accept 
that it is peaceful. 

Hassan Rowhani, the head of Iran's Supreme National Security 
Council, said the international community must recognise Iran as 
a nuclear country. 

He said Iran had an inalienable right to continue its nuclear 
programme, which had been shown to be peaceful. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency is due to discuss Iran on 
Monday. 

The Tehran government is hoping that the IAEA's Vienna meeting 
will further improve the country's standing with the agency, and 
in turn boost hopes of trade talks with the European Union. 

Last week, IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei spoke of a "sea change" 
in relations with Iran. 

"We are clearly moving in the right direction," he said. 

Nuclear club

Mr Rowhani did not give any time frame by which he hoped the IAEA 
would close its file on Iran, but he indicated it should happen 
soon. 

[Iran's Bushehr nuclear plant under construction] 
Iran says the world must accept its nuclear status                                                
		
"We took steps toward confidence-building. ... We believe it is a 
world of give and take," he said. 

But he stressed the world should accept that Iran was a nuclear 
power. 

"That means Iran be recognised as a country having the nuclear 
fuel cycle, and enriching uranium," said Mr Rowhani. 

The IAEA halted its enrichment programme last year, but Mr 
Rowhani reminded the international community that this move was 
only temporary. 

"When to resume is in the hands of our system," he said. 
*****************************************************************
 11 Kashmir Telegraph: Iran Admits Nuclear Program Successful
 
l March 2004 l     
The Kashmir Bachao Andolan Publication     
l Vol 3, No 10 l   
  
S T A T E C R A F T   
  
 Gary Fitleberg 

Iran has finally admitted having achieved "big success" in 
nuclear fuel technology, saying the covert program revealed a day 
earlier by diplomats in Vienna was a means to meet the nation's 
energy requirements.
 
But Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi refused to 
acknowledge that inspectors from the International Atomic Energy 
Agency (IAEA) have discovered drawings of equipment that can be 
used to make weapons-grade uranium.
 
"The Islamic Republic of Iran has achieved a big success in the 
field of nuclear fuel cycle technology," Asefi said in a 
statement.
 
"Due to sanctions imposed by the U.S. in the past 25 years that 
has created problems for inaugurating the Bushehr nuclear 
reactor, the Islamic Republic of Iran was forced to expand its 
capability in the field of nuclear energy in order to achieve 
self-sufficiency and meet its energy requirements in the next 
decades," the statement said.
 
Diplomats in Vienna said that UN inspectors sifting through 
Iran's nuclear files have discovered drawings of high-tech 
equipment that can be used to make weapons-grade uranium - a new 
link to the black market headed by the father of Pakistan's 
atomic bomb.
 
Beyond adding another piece to the puzzle of who provided what in 
the clandestine supply chain headed by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the 
revelations cast fresh doubt on Iran's commitment to dispelling 
suspicions that it is trying to make atomic arms.
 
The diplomats, who spoke Thursday on condition of anonymity, said 
the designs were of a P-2 centrifuge - more advanced than the P-1 
model Iran has acknowledged using to enrich uranium for what it 
says are peaceful purposes.
 
Preliminary investigations by the inspectors working for the IAEA 
indicated they matched drawings of equipment found in Libya and 
supplied by Khan's network, the diplomat said.
 
The diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Iran did 
not volunteer the designs - despite pledging last year to replace 
nearly two decades of secrecy with full openness about all 
aspects of its nuclear activities. Instead, they said, IAEA 
inspectors had to dig for them.
 
The diplomats emphasized that - despite calling into question 
Iran's pledge to be fully open - the find did not advance 
suspicions that Iran was trying to make nuclear weapons.
 
Iran has denied having nuclear ambitions. It signed an additional 
protocol to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to end nearly 
two decades of nuclear secrecy late last year but only under 
intense international pressure generated by the discovery of its 
secret enrichment program.
 
"We do not have anything to hide and we are ready to be inspected 
more [seriously] by IAEA inspectors," Iranian Foreign Minister 
Kamal Kharrazi told reporters Friday on the sidelines of a Rome 
conference celebrating 50 years of Vatican-Iranian relations.
 
"There may be questions by IAEA inspectors but we are ready to 
verify those, and what has been achieved altogether up until now 
is out of our cooperation with IAEA," Kharrazi said in English 
when asked about the discovery of the drawings. "As long as we 
are ready to continue our cooperation, all outstanding questions 
will be verified."
 
SUPPORT Kashmir Telegraph: Place your classified ads HERE. It 
pays to advertise in Kashmir Telegraph!   
  
To advertise, email to: romeet@dailypioneer.com or call + (91)
98233 81216  

Copyright © 2002-2003 Shyam Lal Watt Foundation 
*****************************************************************
 12 AF: Lack of trust prevents resolution of N.Korean nuclear crisis
Chinese FM

WAR.WIRE

BEIJING (AFP) Mar 06, 2004

 The North Korean nuclear crisis will not be easily resolved 
because the United States and North Korea lack trust, China's 
foreign minister Li Zhaoxing said Saturday.

"The two parties who play the most important role in this issue 
lack mutual trust between themselves," Li said in Beijing.

He said Russia and the United States "should also play a 
constructive role in this process."

The second round of six-nation talks to resolve the 16-month 
standoff ended in Beijing last month with little significant 
progress, other than an agreement to meet again before the end of 
June.

  WAR.WIRE
  
*****************************************************************
 13 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Kerry Will Oppose N Korean Nukes   
 
      Updated Mar.7,2004 18:57 KST   
 
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- John Kerry, the presumptive U.S. Democratic 
presidential candidate, said in an interview with The New York 
Times on Saturday that he would do everything in his power to 
prevent North Korea and other countries from possessing nuclear 
weapons. He also warned during the interview that North Korea 
"should never doubt the resolve of the United States to be 
serious about proliferation." 

Kerry asserted during the interview that the reason the Bush 
administration reversed course on the North Korean nuclear issue 
and chose to go to war with Iraq was because "it could be done," 
while North Korea was "less there for the doing." He said the 
Bush administration knew that in a war with North Korea, more 
than one million casualties would be sustained during the first 8 
hours, unlike the war with Iraq. 

Kerry also stressed the importance of China in solving the North 
Korea¡¯s nuclear and other issues, but emphasized that the US 
should not avoid bilateral negotiations with North Korea. He said 
that the Bush administration used the participation of South 
Korea, China, and Japan as an excuse to get back to the 
negotiating table, but had no intention to engage in substantive 
discussions. Kerry also stated that "Powell personally announced 
they were going to continue. The neo-cons at the White House 
pulled it out from under him in a two-day period and left him 
stranded, and left Kim Dae Jung stranded. It was disgraceful." 

(Kang In-sun, insun@chosun.com ) 

*****************************************************************
 14 NYT: U.S. Lags in Recovering Fuel Suitable for Nuclear Arms
 
 By JOEL BRINKLEY and WILLIAM J. BROAD

Published: March 7, 2004

[W] ASHINGTON, March 6 — As the United States presses Iran and 
other countries to shut down their nuclear weapons development 
programs, government auditors have disclosed that the United 
States is making little effort to recover large quantities of 
weapons-grade uranium — enough to make roughly 1,000 nuclear 
bombs — that the government dispersed to 43 countries over the 
last several decades.

Among the countries that received the highly enriched uranium, 
generally with the expectation that it would be returned, were 
Iran and Pakistan. The chief nuclear weapons expert in Pakistan 
recently made the stunning disclosure that his network had 
secretly sold uranium and nuclear technology to Libya, Iran and 
North Korea.

 The auditors said they found that "large quantities of 
U.S.-produced highly enriched uranium were out of U.S. control."

 The bomb-grade uranium was loaned, leased or sold to dozens of 
countries starting in the 1950's under the Eisenhower 
administration's Atoms for Peace program, which was intended to 
help other countries develop nuclear energy facilities or pursue 
scientific or medical initiatives. The dispersals continued until 
1988. But the government's effort to recover the uranium, either 
in the form in which it was delivered or as spent fuel, was 
lackadaisical, the report suggests.

 In the last 50 years, the report says, the government has 
recovered approximately 2,600 kilograms (about 5,700 pounds) of 
17,500 kilograms dispersed, leaving almost 15,000 kilograms still 
in foreign hands. That remains true even as the Bush 
administration warns that Al Qaeda and possibly other terrorist 
organizations are trying to obtain nuclear materials to make a 
bomb.

 In general, it takes about 10 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium 
to make a bomb.

 Nuclear weapons experts say most of the exported uranium was 
weapons grade, and Thomas B. Cochran, a senior scientist at the 
Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington, estimated that 
the exported uranium material could make "about a thousand 
nuclear" weapons.

 "It could be hundreds if the design was unsophisticated, or 
thousands if it was more advanced," he added.

 Much of the uranium is in the hands of Western European or other 
allied nations, officials said. But the report, by the Energy 
Department's inspector general, says that about half of the 
uranium is in the hands of government agencies, universities or 
private companies in 12 countries that are "not expected to 
participate in the program" to return it. Among those countries 
are Iran, Pakistan, Israel, Mexico, Jamaica and South Africa. 
Reasons for declining to return the material vary; some of the 
uranium, for example, is in use at research universities that are 
loath to give it up.

 Some of the report's findings were first reported in The Wall 
Street Journal on Feb. 13.

 The Energy Department is in charge of recovering the uranium, 
but the effort is housed in the department's Environmental 
Management Program, an office that has been the subject of many 
stinging audits and self-evaluations in recent years that have 
criticized it as inefficient. The recovery program was placed 
there in 1996 because that office seemed best suited to manage 
the safe transport of any nuclear material that was returned, a 
senior department official said.

 The failure to recover most of the uranium "shows a complete 
loss of perspective," said Steven Aftergood, a security expert at 
the Federation of American Scientists, an arms control group in 
Washington. "The failure to vigorously pursue it is a scandal. 
Few things are more important than this. It's a serious matter 
that has not been taken seriously."

 Jeanne Lopatto, a spokeswoman for the Energy Department, said: 
"We agree with the findings of the I.G. report, none of which 
came as a surprise to us. In fact, long before the report came 
out, a working group" within the department "was studying the 
program and making recommendations for improvement. Our plan is 
in place to make this a more effective nonproliferation program."

 The senior official said the Energy Department impaneled a 
working group last fall to address the problems. At that time, 
the inspector general had finished his investigation but had not 
published his report. It was issued Feb. 9. The working group 
recommended that the recovery program be taken out of the 
environmental office and put in another office more directly 
involved with nuclear proliferation problems, the official said.

 Jon Wolfsthal, who ran the recovery program from 1995 to 1997, 
said one important reason so little uranium had been returned was 
that "we are charging these countries $5,000 a kilogram to get it 
back." The fee structure was set in 1996, to help pay for the 
program, he added.

 The senior official said the department was likely to begin 
waiving the fee in many cases and offering other incentives he 
would not specify to encourage countries to return the uranium. 
He declined to be identified, Ms. Lopatto said, because that is 
what department policy requires.

 The department's inspector general issued a similar report in 
2002, saying the Energy Department had not made sufficient effort 
to recover nuclear fuel rods dispersed to other nations under the 
Atoms for Peace program. Those rods contained far smaller 
quantities of uranium, generally not enough to make a bomb. 

Joel Brinkley reported from Washington for this article and 
William J. Broad from New York.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company | Home|
*****************************************************************
 15 WorldNetDaily: Bush wrong on nuke treaty 'fix'
 
 MARCH 6 2004           
                            
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com 

The new strategy President Bush announced a couple of weeks ago 
for preventing nuke proliferation involved making changes to the 
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty – such as treating gas 
centrifuges as if they were nukes – that are unlikely to be made. 
But he also suggested changes in the way the Nuclear Suppliers 
Group does business. 

Here is the way the president stated the problem and its 
solution. 

Under this treaty, nuclear states agreed to help non-nuclear 
states develop peaceful atomic energy if they renounce the 
pursuit of nuclear weapons. But the treaty has a loophole, which 
has been exploited by nations such as North Korea and Iran. 

These regimes are allowed to produce nuclear material that can be 
used to build bombs under the cover of civilian nuclear programs. 
So today as a first step, I propose a way to close the loophole. 

The world must create a safe, orderly system to field civilian 
nuclear plants without adding to the danger of weapons 
proliferation. The world's leading nuclear exporters should 
ensure the states have reliable access at reasonable cost to fuel 
for civilian reactors, so long as those states renounce 
enrichment and reprocessing. 

Enrichment and reprocessing are not necessary for nations seeking 
to harness nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. 

The 40 nations of the Nuclear Suppliers Group should refuse to 
sell enrichment and reprocessing equipment and technologies to 
any state that does not already possess full-scale, functioning 
enrichment and reprocessing plants. 

Now, the president is wrong when he says there's a "loophole" in 
the NPT. That "loophole" – Article VI – guarantees the right of 
any NPT signatory to acquire – for peaceful purposes – all 
available nuclear technology and obligates any NPT signatory that 
can provide it to do so. Article VI is the principal reason about 
175 nation-states signed the NPT and have – by and large – 
adhered to it. 

He is also wrong when he says that NPT signatories are "allowed" 
to produce nuclear material that can be used to build bombs. They 
aren't. All facilities that could produce nuke materials must be 
subject to an International Atomic Energy Agency Safeguards 
agreement and are continuously monitored to ensure that such 
materials are not produced and/or diverted. 

But what's this Nuclear Suppliers Group? 

The NSG was created because the 1974 test by India – not then, or 
now, an NPT signatory – of a nuclear device demonstrated that 
"NPT-covered" items, transferred for peaceful purposes to non-NPT 
signatories, could be misused. 

Then, in the aftermath of the Gulf War, it became clear that 
there were dual-use technologies – not covered by the NPT – that 
could be misused, even by NPT signatories, such as Iraq. 

NSG "Guidelines for Nuclear Transfer" have long required the 
acceptance by the recipient state, whether NPT signatory or not, 
of IAEA Safeguards on certain imported items. For example, there 
are facilities in Pakistan – not an NPT signatory – that have 
long been subject to IAEA Safeguards. 

But now, NSG guidelines require the recipient state to subject 
all "NPT-covered" items in all its nuclear activities to IAEA 
Safeguards, not just the items being imported. So if Israel – not 
a NPT signatory – were to import NPT-covered items from any of 
the 40 NSG members, that member would require that most of the 
Israeli nuclear establishment – including the Israeli nuke 
stockpile – be made subject to an IAEA Safeguards agreement. 

In addition to those guidelines, the NSG has recently established 
– as a consequence of the discoveries made in Iraq by the IAEA – 
"Guidelines for Transfers of Nuclear-Related Dual-Use Equipment, 
Material and Related Technology." If there is any question as to 
what use the dual-use equipment will be put, the NSG exporter may 
require that equipment to be made subject to an IAEA Safeguards 
agreement. 

President Bush's proposal goes much further than requiring 
"NPT-covered" imports to be subject to an IAEA Safeguards 
agreement. He wants NSG members to sometimes refuse to sell 
"NPT-covered" items at all. 

Of course, the NSG is a voluntary organization, and the NSG 
guidelines are just that – guidelines. There is not even a 
requirement that NSG members be NPT signatories. Pakistan, for 
example, would not have to become an NPT signatory to join the 
NSG. And get this – Pakistan wants to join! 

Now, President Bush obviously doesn't trust the IAEA to do its 
job: preventing nuke proliferation. In Iraq, in Iran, in North 
Korea and in Libya. 

But would he rather trust Pakistan – as a new member of the 
Nuclear Suppliers Group – to refuse to sell "NPT-covered" items 
to North Korea?
 
Physicist James Gordon Prather has served as a policy 
implementing official for national security-related technical 
matters in the Federal Energy Agency, the Energy Research and 
Development Administration, the Department of Energy, the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense and the Department of the Army. Dr. 
Prather also served as legislative assistant for national 
security affairs to U.S. Sen. Henry Bellmon, R-Okla. -- ranking 
member of the Senate Budget Committee and member of the Senate 
Energy Committee and Appropriations Committee. Dr. Prather had 
earlier worked as a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence 
Livermore National Laboratory in California and Sandia National 
Laboratory in New Mexico. 


[WorldNetDaily.com] 
*****************************************************************
 16 Nigerian Nuke Weapons? US Missing Enough HEU For Potentially Thousands Of N-Weapons
 
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 01:34:35 -0500

 


 Nuclear winter is best argument for nuclear
abolition:
  http://www.mothersalert.org/nuclearwinter.html
  http://www.mothersalert.org/nuclearwinter2.html


1. U.S. Lags in Recovering Fuel Suitable for
Nuclear Arms
2. Nigeria Denies Nuclear Ambitions
3.Pakistan Official Offers Aid to Nigeria


The bomb-grade uranium was loaned, leased or sold
to dozens of countries starting in the 1950's
under the Eisenhower administration's Atoms for
Peace program


Nuclear weapons experts say most of the exported
uranium was weapons grade, and Thomas B. Cochran,
a senior scientist at the Natural Resources
Defense Council in Washington, estimated that the
exported uranium material could make "about a
thousand nuclear" weapons.

"It could be hundreds if the design was
unsophisticated, or thousands if it was more
advanced," he added.

1.
  http://www.nytimes.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/07/international/worldspecial2/07NUKE.html

U.S. Lags in Recovering Fuel Suitable for Nuclear
Arms
By JOEL BRINKLEY and WILLIAM J. BROAD

Published: March 7, 2004


ASHINGTON, March 6 - As the United States presses
Iran and other countries to shut down their
nuclear weapons development programs, government
auditors have disclosed that the United States is
making little effort to recover large quantities
of weapons-grade uranium - enough to make roughly
1,000 nuclear bombs - that the government
dispersed to 43 countries over the last several
decades.

     Advertisement


Among the countries that received the highly
enriched uranium, generally with the expectation
that it would be returned, were Iran and Pakistan.
The chief nuclear weapons expert in Pakistan
recently made the stunning disclosure that his
network had secretly sold uranium and nuclear
technology to Libya, Iran and North Korea.

The auditors said they found that "large
quantities of U.S.-produced highly enriched
uranium were out of U.S. control."

The bomb-grade uranium was loaned, leased or sold
to dozens of countries starting in the 1950's
under the Eisenhower administration's Atoms for
Peace program, which was intended to help other
countries develop nuclear energy facilities or
pursue scientific or medical initiatives. The
dispersals continued until 1988. But the
government's effort to recover the uranium, either
in the form in which it was delivered or as spent
fuel, was lackadaisical, the report suggests.

In the last 50 years, the report says, the
government has recovered approximately 2,600
kilograms (about 5,700 pounds) of 17,500 kilograms
dispersed, leaving almost 15,000 kilograms still
in foreign hands. That remains true even as the
Bush administration warns that Al Qaeda and
possibly other terrorist organizations are trying
to obtain nuclear materials to make a bomb.

In general, it takes about 10 kilograms of
weapons-grade uranium to make a bomb.

Nuclear weapons experts say most of the exported
uranium was weapons grade, and Thomas B. Cochran,
a senior scientist at the Natural Resources
Defense Council in Washington, estimated that the
exported uranium material could make "about a
thousand nuclear" weapons.

"It could be hundreds if the design was
unsophisticated, or thousands if it was more
advanced," he added.

Much of the uranium is in the hands of Western
European or other allied nations, officials said.
But the report, by the Energy Department's
inspector general, says that about half of the
uranium is in the hands of government agencies,
universities or private companies in 12 countries
that are "not expected to participate in the
program" to return it. Among those countries are
Iran, Pakistan, Israel, Mexico, Jamaica and South
Africa. Reasons for declining to return the
material vary; some of the uranium, for example,
is in use at research universities that are loath
to give it up.

Some of the report's findings were first reported
in The Wall Street Journal on Feb. 13.

The Energy Department is in charge of recovering
the uranium, but the effort is housed in the
department's Environmental Management Program, an
office that has been the subject of many stinging
audits and self-evaluations in recent years that
have criticized it as inefficient. The recovery
program was placed there in 1996 because that
office seemed best suited to manage the safe
transport of any nuclear material that was
returned, a senior department official said.

The failure to recover most of the uranium "shows
a complete loss of perspective," said Steven
Aftergood, a security expert at the Federation of
American Scientists, an arms control group in
Washington. "The failure to vigorously pursue it
is a scandal. Few things are more important than
this. It's a serious matter that has not been
taken seriously."

Jeanne Lopatto, a spokeswoman for the Energy
Department, said: "We agree with the findings of
the I.G. report, none of which came as a surprise
to us. In fact, long before the report came out, a
working group" within the department "was studying
the program and making recommendations for
improvement. Our plan is in place to make this a
more effective nonproliferation program."

The senior official said the Energy Department
impaneled a working group last fall to address the
problems. At that time, the inspector general had
finished his investigation but had not published
his report. It was issued Feb. 9. The working
group recommended that the recovery program be
taken out of the environmental office and put in
another office more directly involved with nuclear
proliferation problems, the official said.

Jon Wolfsthal, who ran the recovery program from
1995 to 1997, said one important reason so little
uranium had been returned was that "we are
charging these countries $5,000 a kilogram to get
it back." The fee structure was set in 1996, to
help pay for the program, he added.

The senior official said the department was likely
to begin waiving the fee in many cases and
offering other incentives he would not specify to
encourage countries to return the uranium. He
declined to be identified, Ms. Lopatto said,
because that is what department policy requires.

The department's inspector general issued a
similar report in 2002, saying the Energy
Department had not made sufficient effort to
recover nuclear fuel rods dispersed to other
nations under the Atoms for Peace program. Those
rods contained far smaller quantities of uranium,
generally not enough to make a bomb.


Joel Brinkley reported from Washington for this
article and William J. Broad from New York.






2.

  http://www.guardian.co.uk

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-3826652,00.html
  Nigeria Denies Nuclear Ambitions

Friday March 5, 2004 9:16 PM


By DULUE MBACHU

Associated Press Writer

LAGOS, Nigeria (AP) - The Nigerian government
denied Friday that it ever sought atomic weapons,
distancing itself from earlier statements that
suggested its military wanted to develop nuclear
capability.

Friday's denial, coupled with the other claims,
left experts unsure if the African powerhouse was
trying to mask its nuclear ambitions, or if it was
guilty only of government bungling.

The Nigerian vice president's office said five
weeks ago that a visiting North Korean delegation
had offered the country missile technology. On
Wednesday, the Defense Ministry cited a top
Pakistani official as saying Pakistan was trying
to decide how to help the Nigerian military
``strengthen its military capability and to
acquire nuclear power.''

But the same Nigerian Defense Ministry spokesman
who made the claim about the North Korean offer
later retracted the statement. And on Thursday,
Nwachukwu Bellu, the Nigerian Defense Ministry
official who signed the statement about Pakistan's
supposed offer, called the document a ``mistake.''

Pakistan also denied that its official - Joint
Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mohammad Aziz Kahn - made any
such offer in a visit Wednesday.

Another denial came Friday, from President
Olusegun Obasanjo's spokeswoman, Remi Oyo.

``Nigeria is not seeking any deal with any country
as regards acquiring nuclear weapons,'' Oyo told
The Associated Press. ``We're surrounded by
friendly nations,''

She dismissed the government's controversial
statements as ``something that went awry.''

U.S. officials and international analysts wonder
if Nigeria - Africa's most populous nation with
126 million people - is privately angling to
become the world's latest nuclear power or
posturing for overseas aid or influence in return
for abandoning such ambitions.

``It was an extraordinary statement. I wonder how
it could have been issued in error,'' said Susan
Rice, former Assistant Secretary of State for
African Affairs under President Clinton.

Rice, a senior fellow at Washington's Brookings
Institution, warned that Nigeria's history of
military takeovers made it an unstable place for
nuclear technology.

Nigeria is not entirely nuclear-free, but the U.N.
nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy
Agency, says a reactor it does have is for
research purposes.

``They are inspected regularly by the IAEA to
ensure they are not put to any other uses other
than what they're meant for,'' IAEA spokesman Mark
Gwozdecky said.

In a document published by the Vienna-based
International Atomic Energy Council, the Energy
Commission of Nigeria appealed last September to
the IAEA for ``nuclear fuel'' to operate a
``miniature neutron source reactor.'' Commission
director-general I.H. Umar was cited as saying it
was built for Nigeria in March 1999 by China's
Nuclear Energy Industry Corporation.

Umar declined to comment when reached by
telephone.

According to the IAEA document, the international
body initially disallowed shipments of nuclear
fuel to fuel the Nigerian reactor ``due to the
absence of a sufficient nuclear regulatory
framework in Nigeria.''

Gwozdecky said the Nigerian facility is ``under
our safeguards.''

Air Force Gen. Charles Wald, deputy commander of
U.S. forces at the U.S. European Command in
Stuttgart, Germany, said he was unaware if Nigeria
had such aspirations.

Remi Oyewumi, a Nigerian political analyst in the
capital, Abuja, suggested Nigeria's government may
want nuclear weapons because they ``confer
prestige, no doubt, and Nigeria is also known for
wanting prestigious things.''

Even a corrected statement issued by Nigeria's
Defense Ministry on Thursday cited the nation's
chief of defense staff, Gen. Alexander Ogomudia,
as praising Pakistan's nuclear program for lifting
the country from its status as a ``developing
nation.''

``General Ogomudia stressed that Pakistan was no
longer a developing nation because it had gone
beyond that with its nuclear capability,'' the
defense ministry statement said.

--- 

Associated Press writers Glenn McKenzie in Lagos
and Todd Pitman in Stuttgart, Germany contributed
to this report.







Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited
2004


3.
http://www.nytimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Nigeria-Pakistan.html

Pakistan Official Offers Aid to Nigeria
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: March 4, 2004


Filed at 9:54 a.m. ET

ABUJA, Nigeria (AP) -- Nigeria's Defense Ministry
said Pakistan's top military official offered to
share unspecified assistance with Nigeria's armed
forces, but a Nigerian defense spokesman later
retracted a statement that the offer included
``nuclear power.''

In a late night communique, Nigeria's Defense
Ministry claimed the chairman of Pakistan's joint
chiefs of staff, Gen. Muhammad Aziz Khan, said
during a scheduled visit to Nigeria that Pakistan
``is working out the dynamics of how they can
assist Nigeria's armed forces to strengthen its
military capability and to acquire nuclear
power.''

     Advertisement


However, Nwachukwu Bellu, the Nigerian Defense
Ministry spokesman who signed Wednesday's
statement, told The Associated Press on Thursday
that ``it was a mistake'' for the communique to
have mentioned nuclear power as an area of
possible cooperation.

``It was a mistake,'' Bellu said without further
clarification. When asked whether officials from
the two countries discussed nuclear cooperation at
all, he replied: ``Nothing like that happened.''

He declined further comment. Other Nigerian
officials were not immediately available for
comment.

The statement, issued late Wednesday, did not say
if Pakistan was offering nuclear weapons, or if
Nigeria was seeking them.

Pakistani officials quickly denied the claim.

``This is a baseless story and a conspiracy to
hurt our image,'' Pakistan's information minister,
Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, told The Associated Press
Thursday in Islamabad.

The Pakistani military also issued a statement
that Kahn did not ``offer of Pakistan's assistance
to Nigeria to acquire nuclear power.''

``Pakistan is a responsible nuclear state. It
fully understands its obligation'' toward
non-proliferation, the Pakistani military said.

Pakistan came under significant international
pressure after one of its top nuclear scientists
admitted last month that he sold nuclear
technology to Iran, as well as North Korea and
Libya -- all nations on the U.S. list of terrorism
sponsors.

Less than two months ago, Nigeria announced that
North Korea had agreed to share missile technology
with Nigeria, an offer that was subsequently
denied by North Korea.

Nigeria said any North Korean missile help would
be used for ``peacekeeping'' and to protect its
territory. It said it was not seeking nuclear
technology or weapons of mass destruction.

Under former army dictators, Nigeria's military
was viewed as an international pariah for
ruthlessly suppressing dissent. Involvement in
African peace missions since elections restored
civilian rule in 1999 has helped repair its image
abroad.






*****************************************************************
 17 BBC: Libya ships out last WMD parts 
 
  Last Updated: Sunday, 7 March, 2004
		 		 		 
[Control room of Libya's Tajura Nuclear Reactor research facility]                             
Libya revealed the extent of its nuclear programme late last year                                                                

Libya has sent all its known remaining nuclear weapons-related 
equipment to the US as part of a disarmament deal. 

A ship carrying 500 metric tons of equipment left Libya on 
Saturday for an undisclosed site in the US, White House spokesman 
Sean McCormack said. 

He said long-range missiles and launchers were also part of the 
cargo. 

The move follows Libya's surprise announcement in December that 
it was scrapping its weapons programmes in a bid to end its 
international isolation. 

Secret talks had been held between Muammar Gaddafi's state and 
its old enemies - the US and the UK - and further improvements in 
relations have been made since. 

Rapid change 

The US has announced that talks will begin on Sunday with Libyan 
officials on retraining their weapons scientists. 

[Scud missile with launcher (archive image)] The shipment is said 
to includes Scud missiles and launchers                                                
		
The BBC's Rob Watson in Washington says the shipment is another 
extraordinary twist in the warming relations between the 
once-sworn enemies. 

He adds that both the US and Libya are getting what they want - 
with Libya's isolation ending while Washington can point to the 
rewards on offer for countries ready to abandon their weapons of 
mass destruction. 

In the space of the last week or so, the US has lifted 
restrictions banning Americans from visiting Libya and has given 
permission for a Libyan diplomatic presence in Washington. 

In February, Mohammed Abdulrahman Shalgam became the first Libyan 
foreign minister to visit London since 1969. 

Col Gaddafi told the Washington Post on Saturday that he was 
optimistic about better relations with the US, now that, as he 
put it, they were "able to talk". 

The White House said the final shipment includes: 


+ centrifuge parts used to enrich uranium 


+ all equipment from Libya's former uranium conversion facility 


+ all of Libya's longer-range missiles, including five Scuds, and 
all associated equipment, including launchers. 

Earlier shipments of nuclear weapons-related equipment were taken 
to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, where the 
material is believed to have been destroyed. 

Stockpiles tackled 

Mr McCormack also reported that all of Libya's known chemical 
munitions had been destroyed and its stocks of mustard gas had 
been moved from insecure warehouses to a single, secure, 
facility. 

[Libya's leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi] Gaddafi's December move 
was hailed around the world                                              
		
The US, he said, would work with Libya to "achieve the 
destruction and elimination of the actual agent itself". 

On Friday, Libya declared that it had a 20-ton stockpile of 
mustard gas in a full report on its chemical weapons programmes 
submitted to the UN. 

The Libyans also detailed large amounts of chemicals used to make 
nerve gas. 

The UN hailed the declaration as a major step towards eliminating 
Libya's weapons of mass destruction. 

Most US trade restrictions still remain on Libya but American 
companies are now allowed to prepare for a return to Libya. 

The US decision to ease punitive measures also followed Tripoli's 
clarification that it accepted responsibility for the Lockerbie 
bombing in 1988, over-riding comments by its prime minister who 
denied Libya had had any part in the attack. 

*****************************************************************
 18 FT: Nuclear concerns bring a stream of visitors to Pakistan's door
 
  By Victoria Burnett  
  Published: March 6 2004 4:00 | Last Updated: March 6 2004 4:00
 
As Pakistan's investigation into a smuggling ring that allegedly 
peddled nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea enters its 
fourth month, the world is grappling with new questions about 
Pakistan's ability to contain the leak of deadly know-how and old 
worries about the safety of the country's arsenal. 

The spread of nuclear weapons technology has been on the agenda 
of a stream of high-level visitors, including Jack Straw, the UK 
foreign minister, his French counterpart Domenique de Villepin, 
George Tenet, head of the US Central Intelligence Agency, and 
Stephen Rademaker, US assistant secretary of state for arms 
control.

"Given the situation we have, the imperatives are first that 
there be no onward proliferation, second that [Pakistan] does not 
get into a situation in which it would use the weapons, and third 
that it does not get into a costly and potentially destabilising 
nuclear arms race," said a western diplomat in Islamabad.

Diplomats suspect the government is hoping concern about the 
nuclear issue will be eclipsed by other priorities, such as the 
hunt for al-Qaeda on Pakistan's border with Afghanistan.

"If they think this is going to go away then they are foolish," 
says Pervez Hoodbhoy, a professor of theoretical physics at 
Quaid-e-Azam university in Islamabad. "What if Musharraf is 
assassinated? What if there's a nuclear incident?"

Western officials are keen to increase technical safeguards to 
minimise the risk of an incident in the event that General Pervez 
Musharraf, Pakistan's president, is succeeded by someone less 
level-headed than he or overthrown. These could include gadgets 
that prevent a warhead from being triggered without the correct 
code, similar technology in missiles and aircraft that stops them 
releasing their nuclear load, and better security at 
installations where devices are stored.

But Pakistan's status as a de facto nuclear state that has not 
signed the Non-Proliferation Treaty restricts the help NPT states 
can offer, say analysts and diplomats. NPT countries are barred 
from offering non- NPT states technology that makes bombs safer 
if at the same time it makes them easier to deploy. For example, 
permissive action links, or PALs, prevent unauthorised detonation 
using methods such as codes, but they may also allow storage of 
assembled weapons, meaning they could be deployed more quickly.

Pakistan has raised anew the prospect of revising the NPT to 
include de facto nuclear states. Mr Straw said during a visit to 
Islamabad this week that Britain was giving the issue "a lot of 
thought". Western officials suggest bolting new clauses on to the 
existing treaty rather than renegotiating the pact from scratch.

"A lot of what we can offer is better protection at the bases 
where components are held," says David Albright, president of the 
Institute for Science and International Security in Washington. 
But there are political constraints. Western officials say 
hands-on international supervision would stoke fears among the 
Pakistani public that the proliferation scandal is part of a US 
ploy to take over the country's nuclear arsenal.

One source of reassurance regarding Pakistan's own controls, 
western officials say, is a new command structure that puts the 
rival institutions charged with nuclear development - the Khan 
Research Laboratories (headed until 2001 by Abdul Qadeer Khan) 
and the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission - under the Nuclear 
Command Authority.

Gen Musharraf began overhauling command of Pakistan's nuclear 
assets after he took power in a bloodless coup in 1999, and put 
the final touches to the new regime in December. Under the NCA, 
headed by Gen Musharraf and vice-chaired by Zafarullah Khan 
Jamali, prime minister, distinct units headed by two 
lieutenant-generals are responsible for the nuclear arsenal and 
the body of researchers developing Paksitan's nuclear capability.

The nightmare scenario entertained in some foreign capitals of 
religious militants taking control of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal 
is dismissed by many western diplomats as "science fiction". But 
the proliferation scandal has breathed new life into fears that 
terrorists could obtain nuclear materials, adding to the urgency 
with which western officials wish to stop secrets flowing out of 
Pakistan as well as in.  
     
      © Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2004. "FT" and
"Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. Privacy
*****************************************************************
 19 Daily Times: IAEA may take up nuclear black market tomorrow 

 Monday, March 08, 2004    

LAHORE: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) opens 
several days of meetings on Monday and Iran and Libya will be 
high on the agenda, stated the Voice of America on Saturday.

It said the agency’s board of governors was also expected to 
discuss the nuclear technology network run by Pakistan’s top 
nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan.

“The board of governors will discuss the dangers of nuclear 
proliferation and the global nuclear black market. IAEA 
spokeswoman Melissa Fleming says Iran’s nuclear programme shows 
some striking similarities to the Libyan programme,” it added. 
VoA stated Ms Fleming as saying that the similarities between the 
two programmes were that they seemed to have gotten the designs 
and components for their centrifuge programme from the same 
source. —Daily Times Monitor Home | National           

      and hosted by WorldCALL Internet
*****************************************************************
 20 Hi Pakistan: Powell due for talks on terrorism, N-issue     --> 
 
March 07 2004     
    
ISLAMABAD: US Secretary of State Colin Powell will visit Pakistan 
from March 17 to 18 for talks with President Pervez Musharraf on 
nuclear proliferation and war against terrorism, an official said 
on Friday.

Powell’s visit comes amid a stepped-up hunt for Osama bin Laden 
in border areas between Pakistan and Afghanistan and in the wake 
of US media reports that American forces will be deployed on 
Pakistani soil.

Powell’s visit also comes on the heels of Pakistan’s four-month 
probe into nuclear proliferation by its atomic programme founder 
Abdul Qadeer Khan. Pakistan has said it will share information 
with the international community from its own inquiries but has 
refused to allow an inquiry by international investigators.

Powell’s discussions with Musharraf would focus on nuclear 
non-proliferation, the war against terrorism, and the resumption 
of dialogue between Pakistan and India, the official said.

Meanwhile, Indian officials in New Delhi said Powell would visit 
India on March 15, leading a seven-member delegation. His talks 
will include New Delhi’s peace initiative with Pakistan and 
nuclear non-proliferation.

Powell may also visit Afghanistan later, diplomatic sources said. 
A foreign ministry official said Powell would hold talks with 
Sinha on March 16 and could also meet Prime Minister Atal Behari 
Vajpayee and National Security Adviser Brajesh Mishra.

India would ask Powell to amplify US President George W Bush’s 
seven-point drive announced last month to curb nuclear 
proliferation, the official said. New Delhi will also share with 
Powell its assessment of recent discussions with Pakistan, he 
added.

Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 21 Hi Pakistan: Straw lauds Pak role in war against terror     --> 
 
March 07 2004     
    
PESHAWAR: British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth 
Affairs Jack Straw, during his visit to the provincial metropolis 
on Friday, called on NWFP Governor Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah at 
the Governor’s House.

British High Commissioner in Islamabad Mark Lyall Grant and other 
members of his entourage accompanied him.

During the meeting, issues of significant national and 
international interests also came under discussion.

The governor highlighted the system of administration and 
governance in Fata, besides the customs and traditions of tribal 
areas and said that the government had taken concrete initiatives 
to improve the socio-economic conditions of the people of Fata 
through a massive development programme.

He also referred to the proposed Fata reforms and said that these 
reforms were aimed at improving overall condition in the tribal 
areas.

The governor also explained the circumstances in which the people 
of NWFP and Fata have been hosting millions of Afghan refugees.

The governor also assured the distinguished guest of the 
relentless efforts undertaken by the tribal administrations to 
rid the area of the unwanted elements.

Straw especially lauded the role of Pakistan in the war against 
terror.

He was particularly appreciative of the firm stance of Pakistan 
in collaborating the United States and its allies in condemning 
terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.

The British foreign secretary was also appreciative of the role 
of people of Fata in fighting terrorists and flashing them out of 
their ranks and files.

He also eulogised the role of indigenously formed tribal Lashkars 
by the tribesmen to ensure that the soil of Pakistan is not used 
for any untoward activity by any element.

The British foreign secretary also praised the role of NWFP and 
Fata in hosting Afghan refugees for such a long period and in odd 
circumstances.

The possible support of British Department for International 
Development (DFID) in Fata was also discussed.

The British Department for International Development would 
continue its consultation process with the government for 
developing a programme in health and education sectors.

The governor hoped that the support of British government would 
bring a positive developmental change in the tribal area.

NWFP Minister for Health Inayatullah Khan and other high-ranking 
officials were also present on the occasion.

Later, Jack Straw visited a religious seminary and met the 
students and teachers.

Principal of Jamia Imdadul Uloom-e-Islamia, and former member of 
the National Assembly, Maulana Hassan Jan, received him at the 
seminary.

Straw went round various sections of the school, situated in 
Peshawar Cantonment, and freely mixed with the students and asked 
questions from them about their area of domicile, accommodation 
facility at the school and their future career.

He also visited classrooms and attentively listened to recitation 
of verses from the Holy Qur’aan.

Maulana Atta-ul-Haq, chief of the seminary, briefed him on the 
education system of the school. Straw evinced keen interest in 
curriculum and finances of the school.

He was told that 1,160 students were getting free education at 
the seminary and funds were raised through donations.

The foreign secretary also shared views with Maulana Hassan Jan.

The Maulana told the guest that religious schools were not 
breeding centres of terrorists. "Islam is a religion of peace and 
has nothing to do with terrorism," he added.

Maulana Hassan also presented an English translation of the Holy 
Qur’aan to Straw.

Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 22 Hi Pakistan: The guest from Britain     --> 
 
March 07 2004     
    
The visiting British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has been 
speaking almost on the same subjects, as did his counterpart from 
France at the Foreign Office briefing along with our Foreign 
Minister Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri. The two visits (to a 
lay-analyst like the present one) may not even be interlinked. 
However, it should be no wonder if the subjects are the same.

The guest from Britain did not utter long sentences (many a 
speaker can take a lesson in speaking out the minimum in words 
required to be uttered on such occasions - or is it part of the 
proverbial British understatement?). Maybe to the cynic, his 
occasional cough at the briefing helped him in avoiding some 
answers. However, to be honest, he answered all questions, and 
most of them were no different in substance from what had been 
spoken of by the French foreign minister at the same place a few 
days ago. While our foreign minister correctly underlined that, 
it would be in the interest of the international community that 
it recognized Pakistan, along with India and Israel as nuclear 
weapon states, Jack Straw pointed out that Pakistan was on board 
with regard to efforts on non-proliferation. It may not be out of 
place to mention that nobody has been asking us to sign the 
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The situation has to be 
ultimately, and perhaps, is being grappled with. The mechanics, 
the formula for the "acceptance of the reality" would have to be 
worked out and the world would ultimately have to come out of the 
dilemma as it might be in its own interest to do so in view of 
what is being termed as further proliferation of atomic weapons. 
The decision arising out of the investigation of Pakistani 
scientists was described an internal affair of Pakistan, and 
satisfaction expressed over the progress Pakistani authorities 
were making" and the cooperation given to the IAEA in this 
connection.

Naturally, every one should be satisfied with the Pakistan- India 
dialogue, especially our British friends who have more than 
800,000 Pakistanis there. Straw spoke of Pakistanis in his 
constituency.(Some of the words of Urdu that he spoke showed the 
effect they have on the husting) And so he was very much 
interested in peace efforts and the solution to the problem of 
Kashmir as part of the composite dialogue. He talked of the 
affinities of (don’t mind Mr Straw the colonial) culture, 
bequeathed to us by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
Northern Ireland.

Straw while appreciating Pakistan’s efforts to fight terrorism 
also spelt out the necessity to deal with the environment that 
breeds the scourge, a theme that is part of the doctrine of 
enlightened moderation of President Musharraf. Therefore, a just 
solution to the issues of Kashmir, Palestine and other conflicts 
has to be found.

Now a word, about making India a permanent member of the Security 
Council: He said he was aware of the sensitivity of the issue and 
stated that it was Britain’s position to include Germany, Japan 
and India as permanent members of the UN Security Council but 
without a veto power.

Now this reminds one of Pakistan’s stated position on the issue 
the reiteration of which at this stage should not "disturb" 
anybody. In spite of all that is being said about the present 
ambiance between Pakistan and India, the Indian Deputy Prime 
Minister has found it "convenient" to talk about the Indian dream 
of a confederation between India and Pakistan. Saying that 
Pakistan is opposed to new centres of influence, in fact a new 
power centre or centres at the UN, which will exploit the 
advantages of the permanent nature of its seat to its own 
advantage than solve the problems of the region, should not be 
seen as something that may be something out of the ordinary. 
This, indeed, is not at all illogical. Apart from the fact 
whether a country be promoted to become member of the UN, which 
has openly flouted UN resolutions (sometimes openly calling them 
"old UN resolutions"), the fact that it will overburden the 
already burdened nations under the weight of the "elite" club of 
the Security Council even otherwise should be a factor that needs 
pondering.

Coming back to the British foreign minister’s visit, he described 
his talks as very satisfactory and said it covered war on terror, 
Pakistan India relations, situation in Afghanistan and Iraq. 
These talks obviously were dominated by the progress on Pakistan 
India parleys, including the Kashmir issue as part of the 
composite dialogue. He talked of the "lesson" that we have learnt 
from what happened with regard to the nuclear non-proliferation 
and hoped it should not happen in future.

He also said that after the agreement on LFO and other 
constitutional changes Pakistan fulfils the criteria for 
readmission to the Commonwealth.

Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 23 Hi Pakistan: N-tech transfer allegations baseless - Aref  

March 07 2004     
    
                				 
KARACHI: Iran again denied the allegations levelled by the US and 
UK governments regarding the smuggling of nuclear technology from 
Pakistan to Iran and termed it as a baseless campaign against the 
two countries.

Mohammed Reza Aref, the first vice-president of Iran, said this 
while talking to newsmen at the head office of Federation of 
Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI) on Saturday.

Categorically denying these allegations he said the Iranian 
foreign office repeatedly issued clarifications but the foreign 
media is levelling the allegations.

The Iranian nuclear project is purely envisaged by the Iranian 
scientists themselves while enriched uranium and equipment were 
obtained from the international market, Aref said. "It is very 
much clear that our nuclear technology is for peaceful purposes," 
he said and added that obtaining of nuclear weapons never 
remained part of our strategy. Every nation in the world has the 
right to obtain the technology for its development, he said while 
defending the acquisition of nuclear technology.

"We had very useful discussions on all issues including Kashmir, 
Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine," he said while replying a 
question regarding the parleys with top Pakistani leaders during 
his visit.

Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved. No part 
*****************************************************************
 24 Guardian Unlimited: War chief reveals legal crisis 

[UP] 

Antony Barnett and Martin Bright
Sunday March 7, 2004
		
Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, who led Britain's forces to war in 
Iraq last year, has dramatically broken his silence about the 
legal crisis which engulfed the Government on the eve of battle. 

In an extraordinary interview which will reignite the controversy 
over the run-up to the conflict, the former Chief of Defence 
Staff has revealed how Britain went to the brink of a 
constitutional crisis after he demanded 'unequivocal... legal top 
cover' before agreeing to allow British troops to fight. 

His demand for a formal assurance that a war would be legal came 
on 10 March 2003, even as British forces massed on the Iraq 
border, and the advice finally giving the all-clear came on 15 
March, only five days before fighting began. 

Speaking to The Observer, Boyce, who was made a life peer after 
he retired last May, refused to rule out the possibility that he 
might have resigned over the issue, which he described as a 
'crunch point'. 

He said his concerns were 'transmitted' to the Attorney-General 
Lord Goldsmith through the Prime Minister. This disclosure adds 
weight to a suggestion that Tony Blair pressed Goldsmith to 
change the legal advice at the last minute. 

Boyce demanded an unambiguous, one-line note from the 
Attorney-General saying the war was legal to ensure military 
chiefs and their soldiers would not be 'put through the mill' at 
the International Criminal Court. 

His comments will fuel pressure on Blair to release full details 
of how Goldsmith came to his decision. The fact that it still 
took several days during this critical period to give Boyce his 
assurance provides further evidence of uncertainty in Government 
about the legality of the war. 

It emerged last week that an earlier draft of the advice, 
produced around 7 March , prevaricated on whether an invasion of 
Iraq was legal without a second United Nations resolution. The 
Attorney-General was then 'sitting on the fence', said a senior 
Government legal source. He was forced to redraft this advice as 
the countdown to war continued. 

The Observer has discovered that Goldsmith flew to Washington in 
early February for a crisis meeting with his American 
counterpart, John Ashcroft, to discuss the war's legality. Their 
closed meeting on 10 February last year left the British Minister 
still undecided as he flew home. 

In his first interview since he retired, Boyce said: 'My views 
were clear and made very formally both in Cabinet and in the view 
I had transmitted to the Attorney-General through Number 10. I 
required a piece of paper saying it was lawful... Now if that 
caused them to go back saying we need our advice tightened up, 
then I don't know.' 

Boyce said he fully supported the ousting of Saddam Hussein and 
did not believe a second UN resolution was necessary. He still 
believed weapons of mass destruction in Iraq might have been 
'squirrelled away or destroyed at the last moment'. 

He said: 'The justification in my own mind was that I was 
convinced that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons. I knew 
he used them in the past and I believed he was capable of using 
them in the future. Given what happened since 9/11 it was even 
more likely.' 

Yet he was concerned that, without the legal cover from 
Goldsmith, military personnel could be prosecuted for war crimes. 
Boyce hinted that if Goldsmith had not provided him with this, he 
might have resigned, which would have precipitated a major 
political and military crisis, with 60,000 British troops 
stationed in Kuwait prepared for war. 

Boyce admitted the 'personal' difficulty he would have faced if 
such 'unequivocal' reassurance had not been forthcoming: 'It 
would have to be for people around me, the Prime Minister, the 
Secretary of State [for Defence] to know what sort of person I 
was and draw their own conclusion about what I might have done if 
I didn't get what I wanted... I'm not prepared to say what that 
was because this is extremely personal.' 

Asked if this meant he might have resigned, he said: 'I really am 
not prepared to say ... All I would say is that it was an 
important milestone.' 

He said: 'I never said to anybody, not even to myself, "if I 
don't get this, this is what I am going to do"... and I'll tell 
you why, because I was reassured I would get what I asked for and 
I was prepared to take that at face value. ' 

Legal approval was needed to protect everyone involved: 'It would 
have been difficult for our people in the field, for the families 
of the troops and our commanders if we had not had the 
reassurance that what they were about to do was legal. Their 
doubts - if they had doubts - would have been exacerbated by the 
fact that we were signatories to the ICC [International Criminal 
Court].' 

Last night, a senior Whitehall insider told The Observer that 
Ministers were reluctant to disclose the Attorney-General's 
advice, fearing that this would lead to 'a stream of lawsuits 
against the Government'. 

Lawyers acting for Greenpeace activists on trial this week for 
alleged criminal damage to tanks on their way to the Gulf are to 
call Boyce as a witness. They claim his evidence could help prove 
their actions over a potentially illegal war were justified. 

Boyce told The Observer he did not want a lengthy legal paper 
from the Attorney-General, but a simple yes or no if the proposed 
actions in Iraq would be legal. He said: 'If I had been presented 
with a 30-page document telling me the pros and cons and then a 
conclusion telling me it was lawful, certainly it would be of 
interest but it wasn't the crunch point. 

'I asked for unequivocal advice that what we were proposing to do 
was lawful. Keeping it as simple as that did not allow 
equivocations, and what I eventually got was what I required... 
something in writing that was very short indeed. Two or three 
lines saying our proposed actions were lawful under national and 
international law.' 

Last night Downing Street denied Boyce had raised concerns about 
the timing of the legal opinion before the beginning of the war. 
A Number 10 official said Boyce had made a formal request for a 
legal opinion between 10 and 11 March and that he received the 
advice four days later, on 15 March. Operations began on 20 
March. 

'He felt he got the advice in a timely fashion and he was 
perfectly content with that,' the official said. 
	
        Political Alerts Get daily headlines straight to your 
mobile

Sign up for the Backbencher Our free weekly insider's guide to 
Westminster

What do you think?


Guardian Newspapers Limited
*****************************************************************
 25 Kashmir Telegraph: Nuclear Secret Papers Show Link To Pak     

l March 2004 l     
The Kashmir Bachao Andolan Publication     
l Vol 3, No 10 l   
  
BY  I N V I T A T I O N   
  
Gary Fitleberg 

U.N. inspectors sifting through Iran's nuclear files have 
discovered drawings of high-tech equipment that can be used to 
make weapons-grade uranium — a new link to the black market 
headed by the father of Pakistan's atomic bomb.
 
Beyond adding another piece to the puzzle of who provided what in 
the clandestine supply chain headed by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the 
revelations cast fresh doubt on Iran's commitment to dispelling 
suspicions it is trying to make atomic arms. But Iran insisted 
that it was cooperating.
 
The diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the 
designs were of a P-2 centrifuge — more advanced than the P-1 
model Iran has acknowledged using to enrich uranium for what is 
says are peaceful purposes. They said preliminary investigations 
by inspectors working for the International Atomic Energy Agency 
indicated they matched drawings of equipment found in Libya and 
supplied by Khan's network.
 
While highly enriched uranium is a key component of some nuclear 
warheads, less enriched uranium can be used to generate power, 
which is what Iran says it was interested in.
 
The diplomats said Iran did not volunteer the designs — despite 
pledging last year to replace nearly two decades of secrecy with 
full openness about all aspects of its nuclear activities. 
Instead, they said, IAEA inspectors had to dig for them.
 
"Coming up with them is an example of real good inspector work," 
one of the diplomats told The Associated Press. "They took 
information and put it together and put something in front of 
them that they can't deny."
 
The diplomats said Iran had not yet formally explained why the 
advanced centrifuge designs were not voluntarily handed over to 
the agency.
 
Still, the diplomats emphasized that — despite putting into 
question Iran's pledge to be fully open — the find did not 
advance suspicions that Tehran was trying to make nuclear 
weapons.
 
The United States and others accuse Iran of having nuclear 
weapons ambitions. Iran agreed to end nearly two decades of 
nuclear secrecy late last year but only under intense 
international pressure generated by the discovery of its 
enrichment program.
 
"We're not convinced Iran has come completely clean," 
Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton told a security conference 
in Berlin. "There is no doubt in our minds that Iran continues to 
pursue nuclear weapons. They have not complied even with the 
commitment they made in October."
 
In Rome, Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi denied Iran had 
any nuclear weapons ambitions.
 
"We do not have anything to hide and we are ready to be inspected 
more (seriously) by IAEA inspectors," Kharrazi told reporters on 
the sidelines of a conference celebrating 50 years of 
Vatican-Iranian relations.
 
"There may be questions by IAEA inspectors but we are ready to 
verify those, and what has been achieved altogether up until now 
is out of our cooperation with IAEA," Kharrazi said in English 
when asked about the discovery of the drawings. "As long as we 
are ready to continue our cooperation, all outstanding questions 
will be verified."
 
But the Vatican issued a stern message on nuclear weapons during 
Kharrazi's visit, with Pope John Paul II urging Iran to continue 
cooperating with U.N. inspectors and his Foreign Minister warning 
that the pursuit of such weapons only multiplies conflicts.
 
President Bush acknowledged loopholes in the international 
enforcement system and urged the United Nations and member states 
to draft criminal penalties for nuclear trafficking.
 
While accusing Khan of being the mastermind of a clandestine 
nuclear supply operation, Bush avoided criticism of the Pakistani 
government, a key ally in the fight against terror. Pakistani 
President Pervez Musharraf says his government knew nothing of 
Khan's network, even though his military controlled the nation's 
nuclear program.
 
Khan, a national hero in Pakistan for creating a nuclear 
deterrent against archrival India, confessed on Pakistani 
television last week to masterminding a network that supplied 
Libya, Iran and North Korea with nuclear technology. Musharraf 
then pardoned him.
 
In a recent speech, Musharraf said help with nuclear 
proliferation had come from different countries — not just 
Pakistan.
 
"But things happened from here also, and we need to correct our 
house," he said. "We are a responsible nation. We must not 
proliferate."
 
Earlier this year, Libya handed over engineers' drawings of a 
crude nuclear warhead linked to Khan as part of its decision to 
scrap all programs aimed at making weapons of mass destruction.
 
Malaysia pledged Thursday to share information with Washington 
from its investigation of B.S.A. Tahir, a man Bush described as a 
major player in the trafficking network. But top Malaysian 
officials insisted the sole known case of Malaysian involvement 
was the unwitting manufacture of parts seized en route to Libya 
last year.
 
China also declared it had a "common interest" with the United 
States in halting illicit arms trafficking. Foreign Ministry 
spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue said Beijing would take "effective 
measures" to enforce rules against exports of weapons technology 
by Chinese companies.
 
In Moscow, Russian nuclear energy minister Alexander Rumyantsev 
postponed a trip to Iran next week because the countries have not 
nailed down agreements involving a reactor Russia is building. 
Russia has been under pressure to freeze the $800 million deal, 
with the United States saying the facility could help Iran 
develop weapons.
 
Iran-Pakistan nuclear proliferation may lead to regional 
instability in both Asia and the Middle East if not stopped dead 
in its tracks immediately.
   
SUPPORT Kashmir Telegraph: Place your classified ads HERE. It 
pays to advertise in Kashmir Telegraph!   
    
To advertise, email to: romeet@dailypioneer.com or call + (91) 
98233 81216  

Copyright © 2002-2003 Shyam Lal Watt Foundation 
*****************************************************************
 26 JS Online: Opposition to energy pricing system unifies state, 
utilities, consumer groups
 
 By THOMAS CONTENT

tcontent@journalsentinel.com Posted: March 6, 2004 

Imagine your roof has a hole in it. You've hired someone to 
replace the roof, but it's going to take the contractor a month 
to finish it. 

  Photo/Journal Sentinel files   

  Workers perform maintenance on power lines in Racine County. 
State utilities have joined together with consumer groups and 
Gov. Jim Doyle to oppose a new energy pricing system.
   
You've planned your household finances to pay the contractor, but 
then the city steps in to charge you daily fines for having a 
hole in your roof. 

The hole in Wisconsin's roof is its shaky connection to the rest 
of the electricity grid that stretches from the Rocky Mountains 
to the Atlantic Ocean. The extra charges the state faces from a 
new electricity market that's scheduled to start up later this 
year could cost the state's ratepayers an extra $200 million a 
year. 

This arcane energy issue governing how the electricity that runs 
our homes and businesses is bought and sold has mobilized and 
united Wisconsin utilities and their opponents like few issues in 
recent memory. 

Even as they fight about nuclear plants and coal plants, power 
lines and rising power costs, utilities and the customers with 
whom they often skirmish are united and unanimous on one issue: a 
new wholesale electricity pricing system poised to launch late 
this year across a 14-state region from West Virginia to Montana. 

"For once, the state is 100 percent unanimous," said William 
Bourbonnais, an assistant vice president of transmission at Green 
Bay-based Wisconsin Public Service Corp. 

"I haven't seen this agreement from so many ends of the spectrum 
in a long time," said Lee Cullen, a Madison lawyer who represents 
Customers First, a coalition of utility customers, cooperatives 
and the union representing power plant workers. 

As a result, utility critics, utility chief executives and 
Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle are working together to put political 
pressure on federal energy regulators to delay the energy pricing 
system from launching Dec. 1. Delay sought
 

In essence, Doyle and others say, Wisconsin is being penalized 
for a problem it's working hard to fix - the reliability of the 
state's power grid and its ability to keep up with rising demand 
for power on hot summer days. 

Wisconsin utilities have called on the Midwest Independent 
Transmission System Operator, the developer of the market, to 
delay Wisconsin's participation in the market by five years while 
the state beefs up its power infrastructure. 

Doyle wrote the head of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
last week, a move utility officials said helped raise the profile 
of Wisconsin's concerns. 

Though the details of the market plan are complex, Wisconsin's 
beef about the plan is simple. 

Based on projections from the U.S. Department of Energy, 
Wisconsin projects that its electricity costs would rise 4%, or 
$200 million, every year under the trading mechanism. That's in 
addition to the more than $4 billion that ratepayers will be 
paying to finance construction of new power plants and 
transmission lines. 

"This will create high prices that are supposed to (encourage) us 
to build transmission that we are already committed to doing," 
said Roman Draba, vice president of state regulatory affairs at 
Wisconsin Energy Corp. "We'll end up paying twice, and the money 
that we pay in rates will go to other utilities outside the 
state. It's not good for Wisconsin all the way around." 

The Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator is given 
responsibility by the federal government for coordinating the 
power grid in the Midwest. The new setup is part of an electric 
power industry move toward a restructuring under which consumers 
in some states have the ability to choose their own electric 
company. Wisconsin, however, is not among them. The state has 
taken a much slower approach toward restructuring, preferring to 
address reliability concerns first. Utilities in Illinois, 
Michigan, Indiana and Ohio oppose Wisconsin's request for a 
delay. 

Under the market system, electricity prices would be higher in 
areas that have bottlenecks in the transmission system. That 
would result in Wisconsin residents and businesses paying more 
for problems the state already knows it has, Wisconsin utilities 
and customer groups say. 

Bottlenecks in Wisconsin's electricity grid hinder the state's 
ability to import power and contributed to shortages here in the 
late 1990s. 

Wisconsin utilities say they are committed to joining a regional 
market but that Wisconsin's infrastructure needs should be 
addressed first. 

The chief executives of five eastern Wisconsin utilities have 
committed to working with American Transmission Co. to build $4 
billion in new power plants and $1.4 billion in transmission 
upgrades in the coming years to help fix the grid. American 
Transmission has already spent $337 million in grid improvements 
in the past three years, spokeswoman Maripat Blankenheim said. 

Among the solutions: new coal plants planned for Oak Creek and 
Wausau; new natural gas-fired plants under construction by 
Wisconsin Energy in Port Washington; and a Sheboygan Falls 
natural gas plant planned by Alliant Energy Corp. 

In addition, the list of priority improvements includes a 
proposal to build a $420 million power line from Wausau to 
Duluth, Minn., approved last year, plus a new high-voltage 
transmission line connecting Wisconsin to the rest of the Midwest 
grid. A $300 million, 345-kilovolt line would extend 150 miles 
from western Dane County to Cassville and northeast Iowa. 

Ron McNamara, vice president of regulatory affairs at the Midwest 
transmission group, said the group is working to formulate a 
system that would compensate Wisconsin for the higher congestion 
fees the market would charge. 

"If I pay an extra 10 bucks because of congestion, at the end of 
the day I get 10 bucks back, I really don't care," McNamara said. 

The Midwest group is setting up a system that would provide 
compensation to utilities by giving them what are known as 
financial transmission rights. 

"For the last six months we have been working very intensely to 
develop an allocation methodology to make sure that Wisconsin 
people get back as much as possible of that 10 bucks," McNamara 
said. 

But the devil's in the details, Wisconsin utilities and 
regulators say, adding they don't yet have assurances that 
Wisconsin customers will be protected against unnecessary costs. 

"(The Midwest transmission group) has been saying for months all 
the right things," said Robert Garvin, a state Public Service 
Commission member who has been active on this issue. "But we 
can't rely on rhetoric alone to resolve our financial and 
reliability concerns about this market." 

From the March 7, 2004 editions of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
 
, Journal Sentinel Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 27 WSJ: Head of WPL packs a lot of energy in small package 

2:53 PM 3/06/04 

Judy Newman Wisconsin State Journal 

Barbara Swan is a lawyer, a golfer, a gardener, a wife and a
mother. She's also the head of a Madison utility company with
$1.2 billion annual revenue and 2,400 employees. 

Swan, 52, was promoted in January to president of Wisconsin
Power &Light Co. with a $300,000 base salary. She is one of only
a handful of women leading investor-owned utility companies
around the nation. She is also executive vice president and
general counsel for WPL's parent, Alliant Energy Corp. of
Madison. 

Soft-spoken yet authoritative, Swan jokes about her height: 5
feet. "I'm probably the only person in the western world who
prefers to fly coach. The seats fit better than first class,"
she says. "It also fits well with our corporate frugality." 
Born in Pittsburgh, Swan's favorite activities don't require
electricity: they include hiking and biking around Wisconsin's
state parks and trails with her husband, two sons and their
11-year old English springer spaniel, Jynx. 

Deeply affected by an experience as a college exchange student
in the Appalachian Mountain region, Swan has been active in the
Dane County United Way campaigns in 2000, 2001 and 2002 and
served as corporate chair of the 2003 Dane County Walk to Cure
Juvenile Diabetes. 

Swan leads WPL as it tries to add to its electricity supplies.
The company has announced plans to build a 300-megawatt natural
gas-fueled power plant in Sheboygan Falls, buy 453 megawatts
from a gas-fired plant under construction in Beloit and add
renewable energy supplies from wind turbines and manure
digesters. At the same time, WPL plans to sell its 41 percent
share of the Kewaunee nuclear power plant to Dominion Resources
of Richmond, Va. 

WSJ: What are your thoughts on what Wisconsin Power &Light
should be, and could be, for the area? 

Swan: In terms of Wisconsin Power &Light, we've started down the
path over the past year .
+ .

+ . (of) really concentrating on our utility efforts and
concentrating on our infrastructure. The additional construction
of generation in the state is part of that. 

We really are looking to continue to make sure that Wisconsin
Power &Light Co. is a very reliable and a very affordable
provider of energy to our state. The challenges in Wisconsin,
with our own economy here and making sure we keep that vibrant;
making sure we keep jobs in the state. 

WSJ: How do you anticipate that WPL will grow? Do you expect
that there will be acquisitions? 
Swan: It's hard to say. .
+ .
+ . There has not been much activity in terms of mergers and
acquisitions anywhere in the industry over the last two or three
years, given where the economy has been and everything else
that's been going on. I'm assuming that at some point that will
come back to life again. We may consider that in the future. 
Other than that, we are a mature business in a mature market, in
terms of our service territory. There's not very much growth.
The expansion of our load has been averaging a couple percent a
year and we would see that continuing. 

WSJ: Would WPL ever consider again the possibility of trying to
acquire Madison Gas and Electric Co. (now MGE Energy) or other
utility companies around the state? (WPL staged an unsuccessful
takeover bid of MGE in 1990.) 

Swan: Our focus for WPL is really on operating a successful
Wisconsin utility and, as such, WPL has no current plans in the
merger or acquisition area in the near-term. Of course, we'd
have a fiduciary responsibility to review any proposal for a
merger or acquisition that may be presented to us. Hostile
mergers are expensive, are rarely successful in this industry,
so any combination we would seriously consider would have to be
a deal that made sense for all parties. Never say never, but it
just is not high on our radar screen right now. 

WSJ: The sale of the Kewaunee nuclear plant, what went into the
decision to do that? 

Swan: Kewaunee is a very important baseload plant for the state
of Wisconsin, and for us and our customers. But we are
approaching the end of the first license period for Kewaunee. So
it's really a question of what do we see as far as the potential
risks of continuing to own and operate a nuclear power plant,
what do we see as the potential benefits of continuing to
operate it. 

We will have a long-term power contract with Dominion so that we
will still have access to that power at a good price for our
customers. We will have less exposure to the risk of owning the
nuclear plant. And so it just seemed like a very good approach
to take. 

WSJ: You still believe in nuclear power as an important part of
the mix? 

Swan: I do. When you look at the nuclear plants, you do not have
the issue of air emissions. Now, you do have to deal with the
issue of nuclear waste. And we certainly hope the federal
government gets the issues resolved at Yucca Mountain and we
have a permanent depository. But regardless of what system, what
fuel you use for generating electricity, there are tradeoffs. 
WSJ: What about (the) Columbia (power plant near Portage) there
have been a lot of concerns raised by citizens' groups and
others about down time, aging equipment, steam tubes. What is
your sense about what shape it's in? 

Swan: I think Columbia, overall, is in very good condition.
We've done a lot of work on Columbia unit 1. Columbia unit 2
(repair work) is planned. .
+ .
+ . I think if you look at the Columbia plant and you look at
its performance over time, you would see that it has been an
excellent performer for this state. It consistently ranks in the
top plants both in the state and in the region, as far as cost,
as far as its availability and its operation. 
WSJ: Did you ever think when you were small that you'd wind up
heading a utility company? 
Swan: Never. .
+ .
+ . I had a history degree and pretty much, not a thing in the
world that I could do with it. I had spent a semester of my
college career .
+ .
+ . at a college called Berea, outside of Lexington, Ky. 
Unlike most schools, it has an upper income limit if your
parents have too much money, you can't go there. And everybody
has to work. I worked with the Save The Children Foundation,
spent a lot of time in the mountains. I also worked with a
federal program called STABLE, Student Taught Adult Basic
Literacy Effort. 

So I spent a lot of time actually going out to various
communities, out in the hollows, working a lot with women,
teaching basic literacy. These were people who didn't have
beyond a second or third grade education. They couldn't read,
they couldn't write, they couldn't do basic arithmetic. 
It was a real eye-opener for me in terms of a different view of
the world, a different view of what it meant to be poor. 

WSJ: What do you like best about this job? 

Swan: This has been a wonderful company to work for. What I like
best is the people. (President, chairman and chief executive
officer) Erroll Davis has been an excellent leader for the
company. .
+ .
+ . He is someone who has been, thoughout his career, very
concerned about women, minorities, having an inclusive
workplace. 

The other thing I like about my job is I've never had an
opportunity to get bored. I've always had opportunities to do
new things, some of which I've liked better than others, some of
which have been more fun than others, but very few of them have
been dull. 

Copyright © 2003 Wisconsin State Journal   
*****************************************************************
 28 JOURNAL NEWS: Indian Point contract ratified

 By ROGER WITHERSPOON
 THE JOURNAL NEWS
 (Original publication: March 6, 2004)

 NEW YORK — Union workers voted by a 2-1 ratio to ratify the 
first joint contract for employees at the Indian Point 2 and 3 
nuclear power plants, successfully concluding long and often 
contentious negotiations with Entergy Nuclear Northeast. 

The ballot results were announced last night. 

The four-year contract standardizes work rules, benefits and 
salaries for union employees at Indian Point 2, which had been 
owned by Consolidated Edison, and Indian Point 3, which had been 
owned by the New York Power Authority. Entergy bought both 
Buchanan plants in 2001. 

Failure to ratify the agreement would have triggered a walkout by 
the workers at Indian Point 3, whose contract expired Jan. 17. 
The Indian Point 2 contract was slated to expire in June. Union 
workers authorized a strike vote in December, but a strike was 
averted when negotiators "stopped the clock" just before the 
midnight deadline and reached a tentative agreement in the early 
hours of Jan. 18. 

The ballots for members of Local 1-2 of the Utility Workers Union 
of America were counted at the union's Manhattan headquarters. 
They had been mailed to the homes of the union's 472 members Feb. 
20, and officials counted the 432 ballots received by 5 p.m. 
yesterday. Union President Manny Hellen said 288 workers voted 
for the pact, 133 against, with 11 ballots disqualified. 

"The affirmative ratification vote demonstrates that Indian Point 
workers recognize the value of the job security, wage increases 
and benefit improvements the new contract provides," Hellen said. 

Union Vice President Anthony Olivet said negotiating a single 
contract was difficult because of the differences between the two 
plants, and the differences between NYPA, a state agency, and the 
profit-oriented, Louisiana-based Entergy. 

When asked about concessions, Olivet said. "We gave nothing back 
to the company." 

  Copyright 2004 The Journal News, . Inc. newspaper serving
Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York.
*****************************************************************
 29 Xinhuanet: China has little information about alleged DPRK uranium
program: FM   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2004-03-06 16:31:29   

    BEIJING, March 6 (Xinhuanet) -- Chinese Foreign Minister Li 
Zhaoxing said here Saturday that China has little information 
about the alleged uranium enrichment program of the Democratic 
People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). 

    "We don't have as much information as you do about the 
alleged DPRK uranium program," Li told a Reuters reporter while 
asked to confirm the allegations. 

    "(Even) if your information is supported by evidence, that 
willhave nothing to do with China," the minister added. Enditem 
 
    
  Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
 Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is
prohibited.   


*****************************************************************
 30 Toronto Star: Power is blowin' in the wind

TheStar.com - 

  Mar. 6, 2004. 01:00 AM  
     
At long last, Ontario is interested in wind turbines to produce 
electricity.

It's due, in part, to anxiety over nuclear power, and is it any 
wonder, given the staggering delays and cost overruns as Ontario 
Power Generation tries to refurbish nuclear reactors?

But interest has also been sparked by the wind turbine erected on 
the CNE grounds by the Toronto Renewable Energy Co-operative. The 
turbine is a prominent fixture on the Toronto skyline. It's 
attractive; it works; it's a great ambassador for wind power.

And then there's Germany where wind turbines produce about 60 per 
cent as much electricity as Ontario's nuclear reactors generate. 

Wind is a potent alternative. It's renewable, and operating costs 
don't fluctuate as they do with gas-powered generators. 

So why is Ontario only half-heartedly committed to wind? Probably 
it's because the government is afraid to gamble with delay in 
bringing new capacity online. With wind power, community 
opposition can postpone projects indefinitely  as is happening 
in Collingwood with a corporate proposal to build turbines on the 
Niagara Escarpment. But the government's fear results from how it 
brings electricity online. It's a matter of process, and as I 
keep saying in this column, process is what sustainability is all 
about.

What's needed is a regulatory framework that would encourage 
communities to participate because conflicts can best be resolved 
if the people building the turbines come from the communities 
themselves.

Instead, Ontario relies on the old way of asking for bids on 
contracts to supply electricity, and that changes priorities for 
the worse. Instead of communities deciding whether they want wind 
turbines, winning bidders announce where turbines are planned. 
This makes it more difficult to sort out differences.

Communities can bid, of course, but they usually don't have the 
money or the expertise to prepare proposals. So, the process acts 
as a disincentive. Rather than be in a race to meet a bidding 
deadline, it would be better if they could launch a project when 
they were ready.

The issue is timely because Ontario is about to call for 
proposals to deliver 3,000 megawatts (MW) of electricity, of 
which 300 MW would be renewable. 

Germany uses an alternative to the bidding system, and as a 
result, a third of its wind power is produced by community 
organizations. The government sets the price that will be paid to 
suppliers  about 15 cents a kilowatt hour (kWh)  and suppliers 
build the projects. As a result, the German government doesn't 
have to negotiate with bidders, oversee contracts or take 
responsibility for any particular project.

And there are a couple of spinoff benefits. With community 
projects, no power is lost in transmission. Normally, 9 per cent 
of electricity is lost when it is transported from a distance. 

In addition, money spent on electricity stays in the community. 
The Federation of Canadian Municipalities estimates that, on 
average, 90 per cent of every dollar spent on electricity leaves 
the community in which it is spent. 

The Ontario Sustainable Energy Association claims that at 10 
cents per kWh (8 cents per kWh for high-volume producers), 
communities would hustle to get wind power projects under way.

It also suggests a modest start, with only 150 MW of wind power 
developed this way. But surely that's too cautious, especially 
since Germany, Austria, France and the Netherlands have proved 
this approach works.


Cameron Smith is an author and environmentalist living near 
Gananoque, Ont.

Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
*****************************************************************
 31 Sify: NPCIL plans greenfield facilities             
     	
Saturday, 06 March , 2004, 12:44              
     	
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) has proposed 
putting up greenfield facilities, apart from ramping up capacity 
at the existing ones in order to advance schedules and replenish 
the grid. 

S.K. Jain, Chairman and Managing Director, NPCIL, told Business 
Line that he could not name the new sites. He would only say the 
selection policy criteria favoured sites to be removed as far 
away from coalfields as possible. This would obviously rule out 
the north-east and other places identified with coal belts. 

"Electricity demand is going up at the rate of 10,000 MW every 
year. Right now, the total demand is 1.3 lakh MW. In the next 10 
years, it would touch 4 lakh MW. We don't have enough hydel, 
coal, gas or oil reserves to feed this demand. This leaves us 
with nuclear power, and we are blessed with the mineral resources 
required, and have developed the technology for generating the 
same", Jain said. 

NPCIL has also submitted to the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) a 
proposal for scaling up installed capacity at the existing sites. 
If only had the general elections not intervened, the AEC would 
have forwarded the same to the Government for consideration. It's 
now left to the new Government to decide on the new sites as also 
those where capacity addition would be taken up. 

The company had originally planned to achieve 20,000 MW by the 
year 2020. But it is now aiming to achieve this target in the 
next five to six years, after being prodded on by the Planning 
Commission and the Union Power Ministry. 

The company is in a good position for advancing the schedule and 
enjoys sound financials, too. The project management at all the 
nine sites where construction activity is currently going on is 
competitive. Each of the existing sites holds the potential of 
generating anything ranging from 3,000 MW to 6,000 MW. 

For instance, capacity of Kudankulam alone can go up to 6,000 MW. 
Apart from the two 1,000-MW reactors under construction, it has 
the potential to house four more. 

At Kaiga, the new reactors would be of 740-MW capacity. Kakrapar 
has got only two reactors; it can have four more, that too of 740 
MW. Tarapur has got 2X220 MW and 2x540 MW. It will accommodate 
the advanced heavy water reactor (AHWR) of 740 MW. 

In the medium term, NPCIL is bound by word to commission 2X540 MW 
at Tarapur and the 220-MW unit at Kaiga aggregating 1,300 MW 
during the 10th Plan period ending March 2007, said Jain. 

"We have now been asked to put our best foot forward and double 
the target to 2600 MW. We've agreed to take up the challenge. As 
per this commitment, we'll have to commission one 1,000 MW unit 
at Kudankulam and two more 220-MW units at Rajasthan and Kaiga 
before March 2007. The way we're progressing, we're very 
confident of achieving the target set", he added.                        

  Sify.com hosted at SifyHosting India's first Level 3 Internet
Data Centre
© Copyright Sify Ltd, 1998-2003. All rights reserved. See
*****************************************************************
 32 The Advocate: Water pump, turbine malfunction, shutting Millstone unit
 	 	 	
Associated Press
 	 	
March 6, 2004

WATERFORD, Conn. --             Operators of Millstone Power 
Station shut a reactor early Saturday after a water pump and 
turbine malfunctioned, releasing steam but no radiation, The Day 
of New London reported in editions prepared for Sunday.

 Dominion Nuclear Connecticut Inc., the owner of Millstone, will 
not restart the Millstone 2 unit until the cause of the problem 
is found and the equipment is fixed, spokesman Pete Hyde said.

 Two power plants operate at Millstone and a third is being 
decommissioned.

 The incident at the Waterford power station occurred shortly 
after 1 a.m. Saturday, Hyde said. A water pump stopped 
functioning and operators took the unit off line, he said.

 Steam, which had been turning a turbine, was vented into the 
atmosphere because the turbine was vibrating.

 It is not clear what caused the water pump or the turbine to 
malfunction, Hyde said.

 "We made a conservative decision to take it off line," he said. 
"This kind of thing occasionally happens. We'll keep the reactor 
off line until we're sure it's safe to bring it back."

 Standard procedure includes notifying the U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission.

Copyright © 2004, The Associated Press [SCNI Real Estate 

© 2004, Southern Connecticut Newspapers, Inc. All rights 
*****************************************************************
 33 SouthofBoston: Weak forecast stalls Entergy application

SOUTHOFBOSTON.COM   
  
MPG Newspapers 9 Long Pond Rd. Plymouth, MA 02360 (508) 746-5555 

By Suzanne Colonna MPG Newspapers

PLYMOUTH (March 5) - Entergy has put the brakes on renewing its 
license for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant. Advocates on both sides 
of the licensing question will still prepare for the process.

The plant's 40-year license expires in 2012. Last spring, Entergy 
officials announced their intention to extend the license 20 
years. They have until 2008 to apply for renewal. They originally 
said they planned to submit the application by December of this 
year.

But Entergy spokesman David Tarantino now says the company 
informed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) it will postpone 
the renewal application.

"Before investing any more money in the application process, 
Entergy wanted some time to look at the economic viability going 
forward for Pilgrim Station," Tarantino said this week.

Tarantino said Entergy halted progress on the application based 
on a poor economic forecast for electric prices. Entergy has sold 
the power the plant will generate in 2005 and 2006, and now 
projections have improved, he said. Despite the improving 
forecast, the company will take time to watch the market.

To complete the renewal with the NRC before 2012, Tarantino said 
he expects Entergy will decide the future of the plant before 
2007. That timeline leaves Entergy ample opportunity to reinvest 
in the application process.

"At the present time, we are holding up," he said.

Despite Entergy's decision to hold back on renewal work, 
opponents to the plant have not relented.

"Once the application is submitted the process moves very 
swiftly," Duxbury resident and local activist Mary Lampert said 
this week. "Therefore it's important for the community to become 
educated in what the process is."

Renewal process

The Atomic Energy Act and NRC regulations limit nuclear reactor 
licenses to 40 years, but allow the plant operator to renew the 
license for up to 20 years.

Unless Entergy submits its application by 2007, five years before 
the license expires in 2012, the NRC may shut the plant down.

Tarantino said he did not know when or if Entergy will submit an 
application, but expects the process to take approximately four 
years.

To renew, Entergy must provide the NRC with an evaluation of the 
plant's technical capabilities to operate an aging plant. It must 
also evaluate the environmental impacts of a longer life for the 
plant.

The application process requires Entergy to hold a public meeting 
within a month after it submits the application for renewal. The 
NRC estimates 22-30 months to complete the renewal process.

If Entergy decides against another 20 years, the decommissioning 
process for Pilgrim will begin in 2012, the plant's last year of 
operation.

Nuclear reactors generate about 20 percent of the electric power 
produced in the United States. More than 40 percent of the 
licenses for existing nuclear reactors will expire by 2015.

According to NRC regulations, renewal is contingent on the 
operator's ability to continue to operate the plant safely and 
the economic viability of the plant.

Nuclear neighbor

Entergy remains the town's second largest taxpayer but not all 
residents support extending the life of the plant.

Plymouth resident Wedge Bramhall, along with Lampert, started a 
Web site to inform the public about relicensing of the plant. The 
site is www.pilgrimwatch.org.

Bramhall, a longtime Plymouth resident, said he has serious 
concerns about the plant's current operation, let alone another 
20 years in business.

"My biggest concern is the waste," he said, of the spent fuel 
rods stored at the plant.

Entergy stores the rods in a spent fuel pool on the Pilgrim site. 
Tarantino estimates there are about 2,000 fuel assemblies in the 
pool. The pool has the capacity to hold the spent rods produced 
by the plant through 2012.

The federal government has planned to move the country's spent 
fuel rods to an underground repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., 
which would not open before 2010.

Unless the Department of Energy takes the spent fuel rods off of 
Entergy's hands, Tarantino said the company will move the oldest 
rods to dry-cask storage beside the plant.

Lampert, skeptical that the repository will ever open, does not 
consider Yucca Mountain a solution to the problem of nuclear 
waste.

"If the NRC continues to rubber stamp these relicensing 
applications and if Yucca Mountain ever opened, it will be maxed 
out in capacity by 2037," she said.

The spent fuel rods increase the plant's risk for terrorist 
attacks in the post-Sept. 11 world, Bramhall said.

Bramhall and Lampert both question the plant's emergency 
management protocols, including the emergency notification sirens 
and the emergency evacuation routes.

Selectmen this week re-affirmed the local nuclear matters 
advisory committee's task of advising them on relicensing, 
nuclear waste storage and emergency preparedness. Town officials 
expect to fill vacant seats on the committee shortly.

If the plant was decommissioned, residents could stop worrying 
about the sirens, evacuation plans and emergency operations 
centers, Bramhall said.

"This town has everything going for it, but it's got one of the 
worst industries today sitting right in our backyard," Bramhall 
said.

Lampert questioned the plant's ability to safely operate for 
another 20 years, citing design and other technical deficiencies.

"The Pilgrim nuclear power plant was a failure when it was 
built," she said.

Entergy's own renewal concerns have little to do with the plant's 
material condition. The company foresees nothing to prevent the 
plant from safely pumping out another 20 years of power, 
Tarantino said.

"The last four years, the plant's run better than it ever has," 
he said.

The NRC will hold a public meeting later this month to discuss 
its annual evaluation of the plant.

Economic impacts

With the town poised to lose $10 million in annual tax revenue 
from the plant in 2008, a license renewal would re-open the tax 
negotiations between the company and the town.

"The way it stands right now we have a plant that technically is 
to cease operation in 2012," finance director Patrick Dello Russo 
said this week.

Accordingly, the value of the plant will decrease along with the 
revenue for the town. If the NRC relicenses the plant, however, 
the town will re-open the agreement, he said.

The loss in revenue, negotiated when the state deregulated the 
utility industry, will hit the town regardless of Entergy's 
decision whether to relicense the plant.

"We have an opportunity with Entergy to work through those years 
and beyond," Dello Russo said. "For tax value and tax purposes, 
relicensing would provide more stability of tax revenue from the 
facility and therefore to the town."

Alternative energy

The power lines at the plant make it an ideal location for an 
alternative energy-generating plant, such as gas or 
waste-to-energy, Bramhall said. A non-nuclear power generating 
plant would enhance the town's tax base without the environmental 
and homeland security threats which come with Pilgrim, he said.

Dello Russo said the town will have to evaluate the financial 
implications of relicensing the plant and the alternatives if the 
plant is not relicensed or uses another source of energy.

With Entergy's plan not to submit the application this year, 
residents, town officials and Entergy have time to learn about 
the process and the alternatives. Bramhall said he believes the 
issue will be key to candidates running for selectmen in this 
spring's election.

"It's politics and it's big money, and Entergy is the big guy in 
town," Bramhall said. "We're trying to get regular people at home 
to realize we don't need the plant and we shouldn't be conned 
into thinking that we do." 

| MPG Newspapers, 9 Long Pond Rd., Plymouth, MA 02360 Telephone: 
(508) 746-5555
*****************************************************************
 34 Herald-Palladium: Cook environmental review hearings set

St. Joseph-Benton Harbor, Michigan     
   
Saturday, March 06, 2004 
  
By SCOTT AIKEN / H-P Staff Writer 

BRIDGMAN -- The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold 
two public meetings Monday on an environmental review for a 
proposed 20-year extension of the operating licenses for the D.C. 
Cook Nuclear Plant.

The meetings will allow the public an opportunity to make 
suggestions on what environmental issues the NRC should consider 
in its review process. The meetings will be at 1:30 and 7 p.m. at 
the Lake Township Hall, 3220 Shawnee Road.

The NRC staff will hold informal sessions for an hour prior to 
each meeting to answer questions and provide information about 
the process.

Under NRC regulations, a nuclear power plant's original operating 
license is issued for up to 40 years. The license may be renewed 
for up to an additional 20 years if all requirements are met.

American Electric Power Co., which owns and operates the Cook 
plant, holds licenses on the units that expire in 2014 and 2017. 
The company has applied for a renewal that would extend the 
licenses to 2034 and 2037.
 

NRC officials at a meeting in November outlined the renewal 
process, which will take 22 to 30 months. The plant submitted 
1,400 pages of documents that are subject to parallel 
examinations of safety and the environmental impact of the 
license extensions.

The application can be reviewed at the public libraries in 
Bridgman and St. Joseph, or on the Internet at: 
www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications.coo 
khtml.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, 
commercial nuclear reactors supply 20 percent of the nation's 
electricity.

Many of the 103 licensed reactors were built in the 1970s, and 
licenses on about three dozen will expire by 2015.

Regulations require that a nuclear power plant owner must apply 
to renew a license as early as 20 years or as late as five years 
before the current license expires.

Commercial reactors were allowed licensing for 40 years under the 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

According to NRC, the time limit was not set for technical 
limitations on the plants but for anti-trust law limitations.

In the early 1980s, the NRC conducted research on the issue and 
determined that plant licensing could be safely extended.

As a result, the NRC in 1995 amended the license renewal rule to 
make clear the focus on managing the adverse effects of aging 
equipment.

NRC said that at the end of the process to gather information, a 
summary of significant issues will be presented. Copies will be 
sent to those who took part in the process.

The next stop will be for NRC staff to write a draft supplement 
for public comment and to hold another public meeting. Any 
comments received at that meeting will be evaluated before a 
final report is written.
         
Copyright © 2004 The Herald-Palladium 
*****************************************************************
 35 WFSB: Annoying sound from the Millstone Power Plant

March 7, 2004   

(Waterford) - People who live near the Millstone Nuclear Power 
Plant in Waterford have been kept awake at night due to a 
deafening sound. The sound is being caused by a major release of 
steam into the atmosphere. 

Authorities say that there is no danger, no problem with the air, 
and no power problems for customers. 

What is to blame for the steam release? Possibly the weather. 
Pete Hyde, a spokesman from Millstone said, "As you know it was 
fairly dense last night. It is possible the sound was amplified 
because of the fog." 

The steam was released from the coolant system where the heat is 
transferred. The unit 2 reactor was shut down today as a 
precaution. 

Officials say that repairs have been made and the noise should 
not happen again.   

All content © Copyright 2001 - 2004 WorldNow and WFSB. All
*****************************************************************
 36 [NukeNet] French Govt. Accused of Lacking Nuclear Crisis Plan
 
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 15:09:46 -0800

 
<x-flowed>


Hufnagel said Cogema's trucks had escorts and were
built to withstand extreme heat, crashes or a fall
of nine meters (29 feet). ``We comply with the
IAEA's standards, not those set by Greenpeace,''
he said.



   IAEA who's mandate includes the promotion of
nuclear power are the people from whom Cogema take
their lead in protecting the environment & people
of France- and wherever else the winds and water
blow their lethal "produce."




    http://www.nytimes.com

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-environment-nuclear-france.html

French Govt. Accused of Lacking Nuclear Crisis
Plan
By REUTERS

Published: March 5, 2004


Filed at 7:31 a.m. ET

PARIS (Reuters) - The French government is under
pressure to work out a crisis plan for coping with
any major radioactive leak from a nuclear accident
or attack on trucks carrying plutonium after
accusations that it is unprepared.

State-run nuclear reprocessing firm Cogema
dismissed criticisms contained in two reports
released this week, one of which questioned the
safety of the convoys that regularly carry
weapons-grade plutonium across France.

``French nuclear transports are among the safest
in the world,'' Cogema spokesman Charles Hufnagel
said.

The charges come at a sensitive time for the
conservative government, which is wary of
criticism before regional elections that will test
its popularity. It has also been forced to tighten
security on its railway system because of bomb
threats.

France is the world's second largest producer of
nuclear power.

A group of nuclear experts sounded the alarm bells
in a report commissioned by France's Nuclear
Safety Authorityand released on Tuesday.

``France has still not adopted a genuine strategy
to cope with major contamination of an area
resulting from a nuclear accident or a criminal
act that leads to lasting exposure of the
population,'' the report said.

``The experts expressed surprise about the absence
of any official program mapping out a strategy to
tackle economic and welfare problems in
contaminated zones, whether urban or rural.''

CONVOYS SAFE?

Environmental group Greenpeace released a report
on Wednesday saying France would face a disaster
if there was an accident or attack on trucks
carrying plutonium for processing. The trucks pass
near France's two biggest cities, Paris and Lyon.

``Depending on the gravity of the accidents, the
release of plutonium could contaminate up to
hundreds of square kilometers and millions of
people,'' Greenpeace said.

The study, by independent nuclear engineering
consultants Large & Associates, said two trucks,
each with nine plutonium flasks in trailers, leave
a reprocessing plant in La Hague in northwestern
France every seven to 10 days, escorted by around
seven police officers.

It said they take radioactive material within 15
km (nine miles) of central Paris on the way to
mixed oxide fuel fabrication plants in
southeastern France.

``That is about 300 kilograms (660 pounds) of
plutonium dioxide, the equivalent of 40 to 60
nuclear bombs traveling from the north to the
south of France, accompanied by a minibus and two
cars,'' Greenpeace spokesman Shaun Burnie said.

Cogema, which organizes the convoys, rejected the
criticism as non-scientific. It said its
transports conformed with standards set by the
International Atomic Energy Agencyand that it had
not had any accident in 15 years of using them.

Hufnagel said Cogema's trucks had escorts and were
built to withstand extreme heat, crashes or a fall
of nine meters (29 feet). ``We comply with the
IAEA's standards, not those set by Greenpeace,''
he said.






_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://chrome.nocdirect.com/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 37 [NukeNet] Atoms For War: US Missing Enough HEU For Potentially
 
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 15:09:50 -0800

 
<x-flowed>




The bomb-grade uranium was loaned, leased or sold
to dozens of countries starting in the 1950's
under the Eisenhower administration's Atoms for
Peace program


Nuclear weapons experts say most of the exported
uranium was weapons grade, and Thomas B. Cochran,
a senior scientist at the Natural Resources
Defense Council in Washington, estimated that the
exported uranium material could make "about a
thousand nuclear" weapons.

"It could be hundreds if the design was
unsophisticated, or thousands if it was more
advanced," he added.



leaving almost 15,000 kilograms still in foreign
hands. That remains true even as the Bush
administration warns that Al Qaeda and possibly
other terrorist organizations are trying to obtain
nuclear materials to make a bomb.

1.
   http://www.nytimes.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/07/international/worldspecial2/07NUKE.html

U.S. Lags in Recovering Fuel Suitable for Nuclear
Arms
By JOEL BRINKLEY and WILLIAM J. BROAD

Published: March 7, 2004


ASHINGTON, March 6 - As the United States presses
Iran and other countries to shut down their
nuclear weapons development programs, government
auditors have disclosed that the United States is
making little effort to recover large quantities
of weapons-grade uranium - enough to make roughly
1,000 nuclear bombs - that the government
dispersed to 43 countries over the last several
decades.

      Advertisement


Among the countries that received the highly
enriched uranium, generally with the expectation
that it would be returned, were Iran and Pakistan.
The chief nuclear weapons expert in Pakistan
recently made the stunning disclosure that his
network had secretly sold uranium and nuclear
technology to Libya, Iran and North Korea.

The auditors said they found that "large
quantities of U.S.-produced highly enriched
uranium were out of U.S. control."

The bomb-grade uranium was loaned, leased or sold
to dozens of countries starting in the 1950's
under the Eisenhower administration's Atoms for
Peace program, which was intended to help other
countries develop nuclear energy facilities or
pursue scientific or medical initiatives. The
dispersals continued until 1988. But the
government's effort to recover the uranium, either
in the form in which it was delivered or as spent
fuel, was lackadaisical, the report suggests.

In the last 50 years, the report says, the
government has recovered approximately 2,600
kilograms (about 5,700 pounds) of 17,500 kilograms
dispersed, In general, it takes about 10 kilograms
of weapons-grade uranium to make a bomb.

Nuclear weapons experts say most of the exported
uranium was weapons grade, and Thomas B. Cochran,
a senior scientist at the Natural Resources
Defense Council in Washington, estimated that the
exported uranium material could make "about a
thousand nuclear" weapons.

"It could be hundreds if the design was
unsophisticated, or thousands if it was more
advanced," he added.

Much of the uranium is in the hands of Western
European or other allied nations, officials said.
But the report, by the Energy Department's
inspector general, says that about half of the
uranium is in the hands of government agencies,
universities or private companies in 12 countries
that are "not expected to participate in the
program" to return it. Among those countries are
Iran, Pakistan, Israel, Mexico, Jamaica and South
Africa. Reasons for declining to return the
material vary; some of the uranium, for example,
is in use at research universities that are loath
to give it up.

Some of the report's findings were first reported
in The Wall Street Journal on Feb. 13.

The Energy Department is in charge of recovering
the uranium, but the effort is housed in the
department's Environmental Management Program, an
office that has been the subject of many stinging
audits and self-evaluations in recent years that
have criticized it as inefficient. The recovery
program was placed there in 1996 because that
office seemed best suited to manage the safe
transport of any nuclear material that was
returned, a senior department official said.

The failure to recover most of the uranium "shows
a complete loss of perspective," said Steven
Aftergood, a security expert at the Federation of
American Scientists, an arms control group in
Washington. "The failure to vigorously pursue it
is a scandal. Few things are more important than
this. It's a serious matter that has not been
taken seriously."

Jeanne Lopatto, a spokeswoman for the Energy
Department, said: "We agree with the findings of
the I.G. report, none of which came as a surprise
to us. In fact, long before the report came out, a
working group" within the department "was studying
the program and making recommendations for
improvement. Our plan is in place to make this a
more effective nonproliferation program."

The senior official said the Energy Department
impaneled a working group last fall to address the
problems. At that time, the inspector general had
finished his investigation but had not published
his report. It was issued Feb. 9. The working
group recommended that the recovery program be
taken out of the environmental office and put in
another office more directly involved with nuclear
proliferation problems, the official said.

Jon Wolfsthal, who ran the recovery program from
1995 to 1997, said one important reason so little
uranium had been returned was that "we are
charging these countries $5,000 a kilogram to get
it back." The fee structure was set in 1996, to
help pay for the program, he added.

The senior official said the department was likely
to begin waiving the fee in many cases and
offering other incentives he would not specify to
encourage countries to return the uranium. He
declined to be identified, Ms. Lopatto said,
because that is what department policy requires.

The department's inspector general issued a
similar report in 2002, saying the Energy
Department had not made sufficient effort to
recover nuclear fuel rods dispersed to other
nations under the Atoms for Peace program. Those
rods contained far smaller quantities of uranium,
generally not enough to make a bomb.


Joel Brinkley reported from Washington for this
article and William J. Broad from New York.



_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://chrome.nocdirect.com/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 38 Sunday Herald: MPs' depleted credibility  

MPs' depleted credibility  

  Readers' Views 
 
 YOU raised valid concerns about responsibility for the use and
effect of depleted uranium (DU) shells (News, February 29), but
responsibility for the deployment and use of such weapons falls
on us all as we elect the MPs who sanction these heinous weapons
in advance of any conflict. We are all to blame for the acts of
our government if we allow them to happen without demur. In a
democracy, all the individual can do is protest by peaceful
demonstration and lobby their MP.

I have done both, but without success. My MP, Rachel Squire,
refuses to table six written questions I asked her to put to the
Defence Minister on the use, effect and clearance of cluster
bombs and DU shells. She refuses on the grounds that similar
questions have been asked by other MPs and the replies to my
specific questions are likely to be the same as the answers
given to those MPs. 

The answer to questions by MPs Jeremy Corbyn and Angus Robertson
were non-answers citing Exemption 13 of the Code of Practice on
Access to Government Information! 

This seems to be a case of dont mention the war in any way that
could embarrass the government into having to answer awkward
questions. With New Labour it seems that the spin machine
dictates what questions an on-message MP can ask. 

Tom Minogue

Dunfermline

*****************************************************************
 39 GLW: Documentary reveals New Mexico nuclear horror
 
Green Left Weekly

Do It For Uncle Graham
Written and directed by Candy Jones
For more information, visit <http.doitforunclegraham.com>. 

Bill Nevins 

New Mexico shares with Japan and some Pacific island nations the 
terrible distinction of having come under direct nuclear attack. 
That is the message delivered by Candy Jones's new documentary 
film, Do It For Uncle Graham. 

Taking its title from one of Jones' ancestors who stood up in 
defence of the people of the US southwest, Do It For Uncle Graham 
uses wit, humor and journalistic skill to uncover a very scary 
story of government disregard for the health and lives of 
citizens in the poorest and most militarised state in the US. 
Filmmaker Candy Jones shows us the true horror lurking behind the 
Land of Enchantment advertising facade put forth by New Mexico's 
tourist bureau. 

That horror includes a history of aboveground and underground 
nuke detonations, forced displacement, catastrophic environmental 
destruction and obscenely dangerous working conditions that have 
resulted in the deaths of untold numbers of New Mexicans over the 
past 60 years. 

All this, as the film shows us so well, has been accompanied by 
government lies, arrogance and recklessness on a scale that would 
be hilariously absurd if it were not so deadly serious. 

New Mexico, of course, is stolen land to begin with. The former 
Mexican province was kept in the status of a “US territory” (or 
colony, like Puerto Rico or Iraq) until the early 1900s when the 
US Anglo settler population had become large enough to “merit” 
statehood. The indigenous Native and Chicano peoples of New 
Mexico were disregarded by the US authorities. Efforts at 
resistance were labelled “savagery”, “tribal war” and “banditry” 
while US capitalists, backed by US armed forces, plunged in to 
grab New Mexico's natural resources. Sound familiar? 

In Do It For Uncle Graham, Candy Jones picks up New Mexico 
history at the point during World War II when the US government 
chose Los Alamos, an idyllic mountain region in northern New 
Mexico, for its atomic weapons research and development centre. 
Soon after that, the White Sands desert area of southern New 
Mexico received the dubious honour of becoming the site for the 
Trinity atomic weapons explosions. The people who lived in those 
areas were made to move or, in many cases, to stay around and 
“enjoy” radioactive fallout and waste leakage. 

The film's most poignant moments are the footage devoted to the 
Dineh (Navajo) nation of indigenous peoples, North America's 
largest indigenous population, centered in western New Mexico and 
Arizona. 

The sadness on the faces of the proud Dineh spokespeople 
interviewed in this film speaks volumes about the meaning of 
betrayal. One indigenous leader, dressed in colorful traditional 
garb, painfully expresses deep disappointment in New Mexico's 
Congressional delegation (Senator Peter Domenici and 
Representative Heather Wilson). He seems close to tears as he 
tells the camera that these “leaders” are no longer welcome on 
Dineh land because of what they have allowed to happen to the 
Dineh people. 

This is a detailed, humourous, frightening and infuriating film, 
all at once. It is being widely screened at schools and 
communities centres across “occupied” New Mexico, and it is 
becoming part of the building “resistance” movement within this 
state. It is also being screened at the Durango, Colorado Film 
Festival, March 6-14, and at other film festivals nationally. 
This film should be seen by everyone.

From Green Left Weekly, March 10, 2004. Visit the Green Left 
Weekly home page. 

*****************************************************************
 40 PM MARSHALL ISLANDS: US Criticised for Cutting Back Nuclear Monitoring

Pacific Magazine
	
 Friday: March 5, 2004 	 

The U.S. Department of Energy  has been strongly criticised for 
cutting the budget of its long-term radiological monitoring 
program on nuclear test-affected islands in this central Pacific 
nation. In a letter to the Department of Energy’s deputy 
assistant secretary, Marshall Islands Ambassador to Washington 
Banny deBrum said it is “with great dismay that I learned your 
office slashed the environmental monitoring program in the 
Marshall Islands by a total of $1,500,000, with $740,000 cut 
specifically from the environmental program.” 

DeBrum said he was “deeply troubled” that the Marshall Islands 
has not heard about this directly from the Department of Energy 
and said he understood that the department’s action will “cut 
essential aspects” of the program in the Marshall Islands. DeBrum 
listed 11 studies and services now funded through the energy 
department for nuclear test-affected islands. The U.S. tested 67 
nuclear weapons at Bikini and Enewetak atolls from 1946 to 1958. 
It has conducted ongoing radiological studies and monitoring at 
these two atolls and Rongelap which was affected by nuclear 
fallout. 

Marshall Islands officials say these ongoing studies are 
essential to allowing future resettlements of these atolls 
because they are providing baseline data on health and safety of 
the islands. DeBrum said the energy department’s unilateral 
action to cut the budget was undermining trust that has developed 
in recent years through annual meetings that develop joint 
response to nuclear test-related needs in the Marshall Islands. 

He said in his letter to the Department of Energy that he wanted 
to “hear from you as to the steps you plan to take to restore the 
programs your agency promised to deliver and to rebuild the trust 
that is essential to our nations’ joint commitment to address the 
radiological problems in the Marshall Islands resulting from U.S. 
nuclear weapons test.” 

U.S. officials in Majuro declined to comment publicly on the 
matter, saying that Marshall Islands concerns are being addressed 
in Washington.- Marianas Variety/PINA                            

Pacific Magazine and Islands Business 

Pacnews Daily News 			   		   			   		   			   		   			   	 	
 		   			   		   			   		   			   	 	
Johnson Tel: (808) 537-9500, Ext. 222 Fax: (808) 537-6455 

Islands Business: Account Executive Litia Naigulevu-Ashley Tel: 
(679) 3303-108 Fax: (679) 3301-423 

Managing Editor Laisa Taga Tel: (679) 3303-108 Fax: (679) 
3301-423                                                                                                                                                                             

Pacific Magazine is published monthly by PacificBasin 
Communications, Inc. Founder: Bruce Jensen. Copyright 2002, 2003 
PacificBasin Communications, Inc. Editorial, advertising offices 
at 1000 Bishop Street. Suite 405, Honolulu HI 96813. Telephone 
(808) 537-9500. Send all address changes to Pacific Magazine, 
P.O.Box 913, Honolulu HI 96808 or e-mail 
pmaddchange@pacificbasin.net

PacificIslands.cc Copyright 2002, 2003 PacificBasin 
Communications Inc. PacificIslands.cc is developed in conjunction 
with Islands Business International in Fiji. For more information 
contact info@pacificbasin.net
*****************************************************************
 41 Salt Lake Tribune: Goshute dissidents rebuffed by federal court, told to pursue
other avenues 

March 06, 2004   
 
By Judy Fahys 
The Salt Lake Tribune 
 
    Dissident Goshutes failed once again Friday to get the
federal courts to invalidate a lease allowing spent reactor fuel
to be stored on the Skull Valley Goshutes Indian Reservation. 
 
    The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver upheld District
Court Judge Paul Cassell's 2002 ruling that the dissidents first
must let the Interior Department's administrative process take
its full course before the courts can consider their complaints.
The court also advised the dissidents the Interior Department is
the proper place to get help with their internal tribal
leadership fights. 
 
    "Until plaintiffs make such a filing, exhaust administrative
remedies, and present this court with a final agency action,"
the appeals court said in an opinion released Friday, "their
claims regarding legitimate tribal leadership will meet the same
fate as those concerning the fuel storage lease." 
 
    Officials from the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs were not
available for comment on the ruling late Friday. Nor were
attorneys for the dissidents, a loose-knit group of Skull Valley
members opposed to plans for the reactor-waste storage. 
 
    The three-member Goshute Executive Committee, led by
Chairman Leon Bear, signed the lease in 1997 to allow Private
Fuel Storage, a consortium of out-of-state utility companies, to
use 100 acres of the reservation as a way station for up to
44,000 tons of reactor waste. Although the lease terms have
never been publicly disclosed, tens or hundreds of millions of
dollars is rumored to be at stake for the tribe. 
 
    The lease has triggered disputes among the 70 Goshute adults
as Private Fuel Storage pursues a license for the facility from
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. One battle landed in
Cassell's court, after 18 dissidents sued officials of the BIA
for giving preliminary approval to the lease. Among the
complaints raised was that the agency had taken just three days
to review the paperwork. 
 
    Friday's appeals court ruling, penned by Justice Stephanie
K. Seymour, basically said the dissidents must exhaust the
Interior Department's review system before the courts would be
able to take up the case. 
 
    The dissidents have been in that system since at least 2000.
They have four pending complaints before the Interior Board of
Indian Appeals in Washington, D.C. In addition, attorneys in
those cases more than a year ago asked Interior Secretary Gale
Norton to personally address their concerns. 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
    On Friday, Idaho attorney Paul EchoHawk said there has been
no word from the Interior Department on any of those cases. 
 
    In the meantime, three of those behind the dissident case --
Sammy Blackbear, Marlinda Moon and their attorney, Duncan
Steadman -- have been indicted for accessing tribal funds after
a 2001 recall and election fight. Also, indicted was tribal
Chairman Bear, accused of embezzling tribal funds and failing to
report some of his income from the tribe to the Internal Revenue
Service. 
 
    fahys@sltrib.com
 
    
 
   
 
   
			   				 	 "> 	                 				 
 
  
Copyright Salt Lake City Tribune
*****************************************************************
 42 Salt Lake Tribune: Many questions, few answers on shipping nuclear rods 
 
March 06, 2004   
 
Tribune Staff and Wire Services 

answers Friday for a congressional panel seeking details of
federal plans for shipping spent nuclear reactor fuel to a
national radioactive waste dump in Nevada. 
 
    Gary Lanthrum, director of the department's Office of
National Transportation, said the DOE will make public in about
six weeks whether it will use trains, trucks or a combination of
both to get the nation's most radioactive waste to Yucca
Mountain. 
 
    "Once we make a decision about mode, then we'll start
talking about where routes will go," Lanthrum said after
testifying in Las Vegas before six House transportation
committee and railroad subcommittee members. 
 
    U.S. Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, noted much of the waste
likely would come through Utah, either by rail or road, and
expressed disappointment with the lack of details on the waste
shipping plans. A member of the House Transportation Committee,
Matheson criticized the Energy Department's decision not to
include an indepth review of moving the waste to Nevada as part
of its original decision on Yucca Mountain. 
 
    Four of every five Utahns live within five miles of routes
that trains and trucks that might be used to haul high-level
nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain. That could mean 2,408 trucks or
448 trains carrying the lethally dangerous waste through Utah
each year over the disposal site's 38-year life, according to on
analysis of the Energy Department's plans. 
 
    "They should have assessed the risk not only in Nevada but
also in Utah," Matheson said in an interview after the hearing. 
 
    "It's clear to me they didn't think through the
transportation when they chose the site." 
 
    The Bush administration and Congress in 2002 picked Yucca
Mountain as the site to bury 77,000 tons of highly radioactive
waste now stored at commercial and military sites in 39 states.
The department is expected to ask the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission by the end of this year for a license to open the
repository in 2010. 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
    Nevada is fighting the plan in federal court, and Reps. Jon
Porter, R-Nev., and Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., used Friday's
hearing to marshal support for another attempt to stop the
project in Congress. 
 
    "Yucca Mountain is not a done deal," Porter declared during
a break in the session chaired by Rep. Jack Quinn, R-N.Y., and
including Reps. Corrine Brown, D-Fla., Julia Carson, D-Ind., and
Matheson. 
 
    Berkley said she hoped the committee would back legislation
to force a comprehensive Energy Department study about the
safety of transporting nuclear waste before the department picks
routes. 
 
    "The public should know how the government is going to
protect people . . . from a mobile Chernobyl," she said,
invoking the name of the world's worst nuclear disaster. 
 
    She insisted the government should make public its plans to
prevent terrorists from attacking trains or trucks hauling casks
of highly radioactive waste across the nation. 
 
    Lanthrum responded that methods for protecting shipments
were classified. But he said DOE officials could brief members
of Congress behind closed doors. 
 
   ----- 
 
    Reporter Judy Fahys contributed to this story. 
 
    
 
   
 
   
			   				 	 "> 	                 				 
 
  
Copyright Salt Lake City Tribune
*****************************************************************
 43 Washington Times: Radioactive waste threatens Central Asia
 
  March 06, 2004 			   
			
MAYLUU-SUU, Kyrgyzstan  Outside the rusting, closed Izolit 
uranium-processing plant, 23 radioactive waste sites exist in the 
landslide-prone hills  a catastrophe in waiting that could spill 
poison into the river below and on to the most populous region of 
Central Asia. 
 
About 70 million cubic feet of tailings left from refining 
uranium ore during the Soviet era are buried in this mountain 
valley along the Mayluu-Suu River. The river runs a short 
distance to Uzbekistan and the Fergana Valley, the region's 
agricultural heartland with 12 million inhabitants. 
 
Potential disasters could spill from the mountains, said Arip 
Kokkozov, an official at the Ministry of Ecology and Emergency 
Situations who monitors Kyrgyz waste sites. Landslides could 
carry waste into the river; snow and rain could cause leaks from 
containers built with outdated technology; wind could blow waste 
through the air; radioactive material could seep into 
groundwater. 
 
"There are many problems. They need to be solved," Mr. Kokkozov 
said in his office in the southern city of Osh. "If there was 
enough money, we could fly it all into space," he joked. 
 
This debt-saddled former Soviet republic has pleaded for outside 
help to clean up the sites, arguing it doesn't have the resources 
to tackle the problem alone. Cleaning up Mayluu-Suu will cost an 
estimated $17 million, officials say. 
 
"I can't say we are receiving enough assistance from abroad, as 
the cost is very high," said Bolot Aidaraliyev, deputy minister 
of ecology and emergency situations. "This is not one day's work. 
Each site requires an individual approach. ... It will take years 
of work to rehabilitate the sites." 
 
The World Bank has pledged $5 million for this year if 
preparations to address the problem go as planned. The money 
would be used to shore up waste sites against landslides and help 
government agencies get ready for a potential disaster. 
 
Japan is giving about $500,000 under one of the first grants in 
the project. The European Union also has been involved through 
its technical assistance program for former Soviet states. 
 
All the former Soviet republics are grappling with environmental 
problems sown by Moscow's former communist regime, and 
radioactive, biological and chemical waste sites dot the 
landscape of Central Asia. 
 
The vast steppes of Kazakhstan were used as a nuclear testing 
ground, and an island in the Aral Sea shared by Kazakhstan and 
Uzbekistan held a biological-weapons testing facility. But the 
waste at Mayluu-Suu poses the most immediate threat to the 
largest number of people. 
 
Mayluu-Suu, which means "oily water" in Kyrgyz, first got into 
the uranium business in 1946 as the Soviet Union rushed to 
develop atomic weapons. Until the 1970s, the town was a 
restricted military zone that only people who lived and worked in 
could enter, a place not shown on maps. 
 
It later became known for its light bulb factory, now a 
Russian-Kyrgyz joint venture that remains the main industry in 
town. "Our goods provide you with the joy of light," a billboard 
proclaims in English on the road leading into town. 
 
There are no cheery slogans at the shuttered Izolit factory, 
where profiles of Lenin and Marx still watch over a model of an 
atom. The crumpled metal remains of a bridge that once crossed 
the river to the factory are rusting, half-submerged in the 
water. 
 
The city's chief physician, Dr. Nemat Mambetov, says health 
officials found levels of radon  a radioactive gas emitted by 
decaying uranium  as high as twice the internationally accepted 
rates in 28 of 30 homes they examined. Dr. Mambetov said cancer 
rates in town also appear higher than normal, but he has no 
funding  and no oncologists in town  to do more detailed 
research. 
 
At High School No. 4, American-studies teacher Valentin 
Ladeishikov is trying to educate people about the dangers in 
their back yard, and has founded the city's only humanitarian 
organization to take on the issue. He said some residents have 
removed radioactive bricks or metal from waste sites and used 
them to build houses. 
 
On his classroom chalkboard below a drawing of the U.S. Capitol, 
Mr. Ladeishikov draws a series of circles showing how the effects 
of a radioactive leak would expand across the region  creating 
ecological refugees who would spread worries about contamination 
for hundreds of miles. 
 
Mr. Ladeishikov has held educational seminars for students on the 
dangers of stealing material from the waste sites and on what to 
do if catastrophe strikes. He is trying to get foreign donations 
to reach more residents. 
 
"They do not realize the danger," Mr. Ladeishikov said. 
 
On the road into the mountains, Raimjan Osmonaliyev, a village 
elder and former uranium miner, and four other men pray on their 
knees facing toward Mecca, just steps from the entrance to the 
uranium mine and the Izolit factory. Mr. Osmonaliyev, 68, said he 
has no plans to move his six daughters and two sons  and so many 
grandchildren he has lost count  away from Mayluu-Suu. 
 
"This is now in our blood," he replied when asked about potential 
harm from radiation. "We've been here since birth; that's why 
there's no injury from it." 
 
Nearby, a sign warns people not to enter the mine, but the fence 
posts have been stripped of the barbed wire that once kept out 
trespassers. 
 
"Even if we're scared, what can we do?" Mr. Osmonaliyev asked. 
"We can't fly into the sky. We can't escape." 
 
• Additional information is available on the Internet at the 
EurasiaNet site on Central Asia's environment: 
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/environment/index.shtml. 
 

 
*****************************************************************
 44 KTNV: Controversy Brewing Over Nuclear Waste

[13 Action News]                                                                                                        
 			   			 						 			 			 			
 Channel 13 News Posted: March 5, 2004 

An Energy Department official fielded some pointed questions 
today about plans to ship spent nuclear reactor fuel to a 
national radioactive waste dump in Nevada. 

But he stood firm and said the D-O-E will make public in about a 
month-and-a-half its plans to use trains or trucks to get the 
nation's most radioactive waste to Yucca Mountain. 

Gary Lanthrum is director of the Energy Department's Office of 
National Transportation. 

He testified today in Las Vegas before a subcommittee including 
Nevada representatives Jon Porter and Shelley Berkley. 

He says the decision on how to ship highly radioactive waste from 
43 states could come within a month and a half. 

Then, the D-O-E intends to conduct environmental studies on 
routes -- and the specifics of getting waste to Yucca Mountain 
beginning in 2010. 

That's the site 90 miles from Las Vegas that Congress has picked 
to bury 77,000 tons of nuclear waste. 

(Copyright 2004 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) 
			   			   			  			   		 		
 			   			

EEO Public File Report © 2004 KTNV and Journal Broadcast Group                         
*****************************************************************
 45 Times-Standard: PG displays exhibits to explain spent nuclear fuel plans

Article Last Updated: Sunday, March 07, 2004 -
 		   	 	
By Chris Durant The Times-Standard

 EUREKA -- North Coast residents were shown a number of exhibits 
at South Bay Elementary School on Saturday that illustrated 
Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s plans on storing its spent nuclear 
fuel.

 PG &E Public Relations Representative Jim Chaaban said the 
utility company applied for a federal Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission license in February that would allow it to build a dry 
storage facility for the fuel.

 The application process could take years.

 The fuel rods, containing ceramic coated plutonium pellets 
stacked end to end, are currently being stored in a 26-foot deep 
pool at the King Salmon power plant. The plan is to move the rods 
into dry, steel casks that will be placed in concrete on a bluff 
on the utility's property. The casks will be transportable. The 
target date for moving the rods is 2009.

 "It's still a ways off," Chaaban said. "But there's a lot of 
things we can do locally to make sure people understand."                       

 				
 					   						 					   				 				
 					   						

 							
 								   									
 									 									
 									 									
 									 									
 									 


  OTHER ARTICLES IN THIS SECTION 3/7/2004 - Open land meets 
housing demand - California State Fair accepting nominations for 
agriculture awards - Symposium on redwoods set in Rohnert Park - 
Budget worries at fore of supervisors' attention - Teen rights 
discussed at law clinic   

 Chaaban said the utility works with a community advisory board 
that helps determine how to go about informing the public. The 
community advisory board is made up of local officials like 
members of the Arcata City Council and the Humboldt County Board 
of Supervisors.

 More examples of keeping the community informed on the status of 
the project include a website, that should be running within the 
next couple months, and an information phone number, which is 
444-0817.

 "People can call this number and we can ship them information," 
Chaaban said. "We want to exhaust as many inquiries and questions 
as possible to make sure people are satisfied."

 Humboldt Bay Power Plant Manager Roy Willis said that getting 
information to the public is not a required part of the 
application process.

 "This is something we felt we needed to do," Willis said. "We 
plan on doing this a lot. We plan on doing a lot more with the 
media, a lot more with mailers and we're going to do a lot more 
with public officials."

 Willis said there are presentations planned for the Humboldt 
County Board of Supervisors.

 "It's all self-initiated," Willis said. "100 percent of it."

 Some of Saturday's exhibits included a video on fuel rod 
storage, a scale model of a fuel rod, information on radiation 
and detailed information on the storage flasks.

 "We're out there now," Willis said. "We published our 
application, we're in the public forum and people need to know 
what it is so they don't fear it."

 About 40 people attended Saturday's workshop.

© 2003 Times - Standard 		   	 
*****************************************************************
 46 Las Vegas RJ: NEVADA VIEWS: Nuke shipments are safe 
 
Sunday, March 07, 2004

Transportation to Yucca Mountain nothing for Nevadans to worry
about 
SPECIAL TO THE REVIEW-JOURNAL
 
In an absence of complete information, it has proven easy for
the opponents of the Yucca Mountain repository to raise fears
about the transportation of used commercial nuclear fuel and
high-level radioactive waste to the site. But as more specifics
are learned about transportation, and details develop regarding
shipments to Yucca Mountain, my fellow residents of Nevada can
feel confident about the technology and the process.
 
 The announcement late last year that more than 90 percent of
the shipments will travel by rail, over the "Caliente" route
which would keep it 90 miles from Las Vegas at all times, should
add to that confidence. This is the conclusion of the final
environmental impact statement: Rail shipments are inherently
more secure, they are more efficient so there will be fewer
shipments, and the route chosen is particularly remote from
cities and populated areas. 
History has taught us that the transportation of nuclear
materials is safe. During the past 40 years there have been
thousands of shipments in the United States of used nuclear
fuel, traveling more than 1.6 million miles, of which almost
one-quarter were by rail. Since 1990 almost two-thirds of the
shipments have been by railroad. There has never been a release
of radioactive material from those shipments, even though there
have been train accidents involving nuclear fuel.
 
 In the few transportation accidents that have occurred, the
shipping containers performed perfectly, preventing harm to the
cargo and any release of radioactive material. We are not alone
in shipping these materials. France and Britain together average
650 shipments per year, and have already shipped as much used
fuel as is destined for Yucca Mountain. 
It is important to remember that what is being shipped is a
solid ceramic sealed in many layers of a variety of metals, so
there is really nothing to spill. Even in the extremely unlikely
case that a container might be breached, the material would be
confined to a small area with little hazard to the public and no
measurable health consequences. 
Many agencies will oversee the shipment of spent nuclear fuel
and waste. The Department of Transportation will closely
regulate shipping and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will
impose its requirements for safe preparation, handling and
transport. That includes certified containers, advance approvals
and notification of local and state authorities. States, local,
regional and tribal authorities will all be involved in the
process of routing and shipping the material. There is even an
existing working group of these organizations set up to keep
them involved at every step. 
The state of Nevada needs to move from being obstructionist to
really looking out for the interests of its citizens. A new rail
line will need to be constructed, and we need to ensure that it
meets all our environmental requirements and that impacts to
communities are minimized. We need to participate in everything
from understanding the latest research on safe rail
transportation and container design to emergency planning and
readiness for any contingency. Train accidents do occur, and
although hazardous quantities of radioactive material would not
be released, we still must be prepared to deal with all the
possibilities. 
We also need to get real about the scale of the shipments. There
will be about 175 spent fuel and waste trains per year.
Thousands of trucks and trains traveling daily through our state
-- supplying everything from hazardous materials such as
explosive gasoline, toxic chlorine and many carcinogens to the
mundane components of concrete -- dwarf the rate of shipment of
used nuclear fuel.
 
 In this country there are 300,000 shipments every day of
petroleum products alone. Even the most hazardous of these
materials, toxic gases and explosives, will not see the level of
escort, guarding, oversight and 24-hour satellite tracking that
nuclear fuel does. Nevada can opt to have the shipments escorted
during their entire travel in the state. The DOE will also train
any state or local personnel involved in safeguarding the
shipments or responding to emergencies; that training will
benefit every citizen along the transportation routes. 
While there is little for Nevadans to be concerned about
regarding the shipment of used nuclear fuel and waste, there are
significant benefits to be gained. Payments to the state
mandated by law cannot be made unless shipments begin to take
place. 
The current schedule is to have the transportation system in
place, including the rail line constructed, in 2007, and to have
shipments begin in 2010. We cannot get those promised funds
until then, and any delay means that much longer we have to wait
for the federal money. 
There is only one conclusion. The proposed rail shipments to
Yucca Mountain will have minimal adverse effects on our
environment and none on our people. Yet our failure to be
engaged in the process can leave us out of important
decision-making, and it can cost the state funds we can surely
use.


Dr. Denis E. Beller is a research professor at UNLV and the
Idaho State University, where he conducts research to develop
advanced technology for recycling used nuclear fuel while
reducing the quantity and radiotoxicity of the waste from that
recycling. 

Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
 47 Las Vegas RJ: YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Rail corridor plan faces scrutiny 
 
Saturday, March 06, 2004
 

House panel hears doubts about nuclear waste shipping methods,
routes By KEITH ROGERS
REVIEW-JOURNAL
 
Gary Lanthrum, radioactive waste transportation chief for the
Department of Energy, speaks Friday to members of the House
Subcommittee on Railroads meeting in Las Vegas.
Photo by Clint Karlsen.

The Department of Energy is putting "the caboose before the
engine" by proceeding with plans to withdraw land or seek a
right of way for a 319-mile railroad corridor in rural Nevada to
haul nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, a state official told a
House subcommittee Friday.
 
 The department intends to first select the route known as the
Caliente Corridor or another route and to ask questions about
environmental and safety concerns later, said state Nuclear
Projects Agency chief Bob Loux. 
"The fact is DOE has no transportation plan. ... In this case,
it's putting the caboose before the engine," Loux told the House
Subcommittee on Railroads during a hearing at the Clark County
Government Center. 
Nevada's representatives on the subcommittee said they would
pursue a bill suggested by former Nevada Sen. Richard Bryan to
require the Energy Department to develop a credible,
safety-based transportation plan and draft an environmental
impact statement before the agency applies for a license to
construct a repository, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
 
 DOE officials have said they intend to submit a license
application in December for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to
review. That means such a bill, if passed by Congress and signed
by the president, could push the project back a couple years in
light of what it takes to prepare those documents and gather
comments for a project of that magnitude.
 
 "I think we have some allies," Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev.,
said after the hearing, referring to her out-of-state colleagues
on the subcommittee. A half dozen members attended Friday's
hearing.
 
 "When we get back to Congress, we're going to work on this as a
team," she said about the bill.
 
 Her comments were echoed by subcommittee member Rep. Jon
Porter, R-Nev., who noted, "Right now there's not a
(transportation) plan in place and not a requirement for one."
 
 DOE's radioactive waste transportation chief, Gary Lanthrum,
and Surface Transportation Board Chairman Roger Nober tried at
the hearing to explain the legal process their agencies are
following. But Porter said afterward they didn't answer the
broad questions about safety and security of nuclear waste
shipments and the potential for terrorist attacks.
 
 Lanthrum said he anticipates that by late April the department
will decide on a mode of transportation, mostly rail or mostly
truck, and then select routes.
 
 "We anticipate that in the near future we will issue a record
of decision to make a transportation mode decision and, as
appropriate, a corridor selection, but we have not done so yet,"
Lanthrum said, reading from a statement to the subcommittee
chaired by Jack Quinn, R-New York. 
"We believe that we can implement a transportation system that
is safe and secure and merits public confidence," Lanthrum said. 
Under questioning from Porter about moving forward with the
project against the wishes of Nevada, Lanthrum explained that
his office is following the law and the will of Congress, which
approved the Yucca Mountain site.
 
 "We don't believe moving ahead is thumbing our nose at the
state of Nevada," Lanthrum said.
 
 At the hearing Nevada's transportation adviser, Robert
Halstead, said selecting the preferred Caliente rail corridor
would not keep trains hauling nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain
out of Las Vegas.
 
 The number of nuclear-waste rail shipments through Las Vegas
over the 24-year hauling campaign could be as low as 660, or 7
percent of the total, or as high as 8,564, or 89 percent of the
total.
 
 In his opening remarks, Porter warned of dangers from hauling
nuclear waste by rail along with general freight.
 
 "The risks of collision and derailment exist at every point
within the system and especially within the rail yards of our
major cities," he said. "Every day, thousands of cars are
slammed together to form trains. Under current plans, nuclear
waste could be mixed in with trains carrying cars, cows or
candy."
 
 Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, said from his state's perspective
the transportation risks were never adequately assessed before
Congress approved the Yucca Mountain Project in 2002.
 
 Wilderness advocates, as well, noted that endangered species
and three wilderness study areas would be affected if the
Caliente rail corridor is chosen. 
Berkley raised the specter of a terrorist attack on nuclear
waste bound for Yucca Mountain. She questioned the secrecy
shrouding contingency plans for dealing with such a threat.
 
 "This is something the public should know, because it affects
them in a very direct way," she said.
 
 Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Fla., was equally concerned about a
terrorist attack.
 
 "I have a great amount of concern since Sept. 11 (2001) of what
we should be doing in terms of rail safety," she said. 
Rep. Julia Carson, D- Ind., said she, too, is concerned about
the volume of nuclear waste shipments that would pass through
Indianapolis, but she said she realizes that DOE has a different
objective.
 
 "Your job is to design a plan to get rid of this stuff, dump it
somewhere," she said. 
Although he was not invited to participate in the field hearing,
Caliente Mayor Kevin Phillips, in written comments, accused
Nevada and Clark County officials of seeking to delay DOE's
transportation decisions. He said the repository's final impact
statement is adequate for selecting a preferred transportation
mode and routes.
 
 
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
 48 Las Vegas RJ: Budget plan reduces Yucca spending 
 
Saturday, March 06, 2004
 

Panel chops $303 million off DOE request By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
 

WASHINGTON -- A 2005 federal budget plan set to be debated in
the U.S. Senate next week calls for limited spending next year
on the Yucca Mountain Project, according to Sen. John Ensign,
R-Nev.
 
 Ensign said Friday the budget blueprint calls for Congress to
spend $577 million on the proposed Nevada nuclear waste
repository, $303 million less than the Department of Energy had
requested.
 
 The budget amount is closer to the $580 million that lawmakers
set aside this year for the project.
 
 "The DOE wanted a very high level of funding next year, and we
tried to do everything in the Budget Committee we can to cut the
funding," said Ensign, who opposes the project along with most
other Nevada elected leaders.
 
 The budget blueprint serves to guide lawmakers when they write
follow-up appropriations bills later this year that set the
actual spending amounts for federal programs.
 
 The funding levels in the budget document are translated into
allocations for appropriations committees. So while the reduced
budget amount for the Yucca Mountain Project does not
automatically cut its spending accordingly, it could increase
pressure on lawmakers to limit the repository program or cut
others instead. 
"Considering how tight the rest of the budget is, (the Yucca
Mountain Project) will not be able to have any more money,"
Ensign maintained.
 
 The Senate Budget Committee completed its blueprint on Thursday
night, sending the plan to the Senate floor for votes next week.
Ensign, who sits on the panel, negotiated the figures for
nuclear waste spending with committee leaders.
 
 Ensign said he also got Budget Committee Chairman Don Nickles,
R-Okla., to kill accounting changes that the Bush administration
had sought to ease annual spending battles over the Yucca
Mountain Project.
 
 "That had no chance," Ensign said. "I went to Nickles, and he
knew that was not going to happen."
 
 Energy Department spokesman Allen Benson on Friday declined to
comment on possible implications of the Senate action.
 
 "The administration has submitted a budget request for nuclear
waste management," he said. "That budget will enable us to move
ahead with the program."
 
 
Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal
*****************************************************************
 49 KC Chronicle: Elburn hires firm to deal with radium removal plan
 
kcchronicle.com

Ran in the Kane County Chronicle


By DAN CHANZIT
Kane County Chronicle

ELBURN — The village is another step closer to implementing its
radium removal plan.

This week, the village hired engineering consultant Rempe-Sharpe
of Geneva to handle the design and preliminary plans. 

The contract is for $180,000, which is included in the estimated
$1.1 million that it will cost to build radium removal
structures. The silos will contain zeolite filters, which were
developed by Colorado-based Water Remediation Technology.

Elburn is among dozens of municipalities either considering or
implementing the new technology to remove radium from their
water supplies.

"There is a considerable amount of interest," Village President
James Willey said. "It's the right technology for our situation."

WRT's method involves sending water through pipes and filters
made of the mineral zeolite. Radium is trapped by the filters. 
Radium is a naturally occurring radioactive material found in
most deep wells around northern Illinois. 

The Environmental Protection Agency requires all municipalities
to comply with new water quality standards, which include lower
radium levels.

Last month, Bill Gain, the village's engineering consultant at
Rempe-Sharpe, released sketches and timelines on implementing
the zeolite method. 

He said the village could finish construction of the needed
system upgrades by the end of 2005. 

Large cylindrical structures would be built near each of the
village's two wells — one on North First Street and the other on
East North Street.

Blackberry Creek residents will be served by a new well and
radium treatment silo. Gain said developer B Enterprises may
upgrade the silo's design to make it appear more like a house.

"To fit the character of the neighborhood," Gain said. 
  
  us. Copyright - 1999-2003
Kane County Chronicle - 1000 Randall Road - Geneva, Illinois
60134 - (630) 232-9222 - Subscription (630) 232-9239.   

*****************************************************************
 50 Sunday Herald: Fears over bid to lower toxic waste limits 

  Plans to ease nuclear restrictions could see contaminated
materials dumped in landfills

By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor 
 
 The government is examining plans to relax safety limits to 
allow low-level radioactive waste from civil and military nuclear 
plants to be dumped in landfill sites around the country.

Contaminated metal and other materials from reactors and related 
facilities could also be recycled into household products, such 
as food containers and furniture. Radioactive rubble could be 
used to build roads, or used in other major construction 
projects.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) 
has just finished a consultation exercise on a scheme that would 
allow ordinary waste to contain more radioactivity than currently 
allowed.

Materials contaminated by twice as much plutonium and up to 250 
times more radioactive tritium could be disposed of along with 
ordinary rubbish, or reused in consumer goods.

The plan has been greeted with horror by environmental groups and 
radiation experts. This is nothing more than a cost-cutting 
exercise for a dangerous and virtually bankrupt industry, said 
Greenpeace anti-nuclear campaigner, Pete Roche. It is the public 
who will pay with damage to our health and environment. 

He pointed out that the nuclear industry was now cleaning up the 
massive radioactive mess it had made over the last 50 years, 
starting at Dounreay in Caithness and Sellafield in Cumbria.

These proposals will make it cheaper and easier for the industry 
to do a shoddy job, and dump more contaminated waste around the 
country. The thousands of people who live near landfill sites 
should be up in arms.

Defra has asked for views on a set of recommendations from the 
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a United Nations body 
with a remit to promote nuclear power. The recommendations would 
significantly raise the clearance levels below which contam 
ination by certain radioactive isotopes would be regarded as of 
no regulatory concern.

The scheme would also allow a massive increase in the clearance 
level for tritium, which particularly worries experts who point 
out that there have already been problems with tritium leaking 
from landfill sites.

The Sunday Herald revealed in 1999 that water leaking from a 
dozen waste tips across Scotland was contaminated with tritium. 
It was thought to have come from dumped exit signs and old 
trimphone dials, which incorporated tritium to make them glow in 
the dark.

Ian Jackson, a government radiation consultant, warned that 
landfill dumps can lead to the accumulation of pollutants, as can 
incineration. The proposed new clearance levels could 
inadvertently concentrate radioactive materials outside 
regulatory control, he said.

Although the proposals may be sensible from a radiological 
protection point of view, they were politically tricky for the 
government, warned Jackson, a former nuclear inspector with the 
Environment Agency in England. 

Richard Bramhall, from the Low Level Radiation Campaign, pointed 
out that the IAEA proposals under another guise had been rejected 
in 2000 by the then environment minister, Michael Meacher. But 
Bramhall was alarmed that they were now being resurrected .

There are millions of tonnes of low-level contaminated material 
worldwide, he said. If the industry can classify it as of no 
regulatory concern and can dump it anywhere, it will save them 
money.

The relaxation would also assist the Ministry of Defence, which 
has been attempting to decontaminate some of its military sites 
so that they can be sold off. Many, like RAF Carlisle, have been 
polluted with the remains of the radium that was used to luminise 
aircraft dials.

Despite a series of phone calls and e-mails over two weeks, Defra 
failed to respond to questions from the Sunday Herald over the 
IAEA proposals. But in a letter to stakeholders, dated February 
10, 2004, Defras Chris Wilson wrote that responses should be in 
by March 1.

IAEA safety guides are not binding on its member states but are, 
however, highly regarded as representing an international 
consensus and are influential worldwide in promoting good 
practice, he said.

However, the fact that we are seeking your views on the document 
should not be taken as indicating that Defra is considering 
changes to the Radioactive Substances Act or its subordinate 
legislation. 07 March 2004 

  © newsquest (sunday herald) limited. all rights reserved   
*****************************************************************
 51 KLAS: Water is Center of Heated Nukes Debate
  
  Edward Lawrence, Reporter

(Mar. 5) -- For the first time in at least 5 years someone from 
the Department of Energy sat before a public hearing on Yucca 
Mountain. The Federal Transportation and Infrastructure 
subcommittee held a hearing in Las Vegas Friday morning. The new 
battle surrounding Yucca Mountain will be over water. 

DOE would need 140 million gallons of water to operate the 
repository. That amount would supply enough water for over 480 
families in the Valley each year according to Representative 
Shelley Berkley. "So are we going to take water from 480 families 
in order to build Yucca Mountain, which none of us want in the 
first place?" 

This is a renewed battle. Our local representatives have stepped 
up the pressure on the DOE. Representative Jon Porter said,  "We 
are trying to make sure they don't have the resources they need 
to operate because we don't agree with Yucca Mountain." 

At the hearing, in front of representatives from four other 
states, the water issue stumped the DOE's Director of 
Transportation Gary Lanthrum. Lanthrum told the subcommittee the 
department was not that far in the planning. In fact the 
transportation director dodged a number of questions posed to 
him, including the announcement in December of a preferred waste 
route through Caliente. 

Rep. Shelley Berkley; "So in other words after you make the 
selection then you go back and tell them what the impact is on 
their land?" 

Robert Halstead, state transportation advisor said, "We've given 
the department all kinds of constructive advice since 1990. For 
the life of me I don't understand why they listened to so little 
of it." 

The Nevada Transportation Advisor shares the same frustration as 
our elected delegation concerning nuclear waste shipments to 
Yucca Mountain. 

Rep. Jon porter; "No, we are not getting the answers. And that is 
why I wanted to bring the committee here, to hear it first hand 
that we are not getting the answers." 

Rep. Shelley Berkley; "We don't know how they are transporting 
the waste. We don't know how they will safely transport the 
waste. And now we don't know where they will get the water in 
order to build Yucca Mountain." 

That water issue will become the next big battle as the offensive 
to stop nuclear waste shipments to Yucca Mountain continues. 

Eyewitness News tried to get some clarification from the 
Department of Energy representative. He walked quickly to a car 
in the parking lot saying he wouldn't talk because he had to 
catch a plane.   

klas.static.worldnow.com
  
All content © Copyright 2000 - 2004 WorldNow and KLAS. All
*****************************************************************
 52 Las Vegas SUN: Federal budget plan calls for limited Yucca Mountain spending
 
ASSOCIATED PRESS 

LAS VEGAS (AP) - A federal budget plan set for consideration next 
week in the Senate would limit spending next year on a proposed 
nuclear waste repository in southern Nevada. 

The budget blueprint calls for Congress to spend $577 million on 
the Yucca Mountain Project, $303 million less than the Department 
of Energy had requested, said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. 

Lawmakers set aside $580 million this year for Yucca Mountain, 
located 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. 

"The DOE wanted a very high level of funding next year, and we 
tried to do everything in the Budget Committee we can to cut the 
funding," Ensign told the Las Vegas Review-Journal for a Saturday 
report. 

The budget blueprint serves to guide lawmakers when they craft 
legislation later this year that will set the actual spending 
amounts for federal programs. 

"Considering how tight the rest of the budget is, (the Yucca 
Mountain Project) will not be able to have any more money," said 
Ensign, who opposes the project along with most of Nevada's 
elected leaders. 

The Senate Budget Committee completed its blueprint Thursday, 
sending the plan to the Senate floor for votes next week. Ensign, 
who sits on the panel, negotiated the figures for nuclear waste 
spending with committee leaders. 

Ensign said he also persuaded Budget Committee Chairman Don 
Nickles, R-Okla., to remove accounting changes sought by the Bush 
administration that would have eased annual spending battles 
concerning Yucca Mountain. 

"That had no chance," Ensign said. "I went to Nickles, and he 
knew that was not going to happen." 

Energy Department spokesman Allen Benson declined Friday to 
discuss the possible implications of the Senate action. 

"The administration has submitted a budget request for nuclear 
waste management," he said. "That budget will enable us to move 
ahead with the program." 

Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal 

-- 


 
*****************************************************************
 53 50 Years of Nuclear Testing Fallibility.  Bravo?
 
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 17:49:05 -0600 (CST)

 
From: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
Date: 02/28/04 18:35:39
To: Raulmax@aol.com
Subject: 50 Years of Nuclear Testing Fallibility. Bravo?

March 1 st , 2004 marks the 50 th anniversary of the 1954 US "Bravo"
hydrogen bomb test on Bikini Atoll in the Marsh=ll Islands that unexpectedly
turned out to be the largest US nuclear test ever exploded. "Bravo" gouged a
crater about a mile wide in the reef of Bikini Atoll. Within seconds of the
blast, the fireball was nearly three miles in diameter. On Rongerik, an
island 135 miles east of the blast, the illumination from "Bravo" was
visible for almost one minute. Physicist Marshall Rosenbluth, located on a
ship about 30 miles away, stated that the fireball "just kept rising and
rising, and spreading.it looked to me like what you might imagine a diseased
brain, or a brain of some mad man would look like on the surface.and the air
started getting filled with this gray stuff, which I guess was somewhat
radioactive coral."
Human Fallibility
"Bravo" brought to light the consequences of human fallibility with regards
to nuclear weapons. In preparing for the test, Los Alamos scientists missed
an important fusion reaction and grossly underestimated the size of the
explosion. The scientists expected that the test would yield the equivalent
of five million tons of TNT, but instead "Bravo" yielded 15 megatons -
making the destructive force three times larger than expected and more than
1,000 times greater than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima that caused a total
of some 135,000 casualties.
Human Consequences
Some 80 miles east of Bikini , a snow-like substance began raining down on
23 fishermen onboard a Japanese tuna fishing vessel called the Lucky Dragon.
The fishermen had no idea that the ash was fallout from the hydrogen bomb
test. When they returned to their home port of Yaizu in Shizuoka prefecture
on 14 March, all of the fisherman were suffering from severe radiation
sickness. In September 1954, the radio telegraph operator on the Lucky
Dragon died. The incident raised interest and concern both in Japan and
around the world. Following extended negotiations, the US made a payment of
$2 million to the Japanese government in January 1955, without legal
liability, to compensate for all injuries and damages caused as a result of
the five nuclear tests it had conducted in the Marshall Islands . Marshall
Islanders on Rongelap and Utirik atolls (about 100 miles east of Bikini )
were also exposed to the fallout. An Islander on Rongelap recalls, "[There
was] a loud explosion and within minutes the ground began to shake. A few
hours later, the radioactive fallout began to drop on the people, into the
drinking water, and on the food. The children played in the colorful
ash-like powder. They did not know what it was." While 28 US Service
Personnel located on Rongerik (about 135 east of Bikini ) were evacuated
within 34 hours of the test, Rongelap and Utirik islanders exposed to the
fallout were not evacuated for another day. By this time, many of the
Rongelap islanders had severe burns, lesions and were beginning to lose
their hair. The Marshall Islands became a United Nations Trust Territory of
the US after World War II. While "Bravo" is a well-known test, the US
conducted a total of 67 nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands alone from
1946 to 1958. The total yield of the 67 tests was 108 megatons, equivalent
to the destructive force of more than 7,000 Hiroshima bombs. In 1988, the
Marshall Islands Nuclear Claims Tribunal was established to grant
compensation to Marshall Islanders for personal injury deemed to have been
caused by nuclear testing.
Although some $270 million was provided to victims between 1986 and 2001,
half a century later, islanders are still waiting on a stalled bid for
compensation. During a visit to the Marshall Islands in January 2004,
Congressman Richard Pombo (R-CA), who chairs the House Resources Committee
which oversees funding to the Marshall Islands , admitted that Washington 's
obligations have not ended. Pombo stated, "Obviously, the United States has
an ongoing liability (for the nuclear test legacy). This issue is 50 years
old. At some point we need to find closure."
Historical Lesson Lost?
Despite fallibility in the history of US nuclear testing, Congress
authorized the US Department of Energy (DoE) $34 million in its Fiscal Year
2004 budget to improve the Nevada Test Site. In addition, the FY 2004 budget
authorized $25 million for enhanced test site readiness, which decreased the
preparation time to resume nuclear testing from 24-36 months to 24 months.
The DoE's FY 2005 budget recommendation submitted to Congress includes a
funding request to ensure that the Nevada Test Site could execute an
underground nuclear weapons test within 18 months of receiving orders by the
President. According to the DoE's budget documents, the Nevada Test Site
would receive a 14% increase in its "science campaign," with some of the
money improving test readiness by "maintaining critical personnel, equipment
and infrastructure."
While the present US administration insists that it will not end the
worldwide test moratorium that has been in place since 1992, increased
funding for enhanced readiness of the Nevada Test Site appears to be part of
a well-coordinated effort to resume production of nuclear weapons, including
new and untested weapons. Resumption of US full-scale underground nuclear
testing would undoubtedly lead other countries to resume testing,
essentially defeating any chance for near or long-term US ratification of
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Neither the US nor the rest of the world
can afford the nuclear arms race that would be caused by resuming nuclear
testing.

Take Action
1. Voice your concerns to your elected officials. Call, email, fax or write
the President and your Congressional representatives, asking them to
maintain the current moratorium on nuclear testing and reject any funding
for nuclear weapons testing or enhanced readiness of the Nevada Test Site.
Here is a sample letter that you can modify and email:
http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/action/urgent-actions/bravo/letter.htm or
print and fax:
http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/action/urgent-actions/bravo/bravo.doc to the
President.
To find contact information for your Congressional Representatives, visit
www.congress.org   and simply enter your zip code. Click here
http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/action/urgent-actions/bravo/bravo.doc to
download a sample letter that you can modify and send.
2. Find out more about "Bravo." For more information on those affected by US
nuclear testing and to take further action, please visit:
http://www.bikiniatoll.com/home.html
*****************************************************************
 54 [EMMAS] Call For Vanunu's Unconditional Release
 
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:40:50 -0600 (CST)

 
    Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 16:59:18 -1000
    From: viviane <vlerner@interpac.net>

http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#2a
Call For Vanunu's Unconditional Release

Mordechai Vanunu's supporters around the world continue to call for his
freedom as they count down the days till his 21 April 2004 release date.

An international delegation, including Nobel Laureate Mairead Maguire, will
be in Israel to welcome Mordechai Vanunu to freedom, with participants from
the United States, England, Israel, Holland, Italy, Australia, Hungary,
Ireland, Japan, Norway, and more. About 20 people from the U.S. will be
joining the delegation, including coordinator Felice Cohen-Joppa and
associate coordinator Art Laffin, adoptive parents Nick and Mary Eoloff,
Episcopal Church representatives, anti-nuclear and human rights activists,
Catholic Workers and others.

In late December and early January, a flurry of international media reports
confirmed that Israeli authorities were contemplating various restrictions
and conditions on Vanunu after his release date, including never allowing
him to speak to the press or leave the country, and even administrative
detention. On 24 February Prime Minister Sharon and other Israeli officials
had a meeting to discuss their options. They decided that keeping Mordechai
in administrative detention would likely not pass a High Court review. But
they do plan to impose restrictions, including refusing to issue him a
passport and permission to leave Israel.

With the same specious arguments used to consistently deny Vanunu parole,
these authorities disingenuously claim that Vanunu still threatens Israel's
security with unrevealed secrets. This is of course absurd. Mordechai Vanunu
has been locked away from the world for almost 18 years and has nothing
further to reveal.

In recent years, there has been more information about Dimona and Israel's
nuclear arsenal on Israeli television, in Israeli newspapers and on the
internet than Mordechai Vanunu ever knew or shared with the London Sunday
Times. A recent Israeli television program showed graphics based on his
clandestine photos of Dimona.

As Yael Lotan, co-founder of the Israeli Committee to Free Vanunu and for a
Middle East Free From Weapons of Mass Destruction, recently wrote on behalf
of the Committee, "We appeal to the Israeli and world public opinion to call
on the Israeli government to stop this abuse and to set Mordechai Vanunu
free. Instead of tormenting Vanunu, the Israeli government had better begin
to shut down the Dimona reactor, sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty
and enter into negotiations to make the Middle East free from weapons of
mass destruction."

Write to the Israeli Ambassador in your country and to other Israeli
officials to demand Mordechai Vanunu's freedom. Tell them to release
Mordechai Vanunu without condition or restriction. In April he will have
served his entire sentence and has no more secrets to reveal. He should be
allowed to leave Israel as a free man.
Sign the international petition, either online at
http://www.nonviolence.org/vanunu  or contact the US Campaign to free
Mordechai Vanunu for printed copies.
Visit your congressperson, or an aide in their local office, to speak with
them about Mordechai Vanunu's scheduled release date. For more information,
or to receive an information packet to bring with you, please contact the US
Campaign.
Send a note of support to Mordechai Vanunu, Ashkelon Prison, Ashkelon,
Israel.
Join a worldwide vigils scheduled on 21 April 2004 to celebrate Mordechai
Vanunu's release. Are you interested in having a vigil in your city?

Contact the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu at P.O. Box 43384,
Tucson, AZ 85733, phone/fax 520.323.8697, email freevanunu@mindspring.com or
visit http://www.nonviolence.org/vanunu  for background information and
regular updates. You can donate online at the campaign website, or mail
checks or money orders made payable to the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai
Vanunu at the address above. (Checks and money orders of $50 or more can be
tax-deductible if made payable to the Progressive Foundation.)

=========
*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.***

#################################################################
" 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
<majordomo@cs.pdx.edu>
with the message subscribe/unsubscribe emmasdance. [No subject is
needed.]

"If I can not dance, I want no part in your revolution."  Emma Goldman

#################################################################
*****************************************************************
 55 BulletinWire News: 50 years ago: The day the sun rose twice                                                
 		
BulletinWire | March 5, 2004
 						
On March 1, 1954, the United States conducted the 15-megaton 
Bravo test in the Pacifics Bikini Atoll and sparked what many 
call the worst radiological disaster in U.S. history. The first 
explosion in the Operation Castle testing series, Bravo was 2.5 
times more powerful than predicted—the largest U.S. nuclear test 
ever. The hydrogen bomb was detonated in unfavorable weather; 
winds were blowing toward populated islands. Radioactive fallout 
was blown hundreds of miles east from ground zero across the 
inhabited Marshall Islands, exposing residents and their land to 
extremely dangerous levels of radiation.
 						
Bulletin contributor Colin Woodard visited the Marshall Islands 
in 1998 and spoke with Norio Kebelni, a Marshallese man who was 
11 years old when he saw the Bravo explosion from his home on 
Rongelap island, about 120 miles from Bikini—Bravos fireball was 
nearly 4 miles in diameter and could be seen as far as 2,600 
miles away.
 						
Suddenly a second sun appeared in the western sky and became 
bigger and bigger. It was a huge cloud with yellow and orange, 
mushroom-shaped, and the light was so strong it hurt my eyes, 
[Kebelni said]. A few hours later it snowed on Rongelap, a gray 
ash that curious children played in and old people rubbed on 
their bodies.
 						
Ten years ago, for the fortieth anniversary of the Bravo test, 
Jonathan Weisgall, an attorney who has represented Bikini 
citizens for more than 20 years, wrote a guest opinion piece in 
the Bulletin, demanding that the government apologize for the 
radioactive contamination of the atolls and the cover-up that 
followed.
 						
The greatest irony of the Bravo shot was the decision not to 
evacuate any Marshallese. . . . The secrecy about the fallout 
exposure—and the later lies about a wind shift—were 
unconscionable acts. It is time for a governmental apology, wrote 
Weisgall.
 														
Islands: You Can&rsquo;t Go Home Again,</span> by Colin Woodard,
September/October 1998
 														<span class="scopl">Time To End The 40-Year
Lie,</span> by Jonathan Weisgall, May/June 1994
 														   												 											
History of the People of Bikini Atoll,</span> by Jack Niedenthal
  												 											
| March 5, 2004
 												
Another Vanunu letter
 												
In a recent letter released to the press, Israeli nuclear 
whistle-blower Mordechai Vanunu described in detail the sequence 
of events that led to his being detained by the Israeli 
government and convicted of espionage and treason.
 												
Vanunu describes being lured to Italy in late September 1986 by a 
female Israeli intelligence agent, drugged, kidnapped, and 
brought by ship to Israel. He later stood trial for sending 
information about Israels secret nuclear program to the Sunday 
Times of London and was sentenced to 18 years in prison.
 												
In the most recent communication, which was reported on Israeli 
television and in the Maariv daily newspaper this week, Vanunu 
said he had no intention of apologizing or regretting, of being 
taciturn or silent once his prison sentence ends in April. 
Israeli officials have said that Vanunu will be kept under 
constant surveillance once released from prison.
 												
The surprising thing about Vanunus most recent communication is 
that it was passed to the public uncensored. Vanunu has spent a 
good deal of his prison term in solitary confinement and has had 
his correspondence heavily censored in the past. In the fall of 
2002, the Bulletin received a letter from Vanunu that fit this 
pattern.
 												
Nuclear Whistle-Blower Gives Details of Abduction in
Europe,</span> Agence France Presse, March 2, 2004  
												 											
Bush administration's unscientific methods
 												
Earlier this week many prominent scientists, outraged by what 
they called the Bush administrations "distortion of scientific 
knowledge for partisan political ends," released a joint 
statement calling for an end to such practices.
 												
"Scientific Integrity in Policymaking: An Investigation into the 
Bush Administrations Misuse of Science," a report put together by 
the Union of Concerned Scientists. According to the report, "At 
high levels of government, the administrations political agenda 
has permeated the traditionally objective, nonpartisan mechanisms 
through which the government uses scientific knowledge in forming 
and implementing public policy."
 												
Rothstein warned of what could happen if the executive branchs 
Office of Management and Budget were to overhaul rules on 
scientific peer review as it wants to do.
 												
"If the final—and only—say-so on science resides in the White 
House, it wont be long before all government statements will be 
sprinkled with political pixie dust, and what we now know as 
science will become science—just another of the fact-free 
ideological arguments being used to undermine democratic 
government as we know it," Rothstein wrote.
 											
*****************************************************************
 56 Kashmir Telegraph: Sleeping with the Nuclear Snake

l March 2004 l     
The Kashmir Bachao Andolan Publication     
l Vol 3, No 10 l   
  
Kaushik Kapisthalam 

In the furor following the surreal nuclear drama in Islamabad
culminating with Pakistan’s dictator Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s
“pardon” of Dr.A.Q.Khan, the world media missed another, more
farcical event. It was US President George W. Bush and his
administration spinning the Khan episode as a “major success” in
cracking down on global nuclear proliferation activities. As the
famous boxing promoter Don King likes to say – “Only in
America!” 

The idea that A.Q.Khan was solely responsible for proliferating
nuclear technology and material to Libya, Iran and North Korea
is nonsense and accepted as such by most neutral experts and
retired diplomats. Former Pakistan army chief Gen. Mirza Aslam
Beg openly called for nuclear ties with Iran in the early 1990s
when the nuclear transfers supposedly began. Libya has had long
standing ties with the Pakistani nuclear program starting with
the funding of the then nascent Pakistani nuclear program by
Col. Gaddafi when Z.A.Bhutto was the Pakistani leader in the
1970s. Surely the wily Libyan leader was not doing this out of
the solidarity with a fellow Islamic nation. The Pakistan-North
Korea nuclear relationship was a simple nukes for missiles
barter deal by which Pakistan was able to acquire North Korean
NoDong ballistic missile by paying for it with nuclear
technology, at a time when Pakistan was facing a financial
crisis. The fact that Pakistan Air Force planes were involved in
transferring this technology clearly shows state involvement in
nuclear proliferation. 

Reports quoting unnamed senior Bush administration officials in
the media state that the US policy is now focused on uprooting
the nuclear underground network that A.Q.Khan and his Pakistani
associates had leveraged successfully to build the Pakistani
nuclear program. For that reason, US officials argue, it would
be worthwhile to ignore the A.Q.Khan pardon and not embarrass
Gen.Musharraf by talking about Pakistan army and even his own
links to the nuclear proliferation and focus on extracting
promises from the embattled General to shut down the network for
good. 

This theory looks good on paper but ignores certain facts, such
as Gen.Musharraf’s track record in keeping his word. Be it
action on the madrassas, cracking down on the Taliban or
shutting down Pakistani terrorist groups, Gen.Musharraf’s record
is abysmal. He usually makes grandiose promises in speeches to
mainly Western audiences only to renege on them later. So why
would Gen.Musharraf's promises on nuclear trade be any
different? 

Another point that the US seems to be ignoring is the critical
role the nuclear underground has in Pakistan's nuclear program.
Because of its weak indigenous scientific capacity, Pakistan has
long relied on Western sources for sophisticated nuclear
components. Even as the A.Q.Khan saga was unfolding, US Federal
prosecutors were looking at the case of a South Africa based
middleman who was caught in a sting operation sending nuclear
bomb triggers to Pakistan. A UPI report mentioned that the South
African's Pakistani contact was a person with ties to Pakistani
intelligence. Clearly, for Gen.Musharraf to cooperate in
dismantling the nuclear network would require him to give up
details of his own army and intelligence service's hitherto
secret ties to the nuclear underworld. In addition, were this
network be dismantled, Pakistan would lose is nuclear component
supply chain, bringing its nuclear weapons program to a grinding
halt. 

In this context, it is very likely that Gen.Musharraf's nuclear
cooperation would be like his efforts in the terror and madrassa
front - give misleading clues and eliminate low level expendable
assets so that the Pakistani army interests are left unharmed,
while doing just enough for America not to dump him totally. How
does that help US National Security? The fact is that US
policymakers have totally failed to grasp one point. American
national security and Pakistani army interests are completely
divergent. No amount of co-opting would make the Pakistani army
destroy the nuclear proliferation or terrorist networks and
logically so. Having a world devoid of pan-Islamic terrorists
and a nuclear netherworld is simply not in the interests of the
Pakistani establishment. 

So what are the reasons behind this apparently injudicious US
policy towards Pakistan? Outlook magazine’s excellent Washington
reporter Seema Sirohi wrote in a recent column about a recent
event she attended in Washington. The topic was “Pakistan and
Proliferation” and the person giving the talk was Robert
Einhorn, the former US State Department non-proliferation Czar
under the Clinton administration. Even though the topic was
Pakistan, Ms.Sirohi reported, Einhorn wasted no time before he
mentioned India as part of the “regional problem” and said
introducing nuclear weapons to South Asia was India’s “original
sin”. The best way forward with Pakistan, Einhorn said, was to
“forget the past and look to the future.” 

In a nutshell, Mr. Einhorn illustrated the malaise afflicting US
policymakers when it comes to Pakistan. It is called
bureaucratic memory. In the 1970s and 80s, the US
non-proliferation bureaucracy came to view Pakistan’s nuclear
program as “India’s problem.” After all, if India did not pursue
nukes, why would the Pakistanis need them? Never mind that
Pakistan’s nuclear program started after their defeat in 1971 by
India and was a response to India’s conventional military
superiority. The problem now is that this idea of associating
India with Pakistan’s nuclear program and downplaying the clear
and continuing Westward nuclear proliferation pattern coming out
of Pakistan is so ingrained in the US diplomatic bureaucracy
that it has become impossible to change. 

If the decision makers in the US stopped to think about it, they
would realize that the non-proliferation bureaucracy has been
proven wrong time and again when it came to Pakistan. They
believed Gen. Zia-ul-Haq’s assurances about not building a
nuclear weapon in the 1980s, which proved to be a tissue of
lies. As Einhorn himself admitted, the Pakistanis assured him
the 1990s to look into the Iran dealings which we now know
continued until recently. Gen.Musharraf gave his “400%”
assurance of non-proliferation to Colin Powell after the North
Korea revelations came out in 2002. We now know that Pakistan
continued to send nuclear material to Libya until late last
year. We have seen Wall Street stock analysts called to account
for their mistakes during the Dot Com disaster. We have seen US
intelligence now being called to explain its recent failures in
Iraq. Yet, the State Department South Asia Desk seems to be able
to continuously make poor decisions with impunity. 

The cliché goes – “If you sleep with snakes, you will get
bitten.” One hopes that the American people don’t get a nuclear
bite as a consequence of their government’s inexorable desire to
consort with the Pakistani snake.    

SUPPORT Kashmir Telegraph: Place your classified ads HERE. It
pays to advertise in Kashmir Telegraph!   
 
Copyright © 2002-2003 Shyam Lal Watt Foundation 
*****************************************************************
 57 Guardian Unlimited: Observer review: The Fly

[UP] 

Science and nature: Splitters of science's A-team 
		 	
Brian Cathcart tells the story of the Cambridge scientists who 
split the atom in The Fly in the Cathedral               
		
Robin McKie Sunday March 7, 2004 The Observer            
		
[The Fly in the Cathedral by Brian Cathcart] 

The Fly in the Cathedral
by Brian Cathcart
Viking £14.99, pp308

In The World Set Free, HG Wells compares humanity to a man 'who 
handles matches in his sleep and wakes to find himself ablaze'. 
The point is clear. Our species has created technology and let it 
slip out of control. But when did we lose our grasp? Where did 
the fire start? Was it with the birth of steam power, perhaps, or 
the dawn of computer science?

After reading The Fly in the Cathedral, we are left with no 
illusions: it was the splitting of the atom and the discovery of 
the neutron by scientists working separately but simultaneously 
at Cambridge's Cavendish Laboratory during a brief period of 
unsurpassed creativity in 1932 that did the trick. This, says 
Brian Cathcart in his absorbing account of these great events, 
was 'one of the moments in history when we have stretched out to 
touch the limits of the known world'. At a time of continued 
nuclear proliferation, the consequences still shake the world.

In the early Thirties, scientists, having broken the outer atom's 
secrets, were still baffled about its innards. What went on in 
the nucleus, that tiny glob of matter in the atom's heart, the 
fly in the cathedral? What fantastic powers held it together?

For decades, they struggled until answers were provided, 
abruptly, by an amalgam of talent gathered by Ernest Rutherford 
at the Cavendish. First, there was James Chadwick, his 
monosyllabic deputy, troubleshooter and general factotum, who, 
having been given a sample of highly radioactive polonium one 
day, simply wandered off to use it to carry out a series of 
exquisite experiments that demonstrated the existence of the 
neutron, key to the nucleus.

Two doors down the hall were John Cockcroft and his assistant, 
Ernest Walton, who spent years slaving on a machine that could 
fire streams of protons to colossal speeds, and who, on 14 April 
1932, used them to splinter atoms of lithium into nuclear 
shrapnel. The nucleus of the atom, once considered inviolate, had 
been opened up to mankind's probing.

Finally, there was Rutherford, 'a man of lurid inconsistencies,' 
according to Cathcart. He was a brilliant experimenter who still 
gave himself electric shocks by hanging his wet coat on live 
terminals. He was kindly and well-intentioned but had a temper 
that reduced staff to wrecks. And although ennobled, he behaved 
like a loud-mouthed, colonial farmer all his life, as did his 
wife, Mary, a staunch teetotaller, who became the terror of the 
Rutherfords' regular dinner parties. 'Ern, you're dribbling 
again,' she would snarl at her Nobel laureate husband if she 
caught him with a drink.

Rutherford, 'the battleship of physics', drove Cockcroft and 
Walton to split the atom ahead of their better equipped American 
rivals. 'All he wanted was results,' says Cathcart. With 
Chadwick, Cockcroft and Walton, Rutherford - and the world - got 
those results, in spades.

Within a decade, scientists were using neutrons to split uranium 
atoms, a process that released vast energies, and more neutrons, 
which in turn, split more atoms. The nuclear chain-reaction had 
been uncovered. The result was the bomb, Hiroshima and the Cold 
War. As Wells had warned, the world was now alight.
	
	07.03.2004: Brian Catchcart on the crisis at Leeds United
[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004

Guardian Newspapers Limited
*****************************************************************
 58 Tennessean: Oak Ridge reactor back in working order 

- Sunday, 03/07/04

Associated Press

OAK RIDGE — An Oak Ridge research nuclear reactor is running 
again after being shut down last month because of a cooling-pump 
problem, officials said. 

The High Flux Isotope Reactor is among the world's top research 
reactors, but it had to be stopped Feb. 16 after an electrical 
problem between the cooling pump and the motor driving it. 

Research Reactor Director Denny Newland said the unit was 
restarted last week after workers installed another motor and 
cooling pump that had been taken out of operation earlier. 

The High Flux Isotope Reactor has four cooling pumps, each with 
its own motor system. The reactor is allowed to operate on only 
three. 

Each of the motors is more than 40 years old and dates to when 
the nuclear facility was built, Newland said. 

The pump taken out will need to be restored as part of a $2 
million refurbishment project. 

The High Flux Isotope Reactor is used to produce radioisotopes 
for medical and industrial purposes. 

Newland said the reactor would be shut down again March 14 for 
testing and maintenance. 

© Copyright 2003 The Tennessean A Gannett Co. 
*****************************************************************
 59 Tri-Valley Herald: No small nukes, despite debates
 
  3/7/2004   
             
There is nothing in the budget for mini-nukes,
By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER

In asking Congress recently for $6.6 billion, the nation's top 
executive for nuclear weapons made a point of saying none of the 
money was for developing new hydrogen bombs, much less the 
"mini-nukes" that captivated congressional debate last year. 

"There is no program to develop new, low-yield nuclear weapons," 
said Linton Brooks, head of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration. He later elaborated: "There is nothing in the 
budget that is aimed at producing low-yield weapons. We have no 
requirements for developing new weapons." 

Taken at face value, it was a perplexing statement. Was the Bush 
administration ending its three-year pursuit of new, updated 
nuclear arsenal? Could the Defense and Energy Departments walk 
away from last year's triumphant repeal of a 10-year ban on 
low-yield weapons research, cited by Russia last week as a reason 
for practice launches of its nuclear ICBMs and cruise missiles? 

In a word: Nyet. 

Brooks is a former treaty negotiator who knows the value of 
precise language and the Washingtonian skill of saying less than 
a listener might think. 

It pays to parse every word, according to his deputy, Everett 
Beckner. 

"What he said was, in our present plans, there's nothing 
specific," Beckner said. "There is no work at present that is 
specific to the development of a low-yield weapon." 

The watchword here is "development." Before a nuclear weapon 
enters its third or "development engineering" phase, the weapons 
labs perform a good deal of work. Physicists can dream up a new, 
full-scale weapon and run multiple computer simulations of its 
detonation to refine its design. Senior scientists might assail 
the design, and arguments may ensue over whether it is safe, 
whether it will deliver the specified explosive yield, radiation 
and heat reliably, whether it is a robust and worthy bomb. 

Engineers may fashion prototypes of its components, or per- haps 
the full bomb, and shake them, chill them, slam them into walls 
or bake them in burning jet fuel. Accountants could join in the 
feasibility study, tallying the costs of turning out blueprints 
and manufacturing the weapon, from the first production unit to 
the last. 

That's the case with the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator. So far, 
the Pentagon has yet to ask for the weapon. The military has not 
issued formal requirements for what it is supposed to do. Yet, 
assuming Congress approves one more round of appropriations, more 
than $47 million would be spent by the end of 2005 on a 
high-yield bomb for destroying buried, fortified command bunkers 
and tunnels. The money is to make an existing H-bomb more rigid 
and rugged, encased in the toughest metals to survive a plunge 
into a few dozen feet of rock or concrete and detonate. 

Only then would the administration ask Congress to authorize the 
bomb's development and production, estimated at a cost of $457 
million more through 2009. 

Technically, out of $36 million that the Bush administration 
wants next year for research into new and modified weapons 
designs, not a dime is devoted to developing any bombs. 

"That in no way rules out the possibility that such exploratory 
work could be done," Beckner said. 

Scientists at the nation's three nuclear weapons labs, Lawrence 
Livermore in California, Los Alamos in New Mexico and Sandia in 
both states, are waiting for the first small flushes of cash to 
fund return of their Advanced Concepts teams, defunct since 1994. 

The teams today are minuscule, just a couple of scientists or so 
at each lab who will dream up new designs and carry them toward 
development. Their work for the immediate future would amount to 
a fraction of a percent of the overall U.S. nuclear-weapons 
research budget. So far, studies of mini-nukes at the labs are 
mostly limited to simulating the effects of radiation, heat and 
blast on chemical and biological weapons. 

Asked recently what he wants of the Advanced Concepts teams, 
Brooks told the Arms Control Association, "Well, we don't know. 
We're going to work with the Department of Defense. There are a 
number of ideas." 

The teams are likely to explore destroying chemical and 
biological weapons without blasting them into the environment, 
unneutralized. Brooks said they also might come up with ideas for 
improving the safety of the weapons in accidents or strengthening 
their internal security devices to guard against unauthorized use 
or making existing weapons more "robust" and potentially less 
susceptible to aging. 

Scientists at the labs also expect to look at low-yield weapons 
for a variety of uses, possibly including missile defenses and 
electromagnetic-pulse weapons. 

"There could be some exploration of any or all of those," Brooks 
said. "But probably, it will be more of that effort will be 
focused on safety, security, flexibility, greater margins than on 
fundamental, new capabilities."

Tri-Valley Herald All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 60 Tri-City Herald: Opinions Hanford worker safety is community concern 

This story was published Sunday, March 7th, 2004 

Shedding light on the state of worker safety and health at 
Hanford is vital to the interests of both the site and the 
community. 

Allegations that workers are at risk create concern -- not just 
because they might be true, but also because such charges hurt 
the site's ability to continue cleanup. 

That's why the community, as well as Hanford contractors, should 
welcome the ongoing investigations by the state and federal 
government. 

Done right, they will provide the certainty that this community 
needs and deserves. 

As it stands, reports in national media and publicity by the 
Government Accountability Project have left the impression here 
and across the country of a site where the cost of faster cleanup 
is paid for by sacrificing worker health. 

Now, it appears that the concern might be more widespread as the 
Hanford Environmental Health Foundation, which provides 
occupational medical care for the entire site, has come under 
fire with allegations of supervisor misconduct, fraud and medical 
records mismanagement. 

The Department of Energy has asked no less than its Office of 
Independent Oversight and Safety Assurance, the Office of the 
Inspector General and the National Institute for Occupational 
Safety and Health to investigate. The state has launched another 
probe. And the oversight and investigation subcommittee of the 
House Energy and Commerce Committee wants information. 

The idea of slipshod practices is not the Hanford that many of us 
know, the Hanford where workers sometimes complain that myriad 
precautions get in the way of getting a job done. 

But there have been safety lapses at the site before and likely 
will be again. In the past, whistleblowers have raised concerns 
that led to needed reforms. In the same vein, other workers have 
made dubious claims that were more about protecting their own job 
security than the work force. 

The investigations should sort that out. As Tom Carpenter with 
the Government Accountability Project -- the whistleblower group 
largely responsible for focusing attention on the concerns -- 
told a reporter, "All we want is the allegations investigated by 
a trustworthy organization without an ax to grind." It appears we 
have that, in multiples. 

That's good because not just the safety of Hanford workers is at 
stake. Certainly, worker safety is a community concern when we 
send thousands of family members and friends to work there every 
day. 

But it also is a barometer of our safety, too. How workers handle 
the radioactive and toxic messes at the site determines the risk 
we face living next door to the site. And whether unsafe 
practices are allowed to derail cleanup of the site is pivotal to 
the safety of our children and grandchildren who will live here. 

An examination is never a fun experience, but this community 
deserves the answers one can deliver. '[sys/section/path]', 

© 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 61 The Sunflower - March 2004 - Issue 82
 
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 13:28:38 -0600 (CST)

 
The Sunflower is a monthly e-newsletter providing educational
information on nuclear weapons abolition and other issues relating to
global security. 

To receive our free monthly e-newsletter subscribe at
http://www.wagingpeace.org/subscribe/
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/subscribe/> 

*	Perspectives 

	*	Get Rid of All Nuclear Arms
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#1a> 

*	Take Action 

	*	Call for Vanunu's Unconditional Release
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#2a> 
	*	Sign Petition to Investigate Iraqi Weapons Intelligence
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#2b> 
	*	Write to United Nations Security Council on Total
Nuclear Disarmament
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#2c> 
	*	Participate in Anti-Nuclear Days of Action
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#2d> 

*	Proliferation 

	*	US Budget Proposals Reflect Military Ambitions
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#3a> 
	*	Iran Non-Compliance Raises "Serious Concerns"
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#3b> 
	*	North Korea Talks lead to Deeper Negotiations
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#3c> 
	*	Khan's Nuclear Black Market Revealed
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#3d> 
	*	Pentagon Predicts Inevitability in Nuclear Proliferation
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#3e> 

*	Disarmament and Non-Proliferation 

	*	Bush Announces Plans to Curb WMD Proliferation
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#4a> 
	*	France Rejects Miniature Nuclear Weapons
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#4b> 
	*	Beijing-Washington Step Up Partnership in WMD
Non-Proliferation
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#4c> 

*	Missiles & Missile Defense 

	*	Moscow to Penetrate US Missile Defense?
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#5a> 
	*	Pentagon Plans Early Launch of Missile Interceptors
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#5b>  

*	International Law

	*	Musharraf Refuses International Inspections
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#6a> 

*	Nuclear Energy And Waste

	*	US Nuclear Fuel Conversion Plant Delayed
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#7a> 
	*	Yucca Mountain Opposition Increases
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#7b> 
	*	Bush's Proposed Energy Bill
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#7c> 

*	Nuclear Terrorism 

	*	Al Qaeda Suspected of Possessing Tactical Nukes
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#8a> 

*	Foundation News 

	*	3rd Annual Frank K. Kelly Lecture on Humanity's Future
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#9a> 
	*	Gandhi Live!
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#9b> 
	*	Seeds of Peace Available at the Foundation
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#9d> 

*	Resources 

	*	Toward Nuclear Abolition: A History of the World Nuclear
Disarmament Movement, 1971 to the Present
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#10a> 
	*	War No More: Eliminating Conflict in the Nuclear Age
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#10b> 

*	Quotable 

	*	Archbishop Desmond Tutu
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#11a> 
	*	Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#11b> 
	*	George Soros
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#11c> 

*	Support 

	*	Support the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#12a> 

*	Team 

	*	Editors
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#13a> 
	*	Contributors
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#13a> 

Perspectives

Get Rid of All Nuclear Arms | Top
by Adil Najam

President Bush's Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) provides the
right solution, but to the wrong problem. Nuclear proliferation is
merely a symptom; the real issue is the nuclear weapons themselves. And,
in this sense, the PSI is no more than a Band-Aid, and a quite small one
at that.

The recent scandal in Pakistan, where a corrupt scientist sold nuclear
secrets for profit, only demonstrates that such traffic is much too
lucrative to be stopped by increased policing. For 60 years, ever since
Hiroshima, the U.S. and the world have tried to control the spread of
nuclear weapons. We've tried treaties, economic sanctions and moral
persuasion. And we've failed. We could not stop the Soviets from getting
nukes. We chose not to resist, and actually ignored, Israel's nuclear
program. We looked the other way when India went nuclear and, thus,
could do little when Pakistan followed suit. And we merely fumed when
North Korea flexed its nuclear muscles. In the meantime, we have built
and maintained the world's largest nuclear stockpile.

Can we contain Pakistan's nuclear program? Yes, we can. But first we
will need to contain India's. To do that, however, India will need to
see China's program rolled back. How does that happen? For that, we will
need to start looking at our own. As my grandmother used to say, "If you
point one finger at someone, at least three will point back at you." No
one said this was easy!

Are we really surprised that the rest of the world rolls its eyes when
we pontificate about the dangers of nuclear weapons or weapons of mass
destruction in general - as when Bush referred to them as "the greatest
threat to humanity today"? What other countries doubt is our sincerity.
It is hypocritical to tell the rest of the world that nuclear weapons
are good enough for us, but not for them. We can't have a world part
nuclear and part not.

To read to full article, go to
http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2004/02/18_najam_get-rid.htm
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2004/02/18_najam_get-rid.htm> 

To view the entire Sunflower, visit:
http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resrources/sunflower
<http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/sunflower/2004/03_sunflower.htm#1> 

To receive our free monthly e-newsletter subscribe at
http://www.wagingpeace.org/menu/resources/subscribe/
*****************************************************************
 62 Google News Alert - nuclear
 
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 12:03:22 -0800 (PST)

 
MANY questions, few answers on shipping nuclear rods
Salt Lake Tribune - Salt Lake City,UT,USA
... VEGAS -- An Energy Department official had no immediate answers Friday
for a congressional panel seeking details of federal plans for shipping
spent nuclear ...
<http://www.sltrib.com/2004/Mar/03062004/utah/145233.asp>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.sltrib.com/2004/Mar/03062004/utah/145233.asp>

IAEA to Discuss Dangers of Nuclear Proliferation During Top- ... 
Voice of America - Washington,DC,USA
The agency's board of governors also is expected to discuss the nuclear
technology network run by Pakistan's top nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer
Khan. ...
<http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=17F766FF-4A47-4088-8D5F73CB81A5A821>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm%3FobjectID%3D17F766FF-4A47-4088-8D5F73CB81A5A821>

IRAN Will Revise Cooperation With IAEA If Nuclear Issue is Not ... 
Merh News Agency - Tehran,Iran
VIENNA, March 6 (Mehr News Agency) –– Iran has warned it will not wait
forever, adding that if its nuclear issue is not resolved, it will restart
uranium ...
<http://www.mehrnews.com/wfNewsDetails_en.aspx?NewsID=63810&t=Political>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.mehrnews.com/wfNewsDetails_en.aspx%3FNewsID%3D63810%26t%3DPolitical>

LIBYA gives up remaining nuclear - related equipment
Reuters AlertNet - London,England,UK
CRAWFORD, Texas, March 6 (Reuters) - Libya on Saturday sent to the United
States all the known remaining equipment associated with its nuclear weapons
program ...
<http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N06416104.htm>

LIBYA gives up last nuclear equipment
Financial Times - London,England,UK
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - Libya has sent to the United States all the
known remaining equipment associated with its nuclear weapons program,
along with its ...
<http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/WireFeed/WireFeed&c=WireFeed&cid=1078381789575>

LAST nuclear parts 'leave Libya'
BBC News - London,England,UK
Libya has sent to the US all the known remaining nuclear weapons-related
equipment, the White House says. A ship with some 500 tons ...
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3539799.stm>

NEW light shed on Sino-Pakistani nuclear ties
MSNBC - USA
... US government documents made public Friday shed new light on almost
three decades of US unease over China’s suspected cooperation with Pakistan’s
nuclear ...
<http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4461320/>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4461320/>

POWELL to review Pak steps on nuclear issue
Deepika - India
Washington, Mar 6 (UNI) US Secretary of State Colin Powell will review
the steps taken by Pakistan to root out nuclear proliferation network
during his visit ...
<http://www.deepikaglobal.com/latestnews.asp?ncode=13469>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.deepikaglobal.com/latestnews.asp%3Fncode%3D13469>

BUSH wrong on nuke treaty 'fix'
WorldNetDaily - USA
The new strategy President Bush announced a couple of weeks ago for preventing
nuke proliferation involved making changes to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
...
<http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37457>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp%3FARTICLE_ID%3D37457>

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/
*****************************************************************
 63 Google News Alert - nuclear
 
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 14:19:25 -0800 (PST)

 
MALAYSIA shows resistance to signing additional nuclear non- ... 
eTaiwan News - Taipei,Taiwan
Malaysia showed resistance yesterday to signing stricter nuclear treaty
controls, but assured the United States that it will fight trafficking
following a ...
<http://www.etaiwannews.com/Asia/2004/03/06/1078644889.htm>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.etaiwannews.com/Asia/2004/03/06/1078644889.htm>

AP: Pakistan Knew of Nuclear Black Market
Kansas City Star - Kansas City,MO,USA
... UN investigators are increasingly certain Pakistan government leaders
knew the country's top atomic scientist was supplying other nations with
nuclear ...
<http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/8129685.htm>

TEHRAN calls for nuclear file to be closed
Financial Times - London,England,UK
Hassan Rowhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council,
on Sunday called for the Iranian nuclear file to be closed by the International
Atomic ...
<http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1078381579612>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer%3Fpagename%3DFT.com/StoryFT/FullStory%26c%3DStoryFT%26cid%3D1078381579612>

IRAN Admits Nuclear Program Successful
The Kashmir Telegraph - Mumbai,India
Iran has finally admitted having achieved "big success" in nuclear fuel
technology, saying the covert program revealed a day earlier by diplomats
in Vienna was ...
<http://www.kashmirtelegraph.com/0304/eight.htm>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.kashmirtelegraph.com/0304/eight.htm>

TRIPOLI dispatches nuclear shipment to America
Sydney Morning Herald - Sydney,New South Wales,Australia
Libya has surrendered all of its remaining nuclear weapons equipment to
international inspectors, and has sent a cargo ship laden with 500 tonnes
of ...
<http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/07/1078594236349.html>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/07/1078594236349.html>

US Accusations About Iran ’ s Nuclear Program Politically ... 
Merh News Agency - Tehran,Iran
... who was elected to the seventh Majlis as a representative of Tehran,
here on Saturday rejected the politically motivated US accusations about
Iran’s nuclear ...
<http://www.mehrnews.com/wfNewsDetails_en.aspx?NewsID=64099&t=Political>

KAZAKHSTAN: ASTANA DENIES LINKS TO NUCLEAR SMUGGLING NETWORK
Eurasianet - New York,NY,United States
Kazakhstan is denying any connections to Dubai-based SMB Computers that
could implicate it in an international black market in nuclear materials.
...
<http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/pp030704.shtml>

LIBYA Sends Its Nuclear Arms Tools to US
Los Angeles Times (subscription) - Los Angeles,CA,USA
CRAWFORD, Texas — Libya has sent to the United States all known remaining
equipment linked to its nuclear weapons programs, along with longer-range
missiles ...
<http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya7mar07,1,1672106.story?coll=la-headlines-world>
See all stories on this topic:
<http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=google&num=30&newsclusterurl=http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-libya7mar07,1,1672106.story%3Fcoll%3Dla-headlines-world>

NUCLEAR Non-Proliferation Treaty
Miami Herald - Miami,FL,USA
This has been the corner- stone of efforts to block the spread of nuclear
arms. • A total of 188 countries have signed the treaty, which took
effect in 1970. ...
<http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/8123680.htm>

NIGERIA'S Defense Ministry Praises Pakistan Nuclear Program
Mathaba.Net - Africa
Nigeria’s Defense Ministry on Thursday quoted the Chief of Defense Staff,
General Alexander Ogomudia, as praising Pakistan’s nuclear program for
lifting ...
<http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=39506>

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/
*****************************************************************
 64 FT: Do we really need a fusion scheme?  

  By Tony Fogarty  

  Published: March 6 2004 4:00 | Last Updated: March 6 2004 4:00
 
Sir, Clive Cookson ("Politics could short-circuit our hope for 
future energy", February 21) outlines the present position as 
regards nuclear fusion for power generation. It "holds out the 
promise of plentiful, clean energy", according to Mr Cookson. 
Sounds familiar? The same was said for nuclear fission and how 
cheap it would be - the claimants cheerfully ignoring the 
long-term costs of decommissioning and storage (£48bn at the last 
count). At least that claim is not being made this time.

The International Thermonuclear Energy Reactor (Iter) is merely a 
prototype with a target of 500 megawatts of energy in 10-minute 
bursts and the first commercial plants "in 2050". It will require 
temperatures of 100m°C. Three decades of research have failed to 
produce the goods.

Who on earth is buying into this idea? The sheer hubris would 
have the gods rocking with derision. The need for this technology 
is predicated on diminishing fossil fuel reserves and the need 
for a continuing increase in energy demand.

At present the use of energy is profligate - as it is so cheap. 
Do we really need to travel faster and faster and to produce more 
and more goods? There is abundant untapped renewable energy. 
Spending money on research and development at the rate planned 
for nuclear fusion would be safer as an investment. Iter may be 
built in Europe or in Japan and "both have hinted that they might 
pull out if the decision goes against them". Let us hope the 
decision goes in favour of Japan, and Europe will be able to drop 
out of this hare-brained scheme.

Tony Fogarty, Norwich, Norfolk NR2 2AH, UK  
     
      © Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2004. "FT" and
"Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. Privacy
*****************************************************************
 65 Idaho Statesman: WGI lands $1.5 billion contract

www.idahostatesman.com

 Boise company will upgrade nine Michigan plants 
    
  WGI chief executive  

Ken Dey

The Idaho Statesman Washington Group International, Inc. landed a 
$1.5 billion, six-year contract Friday to upgrade and maintain 
nine Michigan power plants. 

The contract was awarded by Detroit-based DTE Energy to perform 
pollution control and capital improvement projects on the 
fossil-fuel power plants owned by DTE´s subsidiary Detroit 
Energy. 

The contract gives Washington Group control over all improvement 
and maintenance projects at the power plants, which generate more 
than 11,000 megawatts and serve 2.1 million customers in 
southeastern Michigan. 

Company spokesman Jack Herrmann said the $1.5 billion contract 
will be spread out over a period of six years; how much the 
company will earn each year isn´t known yet. 

The contract is one of the company´s biggest, rivaling its recent 
spate of high profile contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan, 
Herr-mann said. 

In January, Washington Group was awarded a contract worth up to 
$1.5 billion over the next five years for work in Iraq, Central 
Asia, North Africa and elsewhere. 

This isn´t Washington Group´s first contract with DTE Energy. A 
similar but smaller contract is already in place for Detroit 
Edison´s Fermi nuclear plant near Detroit. 

Washington Group, whose headquarters is in Boise, also recently 
provided clean air upgrades at Detroit Edison´s 3,000-megawatt 
Monroe Power Plant, one of the largest and most efficient 
coal-fired power plants in the United States. 

“We are proud of our record with DTE Energy over the past decade, 
and we are honored that DTE Energy has demonstrated its 
confidence in us by selecting us to form an alliance that is 
expected to expand our long-standing relationship,” company 
President and CEO Stephen Hanks said in a statement Friday. 

This contract tops off a good week for the company. On Wednesday, 
it announced its earnings for the year were up from 2002, and its 
stock price hit a new high for the year. 

On Friday, the company´s stock closed down 6 cents at $39.93 a 
share. 

John Rogers, an analyst with D.A. Davidson Co., said Friday that 
the contract was a “nice win” for the company, but it didn´t 
change his decision the same day to downgrade the company´s stock 
from a buy to a neutral rating. 

Rogers credited the company for its better than expected fourth 
quarter results announced this week, but he said the stock´s 
substantial appreciation in price over the year caused him to 
give the stock a neutral rating. 

So far this year the company´s stock has ranged from a low of 
$14.70 a share to its high, set this week, of $40.20 a share. 

Rogers said over the next 12 months he expects the company´s 
stock to top out at $44 a share. 

But Rogers does expect the company to beat its earnings guidance 
for the year. 

On Thursday, leaders at Washington Group remained conservative 
about how contracts in Iraq could affect earnings in 2004, only 
giving guidance of $1.40 to $1.80 a share for the year. 

Rogers credited the company for being conservative, but said he 
expects the company to earn $1.90 a share in 2004. 

To offer story ideas or comments, contact Ken Dey 
kdey@idahostatesman.com or 377-6428 

Edition Date: 03-06-2004 
		
    
*****************************************************************

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: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************