***************************************************************** 03/18/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.67 ***************************************************************** 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 AU SMH: Howard at end of credibility line on Iraq - 2 SF Chron: BERKELEY / Blix says Iraq war was illegal / Ex-U.N. offici 3 Reuters: U.S. Praises ElBaradei But Future Support Unclear 4 CNN.com - Polish leader: WMD never existed - 5 Oakland Tribune: One year later, Blix feels he's vindicated 6 UN Atomic Watchdog Renews Call To Iran For Transparency On Nuclear A 7 Hi Pakistan: Russia hints at dropping Iran's nuclear project --> 8 NYT: Losing Time on North Korea 9 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: NK Threatens to Expand Nuclear Arsenal 10 Hi Pakistan: China's foreign minister going to N Korea to discuss nu 11 [DU-WATCH] silent WMD's - the effects of DU by Admiral Vishnu 12 Bellona: Libyan ships Soviet nuke fuel to Dimitrovgrad, leaving a mo 13 BBC: US boosts Pakistan military ties 14 Reuters: Israeli nuke whistleblower won't say more - family 15 BBC: UN briefs US on nuclear controls 16 Daily Times: IAEA and US agree on new nuclear ballgame 17 Hi Pakistan: US rewards Pakistan with elite military status despite 18 San Antonio Express-News Editorial: For nuclear terror, no stand too 19 Las Vegas SUN: Powell Declares End to Pakistan Nukes NUCLEAR REACTORS 20 US: [CMEP] Environmental Impacts of Proposed Nuke Plant Warrant 21 US: [PUBCIT_PRESS] Davis-Besse Nuclear Plant Shutdown - One Day 22 Reuters: Idled Bruce Power nukes could be on stream by 2007 23 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss Annual Performance Assessment of James A. Fi 24 US: NRC: NRC to Meet with SCE Officials to Discuss Safety Performanc 25 US: NRC: NRC to Meet with Entergy Operations, Inc. to Discuss Perfor 26 US: NRC: NRC to Meet with Progress Energy Officials to Discuss Safet 27 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss Annual Performance Assessment of Millstone N 28 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss Annual Performance Assessment of Beaver Vall 29 Reuters: 2-Report urges power-short Ontario to go nuclear 30 Bellona: Nuclear plant in earthquake zone 31 US: Philadelphia Inquirer: Oyster Creek plant gets more oversight 32 US: toledoblade: Reactor is shut down to fix faulty water valve 33 Toronto Star: Panel expected to shake up OPG 34 Toronto Star: Voices: Nuclear power 35 People's Daily: Nuclear energy to relieve China's power demands 36 CTV.ca - Manley report backs nuclear power in Ontario 37 ITAR-TASS: First unit of Bashkir nuclear power station begins operat 38 US: Public Citizen: Davis-Besse Nuclear Plant Shutdown 39 US: NRC: Speech - 001 - A Time for Reflection, A Time for Action 40 National Pos: Ontario's future is nuclear power: report OPG report 41 National Post: Ontario must look to nuclear power with private-secto NUCLEAR SAFETY 42 Citizens Find Bush Guilty of Afghan War Crimes 43 [DU-WATCH] map of DU ordnance in Kosovo 44 People's Weekly World: Why are veterans getting sick? 45 US: Las Vegas RJ: Disabled workers' claims rise 46 US: KRT Wire: Federal Nuclear Regulators Fine Alaska Agency for Radi 47 US: Boston.com: Contamination inquiry to start 48 US: Poughkeepsie Journal: Tell public about plant safety risks NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 49 US: AFP: US plan to get highly enriched uranium out of civilian cycl 50 US: McCook Daily Gazette: Baker: Waste site deserves look 51 The Herald: Dounreay clean-up draws world interest 52 Las Vegas RJ: State files another lawsuit challenging Yucca project 53 US: Salt Lake Tribune: A question of bias 54 RIT: Reactor of the future destroys nuclear waste - KTH to head majo 55 AU ABC: Howard stands firm on radioactive dump site for SA. 56 Whitehaven News: DON'T GIVE US YOUR N-WASTE 57 Whitehaven News: BNFL TO CONSTRUCT A BLAST PROOF WALL 58 Whitehaven News: REPROCESSING BEATS TARGET NUCLEAR WEAPONS US DEPT. OF ENERGY 59 KRT Wire: University of California Hits Snags in Las Alamos Business 60 Reuters: UN Watchdog, U.S. Want to Clean Up Atomic 'Mess' 61 Oak Ridger: Deadline set for K-25 preservation 62 Oak Ridger: Tool detects nuclear threats 63 News-Miner: Galena eyes energy options OTHER NUCLEAR 64 Google News Alert - nuclear 65 Universe Today: NASA and Department of Energy Working on Nuclear Rea 66 AZoM: EU Announces Hydrogen Fuel Cell Initiatives 67 Press Action: Duck Hunting, the High Court, Corruption and Slam Dunk ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 AU SMH: Howard at end of credibility line on Iraq - OpinionWebDiary - www.smh.com.au [Sydney Morning Herald Online] By Margo Kingston March 16, 2004 Why won't John Howard admit that our participation in the invasion of Iraq increased the risk that Australia will be targetted for a terrorist attack? Pretty simple really. If he admits the obvious, as the AFP chief Mick Keelty did, then he's back to square one in explaining his decision to go to war (see Terrorist attack on Australia inevitable, warns FBI expert [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/16/1079199194943.html] ). We know that intelligence agencies advised that invading Iraq would INCREASE the risk of terrorism in general. We know that there were no WMDs, so Howard's stated reason for war - that it would reduce the terrorist risk - is wrong, and we also know that Howard was not relying on the intelligence service's objective assessment of the Iraq risk, but, like Bush and Blair, decided to invade then looked for evidence to convince the UN it was justified (see the Parliamentary Committee WMD report [http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/pjcaad/WMD/report.htm] ) . We also know that the Iraq invasion and occupation split the world and damaged co-operation in controlling terrorism, and that the war could drag on indefinitely, sucking energy from the United States defence force and adding people to terrorist ranks. Surely, we're reaching endgame on Howard's credibility on security. Surely few of us trust him to tell us the truth any more. That's how I explain the sudden rush for even more terrorism laws - now to include socialising with suspected terrorists - crushing even more civil liberties. The idea is to force Labor to oppose some of the more extreme measures, and thus blame Labor if an attack occurs. Basic stuff. The NSW government's announcement that it would extend its already draconian terror laws is based on a different calculation. The Carr government is now so discredited and rancid that any way to divert attention from its disgraceful management of our hospitals, schools and public transport is a relief. On past performance the State Liberals will back any extension of anti-terror laws. Carr's justification - that existing laws weren't designed to deal with "murder planned on such a vast scale" as Madrid - is ludicrous. He passed his laws after Bali! Overlaying the decisions by the NSW and federal governments is the calculation that they want to be SEEN to be responding to Spain, and this way there's no real financial investment required. If you wanted to defend us against terrorism at home, you'd be training drivers of chemical trucks how to react to a hijacking, you'd be securing ALL our airports, and you'd be widely encouraging participation by the public. But that requires money and it also requires TRUST. Do we trust the federal and state governments? No. I set out the premium on trust between citizens and government in today's world in reporting Carr's new anti-terror laws in 2002, and suggested that the use of Carr's extraordinary new police powers be overseen by an Australian trusted by all of us, like Sir William Deane. But no, the police minister oversees everything, and he doesn't even need to report to Parliament. My reports included Costa: Police watchdog [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/19/1037697664920.html] , Protecting our safety AND our liberty [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/22/1037697875816.html] and Democracy's watchdogs blind to the danger [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/12/02/1038712872900.html] On the federal front trust is even more important, so people feel safe in coming forward to give information about their suspicions, particularly people from minority communities. Locking people up for 'consorting' will REDUCE trust and REDUCE cooperation. From what I've read a big factor in the rejection of the Spanish conservatives by the Spanish people was disgust that they ware again being lied to, with the government blaming ETA without evidence. I hope the people also sack Howard, Bush and Blair to cleanse all their democracies and allow their successors to rebuild the trust in government so vital to defeat terrorism (see the Financial Times report Blair more isolated over Iraq policy [http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT /FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1078381788468&p=1012571727085] ). Today, a piece by Webdiary debutant Sam Guthrie on Keelty, Damien Hogan rounds up progress on the war on terror, and some seriously wild reports claiming the US is importing WMDs into Iraq. Noam Chomsky's latest on Iraq is at The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4878794-111321,00.html] . * Sam Guthrie In response to The American elections, the future of alliances and the lessons of Spain [http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/15/1079199161939.html] , and the article I am sure you are about to write regarding the Government's reaction to Commissioner Keelty's analysis of the terror threat to Australia post Iraq, please find the attached torrent. As a PhD student in politics and international relations I am wading through security related analysis every day. I find the Howard Government's attack on Commissioner Keelty and every academic and analyst who correctly assert the view that our membership of the Coalition of the Willing has made us a more prominent terrorist target, absolutely appalling. It is a new low in political expediency. The Abstract Reality Express rumbles back into town What is the latest political dumb show our Prime Minister is performing? Are we in for more of the rhetorical hop scotch we saw during the recent WMD inquiry? Hands up if you're sick of being treated like an imbecile by a Government whose grasp on the concept of honesty extends only as far as the sound bite of a few cautious, well chosen words from a suburban lawyer "based on the information available to us at the time". Yes the Abstract Reality Express has rumbled back into town as the Prime Minister and Attorney General attempt to sell the idea that whilst the security of the country is at constant risk from Islamic terrorism, such risks are in no way connected to or increased by Australia's role in the invasion of Iraq. This despite claims to the contrary yesterday by such authorities as the Federal Police Commissioner, the NSW Police Commissioner, internationally acclaimed Al-Qaeda analyst Rohan Guna Ratna and a videotape, purportedly from Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda, saying it carried out the attacks in Spain due to that country's support for the US-led war on Iraq. Is there a better example of a Government wanting to have its cake and eat it too? On one hand they jump on the events in Madrid knowing it facilitates the opportunity to trot out the national security credentials which since 2001 have inspired enough fear to translate into electoral support for the Coalition. On the other, the Government furiously seeks to avoid any responsibility for a rise in the level of potential terrorist threat which may be due to their strategically naive involvement in Iraq. What is more disturbing is the fact that the Prime Minister, the Attorney General and today the Foreign Minister and Defence Minister are willing to compromise the vital experience and expertise of the Federal Police Commissioner to defend themselves. This is the blame shifting tradition that saw the anonymous bureaucrats and members of the Defence Force blamed for the children overboard claim, and ONA blamed for Howard's false WMD claims. In the face of ailing support and descending polls it seems the Government has become even more brazen in placing its own political success above the security of the nation. Today as FBI executive assistant director (counter-terrorism) John Pistole, goes on record stating Australia's alliance with the US has made it more of a terrorist target, we discover that moments after making a similar claim on Channel Nine's Sunday [http://sunday.ninemsn.com.au/sunday/political_transcripts/articl e_1506.asp] program Federal Police Commissioner Keelty was rebuked by Arthur Sinodinis, the Prime Minister's chief of staff, for contradicting the Government's message. Whilst such a contempt for truth may be permissible when used merely to manipulate the trauma of drowning refugees to win an election or to justify sending the sons and daughters of Australia into an unjust war, when it directly effects the security of the nation surely the Government must, at last, be called to account. The Howard Coalition is fast losing its credibility on the last policy front upon which it thought it could hold its ground: National Security. Rather than providing the country with a single streamlined department specifically dealing with security issues the Governments anti-terrorism apparatus has been exposed as fractured, de-centralised and at the whim of a blinkered political agenda. The treatment of Commissioner Keelty is despicable considering the remarkable role he has played in furthering the security of the country since 9/11. During the Bali investigations he worked not only as the operational chief of the AFP but as a fine diplomat for Australian security, developing a level of regional cooperation which the erratic diplomacy of our Foreign Minister had failed to achieve. The regional networks on security that he continues to spearhead, the experience he has garnered working on the ground in terrorist related investigations and his exposure to vast intelligence sources (including that of ASIO) makes him one of the most well informed commentators in the country on matters of security. By rebuking him the Government has not only shown its contempt f or Keelty but the role of the AFP and the vital work it has achieved since 2001. It is widely acknowledged that the war against terror is an untraditional conflict, a war that will not be won on a battlefield but rather through the effective analysis of intelligence. The treatment of Keelty underlines the reoccurring crisis in Australian intelligence and indeed the wider Public Service. He has been rebuked for not initiating the self censorship that the Parliamentary Joint Committee Inquiry into Intelligence on Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction found rife in ONA's analysis of the WMD threat. In short, Keelty has been attacked for not telling the Government what it wanted to hear. This, during a time where our intelligence should be our strongest weapon against the terrorist threat, is further evidence of the Governments inability to priorities the security of the country over the security of its' own opinion polls. *** Damien Hogan With the dust yet to settle in Madrid and our own Prime Minister claiming "security" as one of his pre-election strengths, I thought a quick roundup of the War on Terror might be in order. Obviously this is not a war in the traditional sense. Al Qaeda have no plans to occupy and hold the western half of Utah or embark on a Lend-Lease agreement. So what are their plans and how has the war been going for them? By a stroke of luck Osama's "secret" plans were left on the bus seat next to me today: Our Secret Plan - August, 2001 * Create fear Fear is the backbone of any terrorist organisation. Lacking the resources to mount any large scale invasions or military occupations, the anticipation of horror is our greatest weapon. The acts themselves will probably generate their own publicity, but ideally local politicians should never let the concept slip from the public's mind for more than a few days - some kind of "terror indicator" (colours would be good) that can be placed on the front pages of newspapers or in TV bulletins would be useful. Obviously, it is mere fantasy to think of it, but an expensive television advertising campaign promoting the concept of "being terrified" would be great. To make it more palatable we might have to substitute the word "alert" for "terrified", but the message should still be clear. * Alienate US from her allies The combined forces of The West are enormous. With a unified approach they would be almost unbeatable. We must divide and conquer. The UK is touch and go (and Australia is simply untouchable) but 150+ or more of the remaining countries should be easily separated. The mere appearance of the US (or even a small handful of minor powers) as "rogue states" will be an enormously powerful propaganda tool in recruiting new members. * Massively increase US military spending This should weaken one of America's great strengths (their economy) and may directly lead to pain in the American community (via reduced services and/or higher taxes). A massive military build up in conventional weapons (and high tech weapons in particular) would be largely ineffectual in fighting us and so should be encouraged. In a perfect world a focus on space-based weapons or even a missile shield would be excellent as these are simultaneously astronomically expensive and entirely useless. As an additional benefit, military spending also consumes resources that might otherwise be used to woo our power-base of poverty stricken, powerless, despotically ruled zealots. * Unite the Arab world There is no need to spell out that fighting amongst ourselves is the road to ruin. Whilst our differences are large, we can surely draw together around a common enemy. If we can somehow get the US president to use terms like "crusade" when discussing various conflicts we will be doing very well indeed. I can't see how this is possible as it would play completely into our hands... but Allah willing. * Disperse US forces The more countries the US attacks the better. Occupation will generate thousands of new supporters. Standard military theory teaches that the concentration of force is vital for any victory. Arab countries are preferred targets but beggars can't be choosers. There will be real dangers for us if America remains focussed on Afghanistan for any length of time. An attack on Iran or Syria would be excellent - North Korea would be OK, but would take the spotlight of us and is not preferred. I was joking the other day with Omar about how funny it would be if the US attacked that infidel Hussein! * Training facilities If I may briefly continue the joke and presume that somehow all sense had left our enemy' minds and that they DID invade Iraq - well that would be a great service. A fundamentalist Islamic government would almost certainly eventually take power and prior to that event many of the techniques of terrorism would be best taught in the kind of arena that Baghdad would offer. I think we could say with great confidence that Baghdad would become to us what Fort Bragg is to the Americans. * USA out of Saudi We must remove American military forces from the holy land. * Weaken moderate leaders We should hope for US arrogance towards unstable regimes. If possible open threats and/or blatant bribes by the US should be encouraged. We must separate the people from their governments. This should create either a shift to policies more favourable to our position or alternatively more repression from those regimes. Either helps us. * Increase recruitment Any US action which leads to increased recruitment or support from the countries in which we operate should be supported. It goes without saying that the American's only real chance of final victory is to turn the locals against us. We must prevent this. Racism is our friend. * Attack American legal institutions Whilst there is already plenty of material to work with, anything which increases global the perception of hypocrisy by the Americans will be propaganda gold. This is a very tough one as many of the American's rights are enshrined in the constitution. But since we are making wish lists, it would be great to get the US to hold without trial (or even deport) thousands of innocent middle eastern looking citizens. The rights of the 1st and 4th and 5th amendments should be gutted. Gulags would be good. In addition, multilateral treaties (eg Chemical, Nuclear or Biological treaties) should be ignored for the US and Israel but rigorously applied to others. * Ignore Palestine Any peace in Palestine would be a terrible blow and rob us of a great deal of "righteousness". Luckily the US seems to determined to let the Israelis solve this one on their own! So that pot should be boiling for a couple of decades yet. * Discourage non-military solutions Military solutions inevitably lead to collateral damage no matter how carefully they are carried out. Collateral damage is the life blood of "radical" recruitment. Occupation is equally useful. If possible every problem should be viewed by the US as a military problem. * Finally - avoid capture of important leaders (eg Me) Whilst I technically play a very small role in the actual organisation, my capture would be a significant propaganda defeat. America will probably recognise this and would show themselves as complete fools if they were to become distracted by other less important targets e.g. Hussein. If however I am captured alive then under no circumstance must I be tried fairly for my crimes or kept alive to rot in a cell. My trial must appear to be manifestly biased (or even illegal if possible) and martyrdom would greatly increase the movement's power and legitimacy. * Two things occurred to me as I sat on the bus and read this document. 1) Even blind Freddy could guess Al Qaeda's plan, and 2) There appeared to be not a single significant setback in the last 4 years. *** The following reports were compiled by Scott Burchill, who warns they have not been verified to date U.S. Unloading WMD in Iraq Tehran Times | March 13 2004 - TEHRAN: Over the past few days, in the wake of the bombings in Karbala and the ideological disputes that delayed the signing of Iraq's interim constitution, there have been reports that U.S. forces have unloaded a large cargo of parts for constructing long-range missiles and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in the southern ports of Iraq. A reliable source from the Iraqi Governing Council, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Mehr News Agency that U.S. forces, with the help of British forces stationed in southern Iraq, had made extensive efforts to conceal their actions. He added that the cargo was unloaded during the night as attention was still focused on the aftermath of the deadly bombings in Karbala and the signing of Iraq's interim constitution. The source said that in order to avoid suspicion, ordinary cargo ships were used to download the cargo, which consisted of weapons produced in the 1980s and 1990s. He mentioned the fact that the United States had facilitated Iraq's WMD program during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq and said that some of the weapons being downloaded are similar to those weapons, although international inspectors had announced Saddam Hussein's Baath regime had destroyed all its WMD. The source went on to say that the rest of the weapons were probably transferred in vans to an unknown location somewhere in the vicinity of Basra overnight. "Most of these weapons are of Eastern European origin and some parts are from the former Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. The U.S. obtained them through confiscations during sales of banned arms over the past two decades," he said. This action comes as certain U.S. and Western officials have been pointing out the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been discovered in Iraq and the issue of Saddam's trial begins to take center stage. In addition, former chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix has emphasized that the U.S. and British intelligence agencies issued false reports on Iraq leading to the U.S. attack. Meanwhile, the suspicious death of weapons inspector David Kelly is also an unresolved issue in Britain. * Occupation Forces Official Claims to Have No Information About Transfer of WMD to Iraq A security official for the coalition forces in Iraq said that he has not received any information about the unloading of weapons of mass destruction in ports in southern Iraq. Shane Wolf told the Mehr News Agency that the occupation forces have received no reports on such events, but said he hoped that the coalition forces would find the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction one day. Coalition forces and inspectors have so far been unable to find any Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. invaded Iraq under the pretext that Iraq possessed a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. * US tried to plant WMDs, failed: whistleblower, see http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/?page=story_12-8-2003_pg1_9 [http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/?page=story_12-8-2003-pg1-9] Daily Times Monitor - Lehore, Pakistan - 15 March: According to a stunning report posted by a retired Navy Lt Commander and 28-year veteran of the Defense Department (DoD), the Bush administration's assurance about finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was based on a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) plan to "plant" WMDs inside the country. Nelda Rogers, the Pentagon whistleblower, claims the plan failed when the secret mission was mistakenly taken out by "friendly fire", the Environmentalists Against War report. Nelda Rogers is a 28-year veteran debriefer for the DoD. She has become so concerned for her safety that she decided to tell the story about this latest CIA-military fiasco in Iraq. According to Al Martin Raw.com [http://www.almartinraw.com/] : "Ms Rogers is number two in the chain of command within this DoD special intelligence office. This is a ten-person debriefing unit within the central debriefing office for the Department of Defense." The information that is being leaked out is information "obtained while she was in Germany heading up the debriefing of returning service personnel, involved in intelligence work in Iraq for the DoD and/or the CIA. "According to Ms Rogers, there was a covert military operation that took place both preceding and during the hostilities in Iraq," reports Al Martin Raw.com, an online subscriber-based news/analysis service which provides "Political, Economic and Financial Intelligence". Al Martin is a retired Lt Commander (US Navy), the author of a memoir called "The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran-Contra Insider," and is considered one of America's foremost experts on corporate and government fraud. Ms Rogers reports that this particular covert operation team was manned by former military personnel and "the unit was paid through the Department of Agriculture in order to hide it, which is also very commonplace". According to Al Martin Raw.com, "the Agriculture Department has often been used as a paymaster on behalf of the CIA, DIA, NSA and others". According to the Al Martin Raw.com story, another aspect of Ms Rogers' report concerns a covert operation which was to locate the assets of Saddam Hussein and his family, including cash, gold bullion, jewelry and assorted valuable antiquities. The problem became evident when "the operation in Iraq involved 100 people, all of whom apparently are now dead, having succumbed to so-called 'friendly fire'. The scope of this operation included the penetration of the Central Bank of Iraq, other large commercial banks in Baghdad, the Iraqi National Museum and certain presidential palaces where monies and bullion were secreted." "They identified about $2 billion in cash, another $150 million in Euros, in physical banknotes, and about another $100 million in sundry foreign currencies ranging from Yen to British Pounds," reports Al Martin. "These people died, mostly in the same place in Baghdad, supposedly from a stray cruise missile or a combination of missiles and bombs that went astray," Martin continues. "There were supposedly 76 who died there and the other 24 died through a variety of 'friendly fire', 'mistaken identity' and some of them?their whereabouts are simply unknown." Ms Rogers' story sounds like an updated 21st-century version of Treasure Island meets Ali Baba and the Bush Cabal Thieves, writes Martin. "This was a contingent of CIA/ DoD operatives, but it was really the CIA that bungled it," Ms Rogers said. "They were relying on the CIA's ability to organise an effort to seize these assets and to be able to extract these assets because the CIA claimed it had resources on the ground within the Iraqi army and the Iraqi government who had been paid. That turned out to be completely bogus. As usual." "CIA people were supposed to be handling it," Martin continues. "They had a special 'black' aircraft to fly it out. But none of that happened because the regular US Army showed up, stumbled onto it and everyone involved had to scramble. These new Iraqi "asset seizures" go directly to the New US Ruling Junta. The US Viceroy in Iraq Paul Bremer is reportedly drinking Saddam's $2000 a bottle Napoleon-era brandy, smoking his expensive Davidoff cigars and he has even furnished his office with Saddam's Napoleon-era furniture. Copyright © 2004. The Sydney Morning Herald. ***************************************************************** 2 SF Chron: BERKELEY / Blix says Iraq war was illegal / Ex-U.N. official says U.S. did not have sufficient evidence of nuclear weapons Charles Burress, Chronicle Staff Writer [cburress@sfchronicle.com] Thursday, March 18, 2004 Hans Blix, the former U.N. chief weapons inspector in Iraq, said Wednesday that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq violated international law. Speaking at a Berkeley news conference in advance of Friday's one-year anniversary of the attack on Iraq, Blix referred to the U.N. Charter and said a state may attack another state if attacked or if imminently threatened by an attack. However, he added, the evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction - - particularly nuclear weapons -- was not sufficient to justify an invasion. Asked whether President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair had misled the public, Blix noted that he'd never accused Bush or Blair of acting in "bad faith" but said he believed they were too inclined "to buy evidence that was not strong." When asked whether he believed the attack had broken international law, he said, "Yes, I cannot see a legal case under international law." The 75-year-old Blix, an international lawyer from Sweden who formerly headed the International Atomic Energy Agency, was in charge of the resurrected U.N. inspection effort in Iraq for 3 1/2 months in 2003 until it was aborted by the U.S.-led attack. He agreed with the nations on the Security Council that more time should have been given to inspections. At the same time, Blix also believes Saddam Hussein would not have accepted inspections without the prewar military buildup, he told CNN producer Christiane Amanpour in an interview Wednesday watched by a sold-out audience of 2,000 at UC Berkeley's Zellerbach Hall. His appearance was part of a three- day UC Berkeley conference on how the American press covered the war and the rationale for the invasion. His newly released memoir, "Disarming Iraq," faults a monumental failure of intelligence and a distortion of inspection findings by the U.S. and British leadership. He says the pre-emptive strike against Iraq without the Security Council's approval damaged the credibility of the nations that launched the attack and diminished U.N. authority. He told reporters Wednesday that the "great gain" of the war was that "Saddam Hussein and his bloody regime are out," but he said he believed the war, instead of reducing terrorism, had "bred terrorism in Iraq and elsewhere. " Another attack on administration policy came in the conference Wednesday from former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, whose wife was exposed as a CIA agent by anonymous administration officials after Wilson challenged U.S. assertions on Iraqi efforts to get nuclear weapons. A diplomat for 23 years under several Democrat and Republican presidents, Wilson challenged those who justify the war by asking whether Iraq is better off today than it was a year ago. "That's the wrong question," Wilson told a noontime crowd of about 200 people. "The real question is 'Are we better off?' " He asked whether America was better off for "owning the potential for instability in the heart of the Middle East for the foreseeable future" and becoming a target for a possible "exponential growth in 19-year-old Arab males who hate us so much and are so unemployed and under-employed that they're prepared to try to kill us and die in order to attain paradise." Wilson also said the press failed in its coverage of the war. Americans saw "shock and awe" from the U.S. point of view but not "shock and awe viewed by the shocked and awed. It is to our peril that we neglect to understand or learn the impact of our actions on other societies." Wilson said he didn't oppose a policy of regime change toward Saddam Hussein. He added, however, that the administration could have used propaganda, subversion and other tools instead of "sending our young men and young women to die and kill for our country." He drew an analogy to California that included a dig at Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger: "The fact that this administration had a regime-change policy in place toward California doesn't mean that you mass 130,000 troops on the Nevada- California border and march to Sacramento. You use other tools ... You get a bunch of people to get petitions. You get a bunch of propaganda. You get a cartoon figure, a caricature, to run for governor, and pretty soon you've got regime change." E-mail Charles Burress at cburress@sfchronicle.com [cburress@sfchronicle.com] . ©2004 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback | FAQ ***************************************************************** 3 Reuters: U.S. Praises ElBaradei But Future Support Unclear Wed Mar 17, 2004 08:15 PM ET By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent WASHINGTON (Reuters) - After a period of hostility, U.S. officials are giving U.N. nuclear watchdog chief Mohammed ElBaradei good marks for his recent handling of Iran. Still, it seemed a long shot that the Bush administration would support the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director general if he runs for a second four-year term. U.S. officials said on Wednesday they have begun to talk about who might fill the job when ElBaradei's term ends in 2005. No decisions have been made but "I don't think he would be the first choice of this administration," one official said. ElBaradei, 61, has not said if he wants another term and some speculate he may seek instead to lead the Arab League. In the runup to the Iraq war, ElBaradei stoked U.S. anger by saying IAEA inspectors had found no evidence of a continuing nuclear program in Iraq. President Bush and top aides insisted the program existed, but no weapons have been found. In recent months, U.S. officials have faulted ElBaradei for not being tough enough on Iran's nuclear program and for not ferreting out Libya's nuclear weapons program. In December, when Libya gave up its nuclear weapons program, U.S. officials did not trust the IAEA to do the dismantlement, so they took charge. But as ElBaradei visited Washington this week for talks on critical nuclear issues, U.S. officials seemed pleased with his latest efforts. "He did a good thing last week when he made a statement that Libya and Iran were both in breach of their nuclear obligations. It floored us," said one U.S. official who is usually critical of ElBaradei. ***************************************************************** 4 CNN.com - Polish leader: WMD never existed - Mar 18, 2004 long.kwasniewski.ap.jpg] Kwasniewski is a key ally of George W. Bush in Europe. (CNN) -- Poland's president has said he believes there were never weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but it would be a mistake to abandon the country now. The remarks on Thursday by President Aleksander Kwasniewski, a key U.S. ally in Europe, were the first by a Polish leader to raise doubts about the reasons for going to war. But he defended the U.S.-led invasion that ousted Saddam, saying it "made sense." Poland has contributed troops to the U.S.-led coalition and has offered to expand its responsibilities if Spain carries out a threat to withdraw its troops. "We were informed that weapons of mass destruction are in Iraq, that there is a probability of the existence of such weapons," The Associated Press quoted Kwasniewski as saying. "Today, this information is not confirmed." U.S. President George W. Bush refused to comment on the report during a visit to Fort Campbell, Ky. -- home of the Army's 101st Airborne Division, one of the units that took part in the invasion of Iraq, which began a year ago Friday. Bush argued that invasion was necessary because Iraq was concealing chemical and biological weapons, long-range missiles and a nuclear weapons program in violation of U.N. resolutions. In January, David Kay -- the former head of the U.S. inspection team in Iraq -- said in January that his team found no evidence Iraq had stockpiled banned weapons. However, Iraq's interim foreign minister, Hoshiyar Zebari, told CNN he was not yet ready to close the book on the matter. "Saddam Hussein had so many ways to hide those weapons, to conceal them," Zebari said. "And over the last decade or so, he played cat and mouse games with inspectors, with everybody else, and he and his regime have not denied that they had those weapons -- that they had developed them. "I think there is some time to establish that truth and the full truth about the fate of these weapons." ***************************************************************** 5 Oakland Tribune: One year later, Blix feels he's vindicated Article Last Updated: Thursday, March 18, 2004 Ex-U.N. inspector tells Berkeley crowd Bush turned weapons questions into grave threats By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER A year after what he sees as an unnecessary and illegal war, Hans Blix is full of vindication. Even so, the United Nations' former chief weapons inspector in Iraq derives no visible pleasure from suggesting that the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has hobbled the Bush doctrine of preemptive war that propelled an invasion force of300,000 in 2003. Blix suggests the United States and United Kingdom are unlikely to pursue disarming strikes against foreign nations again soon. "I think they see the drawbacks of what they did," he said Wednesday in Berkeley during a 10-day tour promoting his book, "Disarming Iraq." It's his personal account of being drawn from retirement in Stockholm into a global controversy in which Blix was by turns reviled in Iraq and ridiculed as ineffectual in the United States, to emerge as a measured voice on the worth of international cooperation and inspections for arms control. Blix said that President Bush and Britain's Tony Blair turned unresolved questions about the fate of Iraq's weapons from the 1990s into grave threats against the West. "There was clearly a tendency in the U.S. and U.K., in Washington and in London, to say the unaccounted-for things existed, that they were weapons," he said. Blix, too, suspected evidence of weapons might be found. Instead, it appears that years of economic sanctions and containment kept Saddam Hussein boxed in and his weaponeers unable to furnish him with new stockpiles. "He was not a threat to the rest of the world, but he was a horror to his people," Blix told reporters Wednesday. "This is one of the great benefits I see of the war, that one of the world's despots is gone" he elaborated later before 2,000 people at the University of California's Zellerbach Hall. "But that's not what the United States and Britain used as their argument before the war." In three-and-a-half months, Blix's inspection team, known as UNMOVIC, scoured more than 200 sites in Iraq, many identified by Western intelligence agencies as associated with weapons research, manufacturing and storage. They found only rocket booster engines that exceeded the range limit imposed by the United Nations in the 1990s and some papers about an exotic method of enriching uranium that Iraq seemed to have abandoned years before. Had UNMOVIC's inspectors been allowed to keep looking one or two more months, Blix said, they could have cleared hundreds of other suspected weapons sites and caused Western intelligence agencies to question their sources of information and judgment that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. "I think they would have been a little shaken, I think, that the information they had was so wrong," Blix said. But he suspects the Bush and Blair administrations were committed as early as the summer of 2002 to the invasion, regardless of the outcome of the U.N. inspections and deliberations in the U.N. Security Council. "Once they came up to the number (of) 200,000 men sitting in the desert, there was a tremendous momentum" for war that was virtually inevitable, Blix said. The majority of the Security Council favored letting the inspections proceed, he said. But the United States, Britain and Spain assumed the mantle as enforcers of past council resolutions and went to war. "When the council did not go their way, they decided to ignore it," Blix said. "Three members of the council went ahead against the wishes of the rest." That stripped the invasion of legitimacy, he said. "I cannot find a legal case for it in international law." Yet Blix does not suggest Bush and Blair administrations intentionally misled the public or the United Nations. "I have never said that Bush or Blair acted in bad faith. I have no evidence pointing in that direction," he said. "I think it's more likely they were inclined to believe evidence that supported their view." But Blix shied from offering political judgments. At the university, he was asked, through interlocutor Christianne Amanpour of CNN, "What is your advice for beating Bush in 2004?" "Next question," he replied. Asked about allegations that the American and British governments eavesdropped on United Nations leaders, Blix said he assumed his offices were bugged as well. "I just wish they had listened to what we said," he added. Contact Ian Hoffman at ihoffman@angnewspapers.com ***************************************************************** 6 UN Atomic Watchdog Renews Call To Iran For Transparency On Nuclear Activities Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 13:00:08 -0500 UN ATOMIC WATCHDOG RENEWS CALL TO IRAN FOR TRANSPARENCY ON NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES New York, Mar 18 2004 1:00PM The United Nations atomic watchdog agency today emphasized the need for transparency and proactive cooperation by Iran to resolve outstanding questions over its nuclear activities following omissions in information Tehran provided in accordance with treaties seeking to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. In a <"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2004/talks1803.html">report on a meeting yesterday in Washington between the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohamed ElBaradei, and United States President George W. Bush on issues of nuclear non-proliferation, an agency news release highlighted its chief's comments to reporters on Iran. "My answer is that the jury is still out," Mr. ElBaradei said in his briefing on the status of Iran's nuclear programme. "We would like to continue to work hard on inspecting Iran before we come to a conclusion. We expect full cooperation, full transparency by Iran, if Iran wants to prove that its programme is for peaceful purposes." He has previously said the <"http://www.iaea.org/index.html">IAEA has no proof that Iran's activities are linked to a nuclear weapons programme and Tehran has consistently denied any such intention. The Agency's Board of Governors meeting in Vienna last week adopted a resolution voicing "serious concern" over Iran's omissions in its reports, specifically mentioning a more advanced centrifuge design than previously declared as well as two mass spectrometers used in a laser enrichment programme. It called on Iran to resolve these and all other outstanding issues, while Mr. ElBaradei was asked to report on the matter before the end of May so that the Board may consider his findings at its June session. 2004-03-18 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml ***************************************************************** 7 Hi Pakistan: Russia hints at dropping Iran's nuclear project --> March 19 2004 MOSCOW: Moscow's plan to complete an atomic reactor in Iran in defiance of Washington has run into obstacles, a key nuclear official said on Wednesday. Washington's criticism of Moscow's nuclear ties with Tehran and disagreements between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have already prompted industry insiders to say Russia may kill off the 800 million dollars project in Bushehr. Andrei Malyshev, head of Russia's Nuclear Safety Inspectorate, cited logistical problems for stalling the project. "The problem has to do with additional equipment Iran needs to buy," Itar-Tass news agency quoted him as saying. "Part of the equipment required to finish construction (of the Bushehr nuclear plant) has to be bought in Europe, where there is a ban on sales of such equipment to this country." Mr Malyshev's remarks were the first official indication the project was off track since Russia's top atomic official pulled out of a crucial trip to Iran this month. US President George Bush has made fighting black-market trade in nuclear technology a key priority, and wants Russia to sign up to an anti-proliferation initiative at the summit of the Group of Eight nations in June. Iran's embassy in Moscow confirmed the project had hit an impasse: "Construction work at Bushehr has not been stopped altogether. But unfortunately it's being delayed," said a senior diplomat. The first generating unit of the 1,000-megawatt plant was originally due to have begun full operation last year. But, as months of negotiations between Moscow and Tehran dragged on, the launch was rescheduled to 2006. Experts say the start-up could be delayed further, if not ditched altogether. TOUGH STANCE: First signs the Kremlin could be taking a much tougher stance on Iran emerged last year when Russia used the leverage of the uncompleted Bushehr project to persuade Tehran to accept stricter UN inspections. The foreign ministry shed little light on its closed-door dealings with Iran on the matter. Analysts say the recent appointment as foreign minister of Sergei Lavrov - Russia's envoy to the United Nations for a decade - could make Russian foreign policy more sensitive to Western security concerns. "Russia's position on Iran has not changed," Mr Lavrov said on Wednesday at his first briefing since he was appointed. "We stand for the clarification and settlement of all questions linked to Iran's nuclear activities, and we call on Tehran to have full and transparent cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency." Sources at IAEA have said that for the time being it was unlikely Russia would resume work at Bushehr until Iran convinces the agency its nuclear programme is peaceful. "Today's comments by Malyshev are just an attempt by the Russians to cover up the real nature of things," said Radzhab Safarov, a respected Iranian expert based in Moscow. "It's a political game Russia plays with an aim to use Bushehr as a bargaining chip in its dealings with the West." Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 NYT: Losing Time on North Korea Published: March 18, 2004 [T] he North Korean nuclear threat is not the kind of problem that grows easier to solve with time. If time is on anyone's side, it is on that of Pyongyang's aspiring bomb makers. The country continues to reject the restraints of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, keeping international inspectors away from its known plutonium reprocessing unit and suspected uranium enrichment plants, while defiantly proclaiming progress toward building a bomb. Yet the Bush administration appears oddly content to let the situation drift forward, at least through this year's presidential elections. Such a lack of urgency could prove costly to America's future security. Granted, there are no attractive diplomatic or military options available and no guarantees that North Korea is seriously interested in a peaceful solution. Still, considering what Pyongyang might do with a fully developed nuclear arsenal — like blackmailing its neighbors or selling bomb ingredients to anyone with enough cash — Washington should be energetically probing for diplomatic opportunities. So far, it has merely been going through the motions. Midlevel American officials have now sat through two rounds of six-nation talks on North Korea in Beijing, and despite the lack of visible results, have dutifully pronounced them useful. Yet all parties understand that no serious progress can be expected in these talks unless Washington steps forward and spells out the concrete diplomatic and economic steps it would take if the North agreed to verifiably dismantle all its nuclear programs. President Bush once rejected doing so on principle, saying it would be wrong to reward North Korea for giving up nuclear weapons programs it had repeatedly promised not to undertake in the first place. Since then, the White House has adopted a more pragmatic view. It has broadly indicated its willingness to give North Korea security guarantees, improved relations and economic help once the North follows Libya's example and abandons all of its nuclear programs — military and civilian, plutonium-based and uranium-based. What it cannot bring itself to do is negotiate specific, simultaneous steps to achieve that goal. It insists, unrealistically, that North Korea commit itself to full disarmament before America offers anything concrete in return. The administration seems intent on using the talks to convince the four other participants — South Korea, Japan, China and Russia — that North Korea is not interested in a diplomatic solution at all. Some of those countries have begun to show increasing impatience with North Korea's belligerent language and unwillingness to put all of its cards on the table. But none of these countries, all neighbors of North Korea, are prepared to give up on diplomacy, in part because they all have much too much to lose from any military confrontation. Left to themselves, America's partners in the six-party negotiations would talk forever, all the while claiming that diplomatic progress was being made in minute increments. North Korea is also happy to let the talks drag on, as it proceeds unhindered with its nuclear weapons development. The country in a hurry for a diplomatic solution ought to be the United States. Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company ***************************************************************** 9 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: NK Threatens to Expand Nuclear Arsenal Updated Mar.18,2004 11:05 KST North Korea has again threatened to expand its nuclear arsenal, accusing the United States of making aggressive moves against the communist government in Pyongyang. The official North Korean news agency said Pyongyang will strengthen what it called its "nuclear deterrent" to protect itself. This comes as the United States and South Korea are preparing for joint annual military exercises that begin Sunday and run through the following week. About 37,000 U.S. troops are stationed in South Korea to deter aggression from the North. Pyongyang says the joint exercises are a rehearsal for a U.S. invasion of North Korea, but the U.S. military counters by saying the exercises are defense-oriented. North Korea often issues threats on the eve of joint military exercises between South Korea and the United States. Pyongyang previously threatened to strengthen its nuclear program after a second round of multi-party talks in Beijing last month ended without a breakthrough. China announced Tuesday it has circulated a draft plan for advancing the limited progress made at those talks. It did not reveal details of the proposal, except to say it covers the working groups all sides agreed to in Beijing. The Beijing talks ended with a pledge to create working groups that would talk through obstacles and issues not deemed appropriate for the high-level agenda. VOA News ***************************************************************** 10 Hi Pakistan: China's foreign minister going to N Korea to discuss nuclear talks (12:20 PST) --> March 19 2004 BEIJING: China's foreign minister will visit North Korea next week for the first time in five years to discuss how to proceed with six-nation talks on the North's nuclear program, the government announced Thursday, a foreign news agency reported. China has sought to push ahead with another round of talks on Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions among the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia. The latest round ended last month in Beijing without a settlement. Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing will visit North Korea next Tuesday through Thursday to discuss the nuclear talks, Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said at a regular briefing. He didn't immediately give any details. Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission and prior consent of the webmaster. ***************************************************************** 11 [DU-WATCH] silent WMD's - the effects of DU by Admiral Vishnu Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:10:36 -0600 (CST) INTERNATIONAL PHYSICIANS FOR THE PREVENTION OF NUCLEAR WAR (IPPNW) CONFERENCE: DIALOGUES WITH DECISION MAKERS NEW DELHI, INDIA, FEBRUARY 29, MARCH 1-2, 2004 CONFERENCE HOSTED BY THE INDIAN DOCTORS FOR PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT (IDPD) CONTACT: DR. ARUN MITRA SILENT WMDs EFFECTS OF DEPLETED URANIUM By Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat Former Chief of the Naval Staff, India FEBRUARY 29, 2004 Heat not a furnace for your foe so hot ..that it do singe yourself. - William Shakespeare This brief presentation is aimed at conveying to the primarily Indian participants of the Conference the fateful and disastrous consequences of the indiscriminate use of depleted and non DU munitions on the people of the west, central and south Asian regions, women, children , men , animals, plant and animal life now and in the future, in gross violation of international law, the Hague convention and domestic US military law. Official Gamma Ray damage caused studies have been deficient in a number of respects..internal contamination, internal dose to individual cells, omissions of diseases other than cancer, mutagenic, long term degeneration , oncogenesis, effects of the killer isotopes in particular. The case studies of the years 1945-50 were ignored. A recent European Parliament Report ECRR 2003 (European Committee on Radiation Risk ) concludes that A Bomb studies underestimate the radiation risk by more than 1000 times and failed to consider the internal exposure and diseases caused by Alpha and Beta rays. They did not consider the Manhattan Project classified memo that, in case the Project objective of producing Plutonium fission and theA Bomb did not succeed , Depleted Uranium munitions would be deployed towards the attainment of the same objective (encl. 1). DU weapons emit Alpha particle dose to a single cell from U-238 which is 50 times the annual dose level. Cancer is initiated with one alpha particle, its daughter isotopes effect generations as the isotopes bio-concentrate in plants and animals, and travel up the food chain. It is a nuclear weapon because the energy is derived from the nucleus of the atom. They enter the body through the lungs, the digestive system or breaks in the skin. One gram of DU releases more than 12,000 particles per second. The radiation slowly kills the cells that make life possible. The Gulf War syndrome of 1991 did just that ( reported by Dr Asaf Durakovic, Prof. of Medicine , Georgetown University, and discoverer of the Gulf War Syndrome.) We are well aware that the radiation fall-out map Under the Cloud: Decades of Nuclear Testing has demonstrated the effects of 1200 nuclear weapon tests conducted at the Nevada Test Site; and the US Government admitted in Nov. 2002, that every living person in the US between 1958-63 was exposed to this fall out resulting in cancer, gene mutation, heart disease, autism, diabetes, Parkinsons, ALS, asthma, chronic fatigue syndrome , hypothyroidism in new-borns, obesity and learning disabilities. One out of twelve children in the US is disabled. The fall out did not stop at the US borders. It travelled around the world, as atmospheric dust and remains even in the biosphere/ sub-orbital space today. High breast cancer rates have been co-located in the proximity of nuclear power plants in the west and more so in the east coast areas of the US (The Breast cancer map from The Enemy Within: the high cost of living near nuclear reactors, quotes US Govt. Disease Control Centers. The Radiation & Public health Report (RPHP), rendered by a group of independent scientists collected 4000 baby teeth and by measuring Strontium 90 levels in the baby teeth ( a built in dosi-meter ) they have been able to co-relate with radiation related diseases in children living near the nuclear power plants; the main path ways being dairy products and drinking water. The induction of DU weapons in 1991 in Iraq, the radio-active trash from nuclear plants broke a 46 year taboo. This Trojan Horse of nuclear war, an omnicidal weapon has since then continued to be used more and more. DU remains radioactive longer than the age of the earth ( estimated at 4.5 billion years. ) The long-term effects from over a decade of DU exposures are emerging in Southern Iraq. They are devastating. The increased quantities of radio-active material ( including non-depleted uranium), used in Afghanistan are 3 to 5 times greater than Iraq 199. In Iraq 2003 they are already estimated to be 6 to 10 times 1991 and will travel through a larger area and affect many more people, babies and unborn. Countries within a 1000 mile radius of Baghdad and Kabul are being affected by radiation poisoning , that includes the Capital, New Delhi, where the ruling elite lives. The reported coming of an AIDS epidemic last year in India , down wind, may have a relationship to DU bombing in Afghanistan. If we think cancer is a problem now wait until more DU is released in wars against terror and for regime change, on mistaken Intelligence reports. More than 500 tons of DU munitions have been dispensed in Afghanistan. Professor Yagasaki calculated that 800 tons of DU is the atomicity equivalent to 83,000 Nagasaki bombs in a paper presented at the World Uranium Weapons Conference in Hamburg in October 2003 ( 5 months ago ). The amount of DU used in Iraq in 2003 is equivalent to nearly 250,000 Nagasaki bombs ( Busby and Leuren Moret have calculated that 1900 tons of DU is equivalent to 60 TBq of Alfa and Beta particulate activity). We need not ennumerate the DU munition types used in Iraq 199, Kosovo 1999, Afghanistan 2001-04 and Iraq 2003. They have been dispensed by all air / ground and sea systems on innocent civilians. DU burns intensely and is very hard. It releases Uranium Oxide. The aerosol contains particles of 0.5-5 microns in size, once they are in the air or dust they are inhaled or ingested, including from contaminated soil. Once in the lungs one such particle is equivalent to having one XRay per hour, for life. Because it is impossible to remove, the victim is gradually irradiated. Still births, birth defects, leukemia, damaged central nervous systems and other cancers have been common in children born since 1991. Child leukemia has risen 600 % in areas of Iraq as reported by the Netherland Visie Foundation. Beyond just the health consequences, DU munitions are in fact, weapons of Silent Mass Destruction in so far as the consequences of their usage are vast, indiscriminate and violate all Human Rights Conventions . Tora Bora , Kabu , Paktia , Karises or underwater supply tunnels have been contaminated forever. All this has been documented in a comprehensive paper Uranium wars : The Pentagon steps up its use of Radio-active Munitions, by Marc W. Herold to whom this paper owes sincere acknowledgement. In another paper Dr Mohammed Daud Miraki, Director Afghan DU Recovery Fund, quotes George W Bush , we will smoke them out, condemning the unborn, the living and the future generations of Afghans and the neighbouring people to a pre-determined, death sentence. After the destruction of our village, I realised that the Americans had sentenced us all to death. When I saw my deformed grandson I realised my hopes for the future have vanished This time we are part of the invisible genocide brought on by America a silent death from which we will not escape ( Jooma Khan of Laghman province..March 2003.) Similar stories are repeated from Paktita province of Jelly Babies. Pregnant women are afraid of giving birthThis is the legacy of US ushered liberation, freedom and democracy. DU is cheap for the US, utilising nuclear waste, cheaper than titanium and tungsten, not for the liberated ( non-DU is still cheaper as it is the uranium feedstock, pre-enrichment). The Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC), Washington DC, and the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (1991) - Steve Fetter and Frank Von Hippel have reported on extensive research by Field teams of the UMRC in Afghanistan. Testimonies of fathers and mothers are horrifying What else do the Americans want ? They killed us , they turned our new-borns into horrific deformations, and they turned our farm lands into grave-yards, and destroyed our homes. On top of all this their planes fly over and spray us with bullets.. we have nothing to lose ..we will fight them the same way we fought the previous invaders (Sayed Gharib at Tora Bora). Radiological dispensing devices or warfare is the latest of the weapons of the new millenium, but it singes even those who use it , as shown in the after effects of the tests at home ground in the US, where evidence of cognitive damage during early infancy have been compiled. For us in Eurasia, Pakistan and India we have a new health epidemic to drain our scarce resources. As world citizens we need to focus on a new scourge, the reality of the PNAC - Rebuilding Americas Defenses, Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century. The Report notes that , Much has been written in recent years about the need to transform the conventional armed forces of the United States to take advantage of the Revolution in Military Affairs. Our military requires a dramatic transformation , lest we lose our ability to fight the future unconventional wars .. some may be fought in cyberspace, others under water or in outer space . And some even within our bodies. Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol and others are some of the men representing contemporary power centers, who define US policy. History indicates that the men who define US military policy from the shadows , are worthy of our attention. GENETIC BOMBS When creating genetic-bombs or weapons to target specific groups; genetic profiles are subtler and more accurate than the coarse pseudo category called race. The group with ADHD ( the Edison Gene) uniquely share common inherited variations in their dopamine regulating genes regardless of race, geography or ethnicity. Thus anybody whos part of a group with a shared genetic profile may be at risk in the future. A virus or bacteria may attack only a particular type of person, killing, disabling or sterilising only those of a particular gene profile. Threatening a particular type would be sufficient political black-mail. Wolfowitz, Kristol and their colleagues suggested that the Pentagon should be thinking about not just germ warfare of which they have plenty of capabilities, but gene warfare. Genetic terra-forming could replace diplomacy, or it could change the face of politics if an organism got loose that killed all the people of a particular minority community who tend to vote for a particular political party. According to the PNAC, Genetically targeted weapons could change world politics for ever, and the report notes, advanced forms of biological warfare that can target specific geno-types may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool To conclude 4th generation micro-nukes, with their war-head composition, were deliberated upon and decided at the US Airforce Strategic Command Headquarters at the Offutt Airforce Base, Nebraska, between the top Corporates /weapon manufacturers and the US military brass. The former not only have prior knowledge of numbers and types of all types of nuclear weapons, but the locations of the planned and approved targets, globally. This meeting took place on Hiroshima Day, 6th August, 2003, and to reiterate, the aim was to define a new generation of nuclear weapons to be used on a pre-emptive basis against rogue enemies and terrorist organisations. (mini-nukes have an explosive capacity between one-third and six times a Hiroshima bomb). In this Strangelovian logic, nuclear weapons are now viewed as a means to ensuring peace and security against non-existent WMDs. AT A GLANCE 1. In the 2003 war, the IraqiS were subjected to the Pentagons radioactive arsenal, mainly in the urban centers, unlike in the deserts in 1991. The aggregate effects of illnesses and long term disabilities and genetic birth defects will be apparent only 2008 onwards. 2. By now, half of all the 697,000 US soldiers involved in the 1991 war have reported serious illnesses. According the American Gulf War Veterans Association, more than 30% of these soldiers are chronically ill, and receiving disability benefits from the Veterans Administration. 3. The number of disabled veterans is shockingly high . They are in their mid-thirties and should have been in the prime of health. 4. Near the Republican Palace where US troops stood guard and over 1000 employees walked in and out, the radiation readings were the hottest in Iraq, at nearly 1900 times background radiation levels. 5. At a roadside stand, selling fresh bunches of parsley, mint, and onions, children played on a burnt out Iraqi tank just outside Baghdad, the Geiger counter registered 1000 times normal background radiation. 6. The Pentagon and the United Nations estimate that the US and Britain used 1,100 to 2,200 tons of armor piercing shells made of DU during attacks in March-April 2003, far more than the 1991 Gulf War ( this does not include air dispensed DU munitions and missiles), wrote the Post Intelligencer. 7. An otherwise useless by-product of the uranium enrichment process, DU is attractive to military contractors because it is so cheap and often offered for free by the Government. 8. The long term effects, as Dr Asaf Durakovic elaborates, after the early neurological symptoms are cancer, and related radiation illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome, joint and muscle pain, neurological and/or nerve damage, mood disturbances, auto-immuno deficiciencies, lung and kidney damage, vision problems, skin rupture, increase in miscarriages, maternal mortality and genetic birth defects/deformation. 9. For years the US government described the Gulf War Syndrome as a post traumatic stress disorder. It was labelled as a psychological problem or simply as mysterious unrelated ailments much in the same way as health problems of Vietnam veterans suffering from Agent Orange poisoning. ( With acknowledgements to Sara Flounders, for 1-9 above, Coordinator of the DU education program ). I also gratefully acknowledge the facts learnt from evidence led by scientists/papers presented and accepted by the International Criminal Tribunal on Afghanistan, at Tokyo on 13-16 Decembe, 2003 and earlier at the World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference, Hamburg 16-19 October, 2003, by Leuren Moret, whose continuing contribution to this cause against Silent Wepons of Mass Destruction ( SWMD), in defense of humanity, deserves our support. Admiral Vishnu Bhagwat may be contacted at . ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/Sj.0lB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 12 Bellona: Libyan ships Soviet nuke fuel to Dimitrovgrad, leaving a money trail Comment DIMITROVGRAD, Central Russia—Importing foreign parcels of Soviet produced highly enriched uranium into Russia under a Russian American cooperative agreement supervised by the International Atomic Energy Agency is becoming a lucrative business for the Scientific Research Institute for Atomic Reactors, or NIIAR, at Dimitrovgrad in the mid-Volga region. From left to right, Dr. Gashut, (Libya), Dr. Yamashita (IAEA) and Dr. Smirnov (Russia) signing the fuel export agreement. IAEA Mikhail Piskunov, 2004-03-18 21:28 The institute seems to be raking it in, while the opacity of how the money is spent is tilling fertile soil for the growth of criminal roots. As was revealed mid March, a load of cargo arrived in the Ulyanovsk Region from Libya on a plane owned by Volga-Dnepr airlines. In the early morning hours of March 9th the cargo was brought to the nuclear centre at Dimitrovgrad, or NIIAR, some 600 kilometers east of Moscow. The load delivered to the centre consisted of several containers filled with fuel assemblies from an IRT-2M reactor in operation at the Tajour nuclear research centre, south of the Libyan capitol of Tripoli. The containers hold 16 kilograms of nuclear fuel. The fuel is enriched by 80 percent with uranium 235. This highly enriched nuclear fuel had been given to Libya in the 1980s by the Soviet Union. Now it is back in Russia through the efforts of Russian-American threat reduction cooperation. This is one step in the Russia-US-IAEA tri-lateral initiative aimed at non-proliferation and preventing nuclear terrorism. Such measures, naturally, cannot be greeted with a lack of support. Indeed, as soon came to light, Libya was acquiring nuclear materials and corresponding equipment, and was carrying out a programme to create weapons of mass destruction, or WMD. Then, when Libya’s administration agreed to cease further pursuits in this area, it was decided to send the Soviet produced uranium back to Russia, and any Libyan equipment related to its nuclear programme were handed over to the United States. The nuclear fuel returned from Libya represents the third nuclear shipment to Russia, and ultimately, to NIIAR, in the past two years. The first came in 2002 with a delivery of uranium from Yugoslavia’s Vinch nuclear research institute. Russia’s Dimitrovgrad institute received just below 50 kilograms of highly enriched uranium. Then, in December of 2003, 17 kilograms of uranium fuel was delivered to NIIAR from the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Nuclear Research and Atomic Energy. Early March brought Libya’s nuclear gift. The Libyan delivery to NIIAR raises many questions, though answers are hard to come by, as the institute’s management is keeping its silence. NIIAR’s press service has published no information about the delivery in any media since it arrived. It’s web site has also avoided the topic. It was necessary, therefore, to analyze information from a variety of sources. Alas, their information is not only scant but contradictory. What is in the containers? But what is it, precisely, that they brought to NIIAR from Libya? Was it pure un-irradiated plutonium, or was it spent nuclear fuel, or SNF? These have been the central questions that we have discussed at the Centre for Assistance on Citizen’s Initiatives, the NGO I run in Dimitrovgrad. According to a March 9th Russian newswire report from the state-run ITAR-TASS, the fuel assemblies had been extracted from a reactor by IAEA specialists. This would mean we are talking about spent nuclear fuel assemblies. If they decide to reuse this fuel for nuclear energy purposes, they will then have to reprocess the fuel. To do that, they will have to at least partially cleanse the fuel of fissionable materials, which, without fail means the formation of a new parcel of radioactive waste at NIIAR, of which there are plenty. A counterbalance to the ITAR-TASS information cited above, however, was two web dispatches on the site of the former Ministry of Atomic Energy, or Minatom, which is now known as Agency of Atomic Energy. The two Minatom articles, which included a report from the Interfax Russian newswire, both reported that the Libyan shipment contained “fresh nuclear fuel.” It may be that this is the correct version of events, though it is hard to believe that a container full of fuel prepared in the Soviet Union 20 years ago returned from Libya—after such a protracted period of time—un-irradiated. After all, it’s not news the IRT-2M reactor at the Tajour centre has been operating in recent years. This would suggest that the facility at least housed SNF, begging the question, where did that SNF go? It couldn’t have just disappeared without a trace. Moreover, SNF presents no less a danger than “clean” un-irradiated nuclear fuel. But, can it be that they did drop off a load of SNF at NIIAR? If that is the case, then it was no accident that Interfax reported the following: “Minatom estimates that the import of fuel with American cooperation—the programme is US-funded—will aid Russia in its entry onto the global market in SNF.” Mikhail Piskunov: "The nuclear centre must pay the region for importing SNF." Viktor Teryoshkin/Bellona Following the Money The issue of the financing of the project to return Soviet era nuclear materials to Russia should force one to stop and ponder. This operation is not bringing NIIAR small change, and one can only guess at the sums this deal are reaping for the institute. All that is known is that the project is financed by the Americans—primarily by the US Department of Energy, or DOE, and the money in play cannot be paltry. For example, after the Yugoslavian fuel assemblies were removed and sent to NIIAR, US Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, in an interview with Russian daily Izvestiya, pledged $400,000 to reprocess the Yugoslavian uranium. The DOE will deliver on this pledge. To take the fuel out of Yugoslavia, the Washington-based non-proliferation NGO, The Nuclear Threat Initiative, or NTI, put up $5m of its own money, while the US federal government, because of environmental clean-up restrictions placed on threat reduction efforts, put up only $2m. According to the DOE, the IAEA and officials from the Russian-American programme to remove the uranium to NIIAR from Libya, the operation cost $700,000. Part of that money was obviously spent on transportation, and the rest, apparently was collected by NIIAR. How much is as yet uncertain. One can only guess. Deductive reasoning suggests this: Receiving nuclear parcels of Soviet pedigree is becoming a very lucrative business for the management of NIIAR. And this concerns not hard cash payments from abroad. Un-irradiated, “clean” uranium is a most valuable material, which NIIAR is receiving practically for free. And after down-blending, this HEU can be used to make new fuel assemblies for both research and energy producing reactors. Again, sheer profit. NIIAR’s opaque use of funding The Centre for Assistance on Citizen’s Initiatives frequently receives information indicating that private firms are leeching off the profitable deals on Soviet era fuel return. For example, according to a report that appeared on the Nuclear.ru web site, “Technical help in filling out documentation and in transport [for the fuel from Libya] was furnished by the Sosny firm, which is also participating in contract work with regarding the Paks Nuclear Power Plant [in Hungary, which ships its SNF to Russia].” It is known to the Centre for Assistance on Citizen’s Initiatives that Sosny was created by management-level employees of one of NIIAR’s leading departments, and that huge sums of money pass through the firm. One can draw one’s own conclusions. All the while, workers at NIIAR live in conditions of poverty: workers’ salaries are relatively low and are often severely delayed. NIIAR currently owes three month’s worth of back pay to its workers. NIIAR workers owed three month’s back-pay Recently, Dmitrograd’s mayor participated in a call-in show on local radio. Hearing the complaints about wage arrears, he promised that the city would seek means to boost NIIAR’s finances. It would be, however, infinitely more fruitful to engage law enforcement and corresponding regulatory agencies in a search for leaking funds. In the same vein, it would be of use to the mayor to know the following fact: In order to import SNF, NIIAR has to pay the regional administration. For example, the Zheleznogorsk Mining and Chemical Combine, located in the Krasnoyarsk region of Central Siberia, gets 25 percent of the gross payment for the import and storage of spent nuclear fuel to the chemical combine’s RT-2 SNF storage facility. But NIIAR management plays the local administration on this point like a fiddle: After NIIAR is engaged primarily in scientific research. City and regional authorities sing NIIAR’s praises while promising the population all kinds of benefits due to Dimitrovgrad’s proximity to NIIAR, and tell the worried citizens that their city is in the running for special federal status a science city. But according to out experts here at the Centre for Assistance on Citizen’s Initiatives, these are little more than pipe dreams that have to be seriously discussed. Mikhail Piskunov is chairman of the Centre for Assistance on Citizen’s Initiatives in the city of Dimitrovgrad. He can be reached by email at csgi@vinf.ru. Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] , President: Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no] Information: info@bellona.no [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 13 BBC: US boosts Pakistan military ties Last Updated: Thursday, 18 March, 2004 [Colin Powell (left) is welcomed by Pakistani Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri] Mr Powell said more action against militants was needed The US Secretary of State Colin Powell says Washington will elevate its military ties with Pakistan, making it a major ally outside of Nato. He was talking in Islamabad ahead of talks with President Pervez Musharraf. His visit coincides with renewed military action by Pakistan's army against al-Qaeda and Taleban suspects and their supporters. Troops and helicopter gun ships backed by fighter jets have been taking part in the operation. Biggest operation Mr Powell said the elevation of relations with the US was a reward for Pakistan's unstinting efforts to hunt and find al-Qaeda suspects sheltering in Pakistan. He paid tribute to its contribution to the fight against global terrorism, which correspondents say is unpopular with many people in Pakistan sympathetic to the Taleban and still hostile to the US. The BBC's Zaffar Abbas in Islamabad says the military action in the South Waziristan tribal region is the biggest operation against al-Qaeda and Taleban remnants for more than a year. Officials say helicopter gun ships were assisting the ground forces on Thursday in clashes near the town of Wana, in which heavy arms were being used by both sides. Fighter jets have also been seen in the area. Residents near the battle said they could hear artillery being fired by the government side and see columns of smoke snaking into the sky. We will be making notification to our Congress that will designate Pakistan as a 'major non-NATO ally' Colin Powell The security forces gave a three hour notice to local residents early on Thursday morning to vacate their houses before hundreds of paramilitary and army troops moved into the area to take on armed militants believed to be hiding in the mountainous area. In a separate development in north Waziristan, the amry says two of its soldiers were killed in a rocket attack in the remote Shawal area. Mr Powell met President Pervez Musharraf for talks as the fighting took place. Our correspondent says that the visit put the president in a difficult position, because he is widely perceived by opposition parties in the country as an American proxy who would never say no to a demand from the United States. Before meeting General Musharraf, Mr Powell repeated Washington's concerns over the nuclear proliferation network set up by the top Pakistani scientist, AQ Khan. "Questions have arisen as to not only what Dr Khan and his associates might have been doing but was there any other knowledge within the government at the time it was happening," Mr Powell said. [An army helicopter flying in the vicinity of Wana, South Waziristan ] It is the biggest operation against al-Qaeda suspects for over a year The Pakistan authorities have insisted Dr Khan was working on his own. "I think this is a logical and proper question to ask and I am sure that Pakistani authorities would want it known as well," Mr Powell said. The talks with the Pakistani government also focused on Kashmir and the current peace efforts between India and Pakistan. Mr Powell's recommendation to the US Congress that it would designate Pakistan a "major non-Nato ally" would enable closer military co-operation between the two countries. In effect, Pakistan now joins a club of 10 or so militarily most-favoured nations that include Israel, Egypt and Jordan among them. It may make it easier for Islamabad to acquire the arms it needs to compete with India in conventional weapons. 'Decisive' A BBC correspondent in Peshawar, near the scene of the latest fighting, says that officials admit the possibility that a top al-Qaeda leader could be in the area because of the stiff resistance that has so far been met. "The government is going in for a decisive action," a government official told Reuters news agency Officials say that 24 suspects were killed in Tuesday's fighting, but they were only able to recover bodies of two foreign men believed to be Chechens. The authorities believe that foreign militants are still hiding in the semi autonomous tribal region that borders Afghanistan, and have launched the operation after local tribesmen refused to hand them over. Over the past two years Pakistan has arrested around 570 al-Qaeda suspects, many of them in risky operations. Pakistan is the third country of Mr Powell's South Asian tour, following India and Afghanistan. ***************************************************************** 14 Reuters: Israeli nuke whistleblower won't say more - family Thu Mar 18, 2004 07:57 PM ET By Dan Williams JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu will not spill any more secrets on his release next month after serving 18 years in solitary confinement for treason, relatives said on Thursday. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered Vanunu closely monitored when he goes free on April 21, citing concern he will discuss his past work at Dimona atomic reactor -- the subject of a 1986 British interview for which he was abducted home and tried. Vanunu's letters are censored. He gets visitors on condition Dimona is not discussed. But his brother said the 49-year-old convict had assured him the government's fears were unfounded. "Mordechai has no more secrets to tell," Meir Vanunu told Reuters. "He has the right to speak out against Israeli policies if he wants, but that is not the same as compromising national security." Vanunu's revelations to the Sunday Times led analysts to conclude Israel has some 200 nuclear warheads, blowing away the Jewish state's ambiguity over its non-conventional capabilities. Absent from the expose were the names of Dimona researchers and descriptions of security precautions at the site. Israeli security sources say Vanunu could still reveal these, as well as sensitive data about locally developed atomic technologies. According to security sources, Vanunu will be barred from leaving Israel for a probationary period after his release. His contact with the media will be severely restricted, sources say. Vanunu -- who embraced Christianity and anti-nuclear activism after being fired from a job as mid-level Dimona technician in 1985 -- has shown no remorse about going public. "The secrets collapsed without any bombs, without killing anyone. That was the great power of a non-violent act," the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu Web site quotes him as saying. Such remarks infuriate Israeli top brass, who see efforts to expose Dimona's capabilities as endangering the military deterrence needed to fend off Middle East foes. "Vanunu is a traitor on an all-out mission against his nation and religion," said Uzi Arad, a former Mossad operative and Israeli government adviser. He said any account Vanunu gives on Dimona after his release is as likely to be fantasy as fact. "The imprimatur of having worked at Dimona makes Vanunu seem completely credible. Who is to say that the combination of his own obsessions and pressure from publishers and anti-Israel lobbies won't make him invent libels about us?" Arad said. Mary Eoloff, an American activist who legally adopted Vanunu in a failed attempt to get him U.S. citizenship, disagreed. "He is not delusional," Eoloff said. "He wants to lead a quiet life and will accept government restrictions on him for a short period." ***************************************************************** 15 BBC: UN briefs US on nuclear controls Last Updated: Thursday, 18 March, 2004 [IAEA chief ElBaradei] IAEA chief ElBaradei reported progress on Iran The US and the UN's nuclear watchdog have agreed to work on new rules to curb nuclear proliferation, the UN body's chief Mohamed ElBaradei says. Mr ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, was speaking after talks in Washington with President George W Bush. He said he had told Mr Bush that the "jury was still out" on whether Iran had the means to build a nuclear bomb. But Mr ElBaradei said Iran was now co-operating fully with the IAEA. They discussed tightening curbs on proliferation after revelations that a top Pakistani scientist, Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, had sold weapons technology on the nuclear black market. The meeting between President Bush, his security adviser Condoleezza Rice and Mr ElBaradei brought agreement that curbs on the purchase and maintenance of nuclear material needed to be strengthened. My suggestion to t president is that we need a good plan to clean up all this nuclear weapons-usable material that is all over the place [ src=] Mohamed ElBaradei "This is a whole different ball game and we need to change many of the rules," Mr ElBaradei said after the meeting. In particular, he said, agreement with the US had been reached on the need to "revisit the whole export control regime... as a result of AQ Khan associates and the lesson we have learnt from that". Dr Khan, hailed by many Pakistanis as the father of the "Islamic bomb", confessed in January to operating a network that hawked nuclear secrets to states such as Iran, Libya and North Korea. 'Talk to Iran' Questions over Iran's nuclear potential dominated the Bush-ElBaradei meeting. Mr ElBaradei said he had urged the US administration to pursue dialogue with Iran to defuse tensions. The Bush administration has accused Iran of enriching uranium for bomb purposes - a charge Iran denies, maintaining it needs the uranium to generate power for civilian needs. Anti-proliferation measures discussed in the meeting included a moratorium on states attempting to enrich uranium. Mr ElBaradei supports the idea of a cut-off point, beyond which nations will be offered low-grade uranium - of the type useful only in power stations - in exchange for renouncing the quest for weapons-grade enriched uranium. A similar programme is already being tried out with Libya, which opened its doors to UN inspectors late last year. "My suggestion to the president is that we need a good plan to clean up all this nuclear weapons-usable material that is all over the place," Mr ElBaradei said. ***************************************************************** 16 Daily Times: IAEA and US agree on new nuclear ballgame Friday, March 19, 2004 * UN nuclear agency assured of access to US intelligence WASHINGTON: UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei said on Wednesday that he and US President George W Bush had agreed the time had come to “change many of the rules” in order to strengthen the fight against nuclear proliferation. He told reporters after meeting Bush at the White House that they had a “good overview of what needs to be done in the area of strengthening the non-proliferation regime.” “This is a different ballgame and we need to change many of the rules,” ElBaradei said. He said they had “agreed on the need to revisit the whole export control regime . . . as a result of AQ Khan associates and the lesson we have learned from that.” ElBaradei’s visit to Washington follows an IAEA board of governors meeting in Vienna that passed a resolution condemning Iran for hiding sensitive nuclear activities. Experts have said Iran is an example of a country which could be developing the technology to make nuclear weapons, even while honouring the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) by claiming its nuclear programme is peaceful. Much of sensitive nuclear technology, such as enriching uranium, can have both civilian and military applications. The IAEA, which is charged with monitoring compliance with the NPT, said in a report issued last month that Iran had failed to report possibly weapons-related atomic activities despite promising full disclosure. ElBaradei said he and Bush had also discussed clean-up measures. He said they “focused particularly on nuclear material, highly enriched uranium and plutonium...to develop a good programme to control these materials and hopefully enliminate it and replace it by low level enrichment that does not pose a serious threat,” he said. The IAEA is now overseeing a reactor in Libya from which highly enriched uranium is taken to Russia, which is to return it as low enriched uranium, which cannot be used in a bomb. ElBaradei said it did not matter if the highly enriched uranium which countries possessed had come from Russia, the United States or other weapons powers. “My suggestion to the president is that we need a good plan to clean up all this nuclear weapons useable material that is all over the place,” ElBaradei said. ElBaradei wants to eliminate the danger that nuclear fuel declared for peaceful uses could also be used to make atomic bombs by having a multilateral body make the fuel, rather than letting individual states do it. The United States has however stressed setting a “moratorium or cut-off date” after which countries that have not mastered the fuel cycle would stop trying to do this. —AFP Home | Foreign IAEA and US agree on new nuclear ballgame North Korea says Iraq shows inspections lead to war Anti-war activists want Bush censured Sharon steps up campaign for withdrawal plan Bush and Kerry fight it out over Iraq and terrorism Fear of Islam overblown, says Mahathir ‘Palestinians have not fulfilled obligations’ FBI mulls intelligence alliance with Europe Asian states to boost information on terrorism A year on from Iraq war, US woos ‘old Europe’ UN invites Greece, Turkey to talks on March 23 Bashir says Madrid bombings a warning to US ‘Saddam should face int’l court’ Haiti swears in new government REGION: Iran denies ElBaradei playing role of mediator with US Sri Lankan President scraps 13 ministries Daily Times - All Rights Reserved Site developed and hosted by WorldCALL Internet Solutions [http://www.wcis.com.pk] ***************************************************************** 17 Hi Pakistan: US rewards Pakistan with elite military status despite nuclear concerns (14:20 PST) --> March 19 2004 ISLAMABAD: The United States will reward Pakistan for its support in the war on terrorism with an elite military status despite concerns about nuclear proliferation, US Secretary of State Colin Powell said Thursday. Powell said US President George W. Bush would soon designate Pakistan a "major non-NATO ally," a move that will significantly enhance military cooperation between the two countries and make it easier for Islamabad to acquire certain armaments from Washington. 'I advised the foreign minister this morning that we will also be making a notification to our Congress that will designate Pakistan as a major non-NATO ally for the purposes of our future military to military relations,' Powell told reporters after meeting his counterpart Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri. Khurshid Kasuri designate the talks really fruitful, 'Pakistanis also against Nuclear non-proliferation because it is in our favour', said Kasuri. Their has been an agreement on the Pakistanis imprisoned in US and strategy is being formed, Kasuri informed. Copyright 1996-2002 . Hi Pakistan. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 San Antonio Express-News Editorial: For nuclear terror, no stand too tough [San Antonio's Home Page From The Express-News and KENS 5] [http://www.mysanantonio.com] Web Posted: 03/18/2004 12:00 AM CST The United States and its European allies were at odds last week over how to deal with Iran's nuclear program. At a quarterly meeting of the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, American delegates circulated a draft resolution condemning Iran for failure to cooperate with the agency's inspectors. In October, the inspectors discovered that Iran was building a previously undisclosed centrifuge capable of producing highly enriched uranium suitable for use in weapons. Iran's Islamic government claims it wants enriched uranium only to produce power. But Iran has the world's fifth-largest proven oil reserves, about 90 billion barrels. France, Germany and Britain, while favoring a tough statement, preferred to emphasize Iran's cooperation during the past year. They believe that too-harsh language would doom a strategy of constructive engagement with Iran. This trans-Atlantic rift arose as a former director of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program told the Associated Press that Iraq was three years away from producing a nuclear bomb before the 1991 Gulf War. It came one month after atomic energy agency inspectors began unraveling a nuclear black market linking Pakistan, Iran, Libya and North Korea. And it came just as the terrorist attacks in Madrid showed the continued vitality and determination of international terrorists to inflict maximum civilian casualties. The world simply cannot allow rogue regimes to possess and proliferate nuclear technology. Even modest amounts of radiological material can be combined with plastic explosives to create small "dirty" bombs. A nuclear weapon in the hands of terrorists would be an unimaginable horror. In the end, the United States compromised on the final language of the resolution. Iran still temporarily suspended nuclear inspections in protest. The secretary-general of Iran's Supreme National Security Council has said those inspections will resume March 27. All civilized nations must have an uncompromisingly clear understanding of the nuclear threat. That understanding must in turn be clearly communicated to nations engaged in nuclear proliferation and nations that support international terrorism. Given Iran's track record in both areas, no statement could have been too tough. + KENS 5 [http://www.mysanantonio.com/aboutus/kens/] ***************************************************************** 19 Las Vegas SUN: Powell Declares End to Pakistan Nukes By GEORGE GEDDA ASSOCIATED PRESS ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) - Secretary of State Colin Powell on Thursday brushed aside criticism of Pakistan's handling of a black market nuclear proliferation network and the U.S. response to it. Powell said that A. Q. Khan, the Pakistani scientist who smuggled nuclear secrets to North Korea, Iran and Libya, "is essentially secluded in his home and he is not going to be running this network any more." He called the dismantling of Khan's network "a major achievement." Powell spoke to reporters while heading for Kuwait after a visit to Pakistan that included a meeting with President Pervez Musharraf and other officials. Earlier, Powell had visited India and Afghanistan. Some analysts see Kahn as history's greatest nuclear proliferator and believe that it was wrong for Musharraf to pardon him and for the United States to accept that action without complaint. Kahn's illicit dealings with North Korea and Iran have caused major security headaches for the United States. Less critical is the assistance he provided to Libya, which recently abandoned its quest for nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. Powell showed impatience when he was asked by a reporter while en route to Kuwait whether both Pakistan and the United States were using "kid gloves" to deal with the Kahn revelations. Suggesting that critics fail to appreciate the achievement in bringing down the network, Powell said "solid intelligence" by U.S. and other agencies helped expose the wrongdoing. He mentioned the undercover work that pinpointed a Malaysian firm as an integral part of the operation. Musharraf has said his decision to pardon rather then punish Kahn was based on the national hero status Kahn enjoys because of his role in helping Pakistan become a nuclear power. Numerous reports in recent weeks have said Kahn had been working in league with Pakistan's I.S.I. intelligence service to carry out nuclear technology transfers - activities reportedly known to American and other intelligence agencies. But Powell said Musharraf and top aides are "all taken aback" by Kahn's crimes. "No responsible government of Pakistan should have tolerated such a thing and I hope they did not. I hope that it was something he was doing on his own." Powell said U.S. officials have not had access to Kahn. The United States considers the case to be an internal Pakistani matter, he said. At a morning news conference with Powell, Pakistani Foreign Minister Khursheed Kasuri said he assured the visiting American that it was in Pakistan's "own interest as a nuclear power that no proliferation take place. We are going to spare no effort to try and make efforts to pull this out root and branch wherever this network is." Earlier, Powell said the United States was elevating U.S. military ties with Pakistan, granting the country benefits enjoyed by only a handful of allies outside the NATO alliance. The new status will make Pakistan eligible for priority delivery of defense material and for the stockpiling of military hardware. Powell said the U.S. gesture demonstrates the strength of U.S. ties to Pakistan but conceded that he did not know whether the country would be able to take advantage of it. Other major non-NATO allies of the United States are Japan, Australia, Israel, Egypt, Kuwait, South Korea, Argentina, New Zealand and the Philippines. In Kuwait, Powell planned discussions with officials on Iraq, the Middle East peace process and reform in the Arab world, a senior Powell aide said. -- ***************************************************************** 20 [CMEP] Environmental Impacts of Proposed Nuke Plant Warrant Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:07:00 -0600 (CST) *** Apologies for cross-posting *** *** P R E S S R E L E A S E *** For Immediate Release: March 18, 2004 Contact: Joseph Malherek, 202-454-5109; Erica Hartman, 202-454-5174 Public Citizen Recommends Broad Environmental Review of Proposed Nuclear Fuel Plant WASHINGTON, D.C. - The government should conduct a broad, thorough analysis of the environmental and public health impacts of a proposed nuclear fuel plant in southeastern New Mexico, Public Citizen said today in formal comments submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the government agency responsible for licensing and regulating nuclear facilities. Today marks the close of the public comment period on the scope of the NRC's forthcoming Environmental Impact Statement, a requirement of federal law. Public Citizen also plans to file a petition to intervene in the NEF licensing proceeding, citing environmental concerns and deficiencies in LES's application. A multinational group of energy companies called Louisiana Energy Services (LES) -- led by the European consortium Urenco -- has submitted a proposal to the NRC to build and operate a uranium enrichment facility in Lea County, New Mexico. The plant, dubbed the "National Enrichment Facility" (NEF), would produce fuel for nuclear power reactors. "As demonstrated by the public health crisis and legacy of environmental contamination near plants in Paducah, Kentucky, and Piketon, Ohio, the long-term impacts of large-scale uranium enrichment operations are profound," said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. "The NRC should produce a detailed, critical evaluation of the potential impacts of this plant, taking into account public concerns as well as the company's history." In its comments, Public Citizen urged the NRC to focus particular attention on several important areas where the LES application falls short. For example, the company has no concrete plan for the disposal of depleted uranium hexafluoride, a radioactive and toxic byproduct of the enrichment process. Moreover, Public Citizen notes that LES trivializes the proposed plant's massive water consumption, not taking into account the serious water shortage in Lea County, which depends on significantly-depleted aquifers for its water. This is LES's third attempt to secure a site and license for its nuclear plant. The company withdrew its application to build a similar plant in Louisiana after nearly a decade of intense citizen opposition. LES made another attempt to locate the plant in Tennessee, but was again expelled by local opponents before it had a chance to submit an application to the NRC. Citizens were concerned about the company's misleading statements and lack of a clear plan for the disposal of its waste. "The citizens of New Mexico deserve an extensive evaluation of the potential impacts of this plant," said Joseph Malherek, policy analyst for Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. "The history of LES and uranium enrichment is cause for suspicion of this foreign-controlled company, warranting a comprehensive investigation into the effects of the proposed facility." To read Public Citizen's comments to the NRC, please go to www.citizen.org/leseiscomments ### ********** If you would like to be removed from the CMEP ListServ, send an email to listserv@listserver.citizen.org with the words "unsubscribe CMEP" in the message. Questions about the CMEP ListServ can be directed to CMEP-request@LISTSERVER.CITIZEN.ORG. To learn more about this and other Public Citizen Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program campaigns, visit our website at http://www.citizen.org/cmep/ -Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program ***************************************************************** 21 [PUBCIT_PRESS] Davis-Besse Nuclear Plant Shutdown - One Day Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:14:55 -0600 (CST) Public Citizen Press Releases Providing the latest information about Public Citizen activities ------------------------------------------- Davis-Besse Nuclear Plant Shutdown - One Day After Restart - Shows Flaws in Regulatory System Statement of Wenonah Hauter, Director, Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program Barely 24 hours after the FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company restarted the Davis-Besse nuclear plant, it is being shut down again due to the failure of two types of valves, one of which could allow radioactive steam to be released into the air. Two of these valves at Davis-Besse were found to be inoperable as the reactor was being restarted. While it is appropriate that the plant is being shut down after this discovery, it is troubling that these problems were not identified previously by either FirstEnergy engineers or U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) plant inspectors, especially since the valves were likely malfunctioning before the plant's February 2002 shutdown (otherwise, they wouldn't have malfunctioned so quickly) and apparently were not adequately tested during pre-startup exercises of the plant late last year and early this year. Worse, a list of problems that the NRC had with Davis-Besse - a list that had not been fully addressed at the time that the NRC approved the restart of the plant - did not even include the malfunction of the valves that caused this recent shutdown. FirstEnergy, in downplaying this event, claims it expected to "find some issues along the way." It is important to note the original cause for shutdown two years ago, the massive corrosion and deterioration of the reactor's vessel head, was itself a problem found "along the way" as the plant was being refueled and inspected for other problems. According to NRC officials, Davis-Besse has the disturbing distinction of being the site for the second and third worst American nuclear incidents after the Three Mile Island partial meltdown in 1979. (The corrosion was the second; coolant problems in 1985 led to the third.) It appears that Davis-Besse is, at best, a mediocre plant that still poses dangers to the surrounding region. This continuing saga highlights what happens when regulators act as promoters of the industry they are supposed to oversee. It is apparent that the NRC is captured by the nuclear industry - Davis-Besse is a glaring example of this inherent conflict. What other dangers await discovery at the nation's 102 other nuclear reactors - reactors that have not been the focus of increased industry and regulatory scrutiny for the past two years, as Davis-Besse has? It is astounding that even though Davis-Besse was under a magnifier, officials still missed problems. Again, we call for the NRC to keep Davis-Besse shut down and to penalize FirstEnergy appropriately by revoking its license to operate it. ### Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C. For more information, please visit www.citizen.org. ------------------------------------------- To be removed from this list send an email to pcpress@citizen.org with "unsubscribe pubcit_press" in the message. Please visit our website at www.citizen.org ***************************************************************** 22 Reuters: Idled Bruce Power nukes could be on stream by 2007 Thu Mar 18, 2004 06:12 PM ET By Rajiv Sekhri TORONTO, March 18 (Reuters) - Bruce Power's chief executive said on Thursday that two mothballed nuclear reactors could start generating electricity by 2007, just in time to help Ontario cope with an supply crisis. "It would not be unreasonable to expect Bruce to contribute within that time period," Duncan Hawthorne, Bruce Power's chief executive, told Reuters, Ontario, whose electricity sector is languishing, plans to shut all its coal-fired plants by 2007 to combat pollution. The move will cut about a quarter of the province's generating capacity Hawthorne's comments came on the heels of a key report that warned that Ontario needs to beef up nuclear generation if it is to meet growing demand. The report, commissioned by the ruling Liberal Party, which came to power in October, said the province should seek private money for nuclear ventures. Jerry Grandey, chief executive of uranium giant Cameco Corp. (CCO.TO: Quote [http://www.investor.reuters.com/FullQuote.aspx?ticker=CCO.TO&tar get=%2fstocks%2fquickinfo%2ffullquote] , Profile [http://www.investor.reuters.com/CompanyOverview.aspx?ticker=CCO. TO] , Research [http://www.investor.reuters.com/StockReports.aspx?ticker=CCO.TO] ) , one of the owners of Bruce Power, told Reuters that Cameco currently has no plans for investing in other nuclear properties in Ontario, despite the strong vote of confidence for nuclear power in the province's future. Earlier this year, Bruce Power, whose owners also include pipeline company TransCanada Corp. (TRP.TO: Quote [http://www.investor.reuters.com/FullQuote.aspx?ticker=TRP.TO&tar get=%2fstocks%2fquickinfo%2ffullquote] , Profile [http://www.investor.reuters.com/CompanyOverview.aspx?ticker=TRP. TO] , Research [http://www.investor.reuters.com/StockReports.aspx?ticker=TRP.TO] ) and BPC Generation trust, said it was conducting a feasibility study on restarting Bruce A units 1 and 2. Bruce Power has eight nuclear reactors, six of which are in service. Grandey said Bruce Power commissioned the study "in anticipation of the government coming to the realization that nuclear must play a strong role in the future." The report, chaired by former Deputy Prime Minister John Manley, urged the province to restart one of three idled units at Pickering A by 2005 to lessen a looming supply crunch. The Pickering station is owned by Ontario Power Generation, the provincially owned utility that generates about 70 percent of the province's electricity. The Pickering unit's restart should cost up to C$600 million ($450 million), the report said. "If (the province) proceeds with our advice, (the Pickering unit) could be in operation in 2005," Manley said. " (The unit) at Pickering is much further advanced than the Bruce units." ***************************************************************** 23 NRC: NRC to Discuss Annual Performance Assessment of James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region I - 2004-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-04-011 March 17, 2004 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov] representatives of Entergy Nuclear Northeast on Thursday, March 25, to discuss the results of the agencys annual assessment of safety performance at the James A. FitzPatrick nuclear power plant. Entergy operates the plant, which is located in Scriba, N.Y. The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. at the plants Emergency Operations Facility/Joint News Center, 2262 N.Y. State Route 176 in Fulton, N.Y. Before the session is adjourned, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public on the plants safety performance, as well as the role of the NRC in ensuring safe operation of the facility. The performance period to be discussed is January 1 to December 31, 2003. In addition, NRC staff will provide a brief overview of how the agencys Reactor Oversight Process works. A letter sent from the NRC Region I Office to plant officials addresses the performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/fitz_2003q4.pdf [PDF Icon] . Overall, the FitzPatrick plant operated safely and met all cornerstone objectives during the period. (Cornerstones are measures of plant performance.) Therefore, at this time the NRC plans to conduct only baseline inspections at the site through September 30, 2005. With regard to security issues, the letter points out that the NRC has issued several orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and improve guard force readiness since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The agency has also conducted inspections to review the implementation of these requirements and has monitored the action of plant operators in response to changing threat conditions. For calendar year 2004, we plan to continue inspections of order implementation combined with newly developed portions of the security baseline inspection program, the letter states. Current performance information for the FitzPatrick plant is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/FITZ/fitz_chart.html. Last revised Wednesday, March 17, 2004 ***************************************************************** 24 NRC: NRC to Meet with SCE Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at Summer Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region II - 2004-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II No. II-04-011 March 17, 2004 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov] South Carolina Electric & Gas Company officials on Wednesday, March 24, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the Summer nuclear power plant near Jenkinsville, South Carolina. The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m. in the Summer Nuclear Training Center auditorium near the plant site. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before the conclusion of the meeting to answer any questions. The NRC found that the Summer plant was operated safely during the previous year and met all the safety objectives in the NRCs oversight program. Based on that performance, the NRC staff plans to conduct only the routine inspections at the Summer plant through September 2005. However, the NRC does plan to conduct one additional inspection of the plants spent fuel material control and accounting. The NRC will also continue to conduct inspections of the plants implementation of NRC security Orders, along with any newly developed portions of the security program. The letter describing Summer plant safety performance is available from Region II Public Affairs and on the NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/sum_2003q4.pdf [PDF Icon] . Current NRC performance indicators for the Summer plant are available at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SUM/sum_chart.html. Last revised Thursday, March 18, 2004 ***************************************************************** 25 NRC: NRC to Meet with Entergy Operations, Inc. to Discuss Performance of Arkansas Nuclear One News Release - Region IV - 2004-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV No. IV-04-011 March 18, 2004 CONTACT: Victor Dricks Phone: 817-860-8128 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov [opa4@nrc.gov] representatives of Entergy Operations, Inc. on Tuesday, March 30, to discuss the results of the agencys annual assessment of safety performance at Arkansas Nuclear One. The facility, which includes two operating reactors, is located near Russellville, AR. The meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. at the Holiday Inn, 2407 North Arkansas Avenue, Russellville. The public is invited to observe the meeting and NRC officials will be available before the conclusion of the meeting to answer questions from the public on the safety performance of the plant, as well as the NRC in ensuring safe plant operation. The performance period to be discussed is January 1 to December 31, 2003. In addition, NRC staff will provide an overview of how the agencys Reactor Oversight Process works. A letter from the NRC to Entergy addresses the performance of the plant during this period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/ano_2003q4.pdf [PDF Icon] . Overall, Arkansas Nuclear One operated safely and fully met all cornerstone objectives (cornerstones are measures of plant performance). However, the NRC staff believes improvements can be made by Entergy to address deficiencies in their problem identification and resolution programs. The NRC staff plans to monitor the licensees efforts in this area through its baseline inspection program. Current performance indicators for Unit 1 are available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/ANO1/ano1_chart.html. Information for Unit 2 is available at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/ANO2/ano2_chart.html. Last revised Thursday, March 18, 2004 ***************************************************************** 26 NRC: NRC to Meet with Progress Energy Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at Harris Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region II - 2004-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region II No. II-04-012 March 17, 2004 CONTACT: Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417 E-mail: [opa2@nrc.gov] Progress Energy officials on Wednesday, March 24, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the Harris nuclear power plant southwest of Raleigh, North Carolina. The meeting will be held at 2:00 p.m. in the Holiday Inn Express, 1006 Marco Drive in Apex, North Carolina. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before the conclusion of the meeting to answer any questions. The NRC found that the Harris plant was operated safely during the previous year and met all the safety objectives in the NRCs oversight program. The NRC also found that an inspection of a performance issue relating to the number of unplanned plant shutdowns concluded that corrective actions were adequate. Several other minor issues evaluated during the period were determined to be of very low safety significance. In addition to the routine NRC inspections at the Harris plant, the agency will conduct inspections of rector vessel lower head penetrations, containment sump blockage and a pilot inspection of plant design issues. The NRC will also continue to conduct inspections of the plants implementation of NRC security Orders, along with any newly developed portions of the security program. The letter describing Harris plant safety performance is available from Region II Public Affairs and on the NRC web site at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/har_2003q4.pdf [PDF Icon] . Current performance indicators for the Harris plant are available at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/HAR1/har1_chart.html. Last revised Thursday, March 18, 2004 ***************************************************************** 27 NRC: NRC to Discuss Annual Performance Assessment of Millstone Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region I - 2004-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-04-012 March 18, 2004 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov] representatives of Dominion Resources on Thursday, March 25, to discuss the results of the agencys annual assessment of safety performance at the Millstone nuclear power plant. Dominion Resources operates the Millstone Unit 2 and Unit 3 reactors at the site, which is located in Waterford, Conn. The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 4 p.m. at Waterford Town Hall, 15 Rope Ferry Road in Waterford. Immediately after discussing the annual assessment results with Dominion Resources management, NRC staff will meet with Connecticuts Nuclear Energy Advisory Council and address any questions posed by its members regarding the review. Before the entire session is adjourned, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public on the plants safety performance, as well as the role of the NRC in ensuring safe operation of the facility. The performance period to be discussed is January 1 to December 31, 2003. In addition, NRC staff will provide a brief overview of how the agencys Reactor Oversight Process works. A letter sent from the NRC Region I Office to plant officials addresses the performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/mill_2003q4.pdf [PDF Icon] . Overall, the Millstone plant operated safely and met all cornerstone objectives during the period. (Cornerstones are measures of plant performance.) Therefore, at this time the NRC plans to conduct only baseline inspections at the site through September 30, 2005. In August 2003, the NRC informed Dominion Resources about a substantive cross-cutting issue at Millstone Unit 2 in the area of problem identification and resolution. The issue involved some lapses in engineering effectiveness that led to weaknesses in the identification of problems, determinations of root causes and/or corrective actions. However, several actions were taken to improve the quality of engineering products and NRC reviews have indicated a decrease in the number of weaknesses in this area. As a result, the NRC considers the issue resolved, though the agency will continue to monitor progress in that area through the baseline inspection program. With regard to security issues, the NRC has issued several orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and improve guard force readiness since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The agency has also conducted inspections to review the implementation of these requirements and has monitored the action of plant operators in response to changing threat conditions. For calendar year 2004, we plan to continue inspections of order implementation combined with newly developed portions of the security baseline inspection program, the letter states. Current performance information for Millstone Unit 2 is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/MILL2/mill2_chart.html. Current performance information for Millstone Unit 3 is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/MILL3/mill3_chart.html. Last revised Thursday, March 18, 2004 ***************************************************************** 28 NRC: NRC to Discuss Annual Performance Assessment of Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Plant News Release - Region I - 2004-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-04-013 March 18, 2004 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov] representatives of FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company on Thursday, March 25, to discuss the results of the agencys annual assessment of safety performance at the Beaver Valley nuclear power plant. The twin-reactor facility is located in Shippingport, Pa., and operated by FirstEnergy. The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. at the Emergency Response Facility at the plant, on Route 168. Before the session is adjourned, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public on the plants safety performance, as well as the role of the NRC in ensuring safe operation of the facility. The performance period to be discussed is January 1 to December 31, 2003. In addition, NRC staff will provide an overview of how the agencys Reactor Oversight Process works. A letter sent from the NRC Region I Office to plant officials addresses the performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/bv_2003q4.pdf [PDF Icon] . Overall, the Beaver Valley plant operated safely and met all cornerstone objectives during the period. (Cornerstones are measures of plant performance.) Therefore, at this time the NRC plans to conduct only baseline inspections at the site through September 30, 2005. The plant did have a white inspection finding, or a finding of low to moderate safety significance, in the second quarter of 2003. It involved a failure to have adequate and timely emergency response staffing in four key functional areas at all times. However, a supplemental inspection completed by the NRC in November 2003 determined that corrective actions taken by FirstEnergy to resolve the issue and prevent a recurrence were satisfactory. With regard to security issues, the NRC has issued several orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and improve guard force readiness since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The agency has also conducted inspections to review the implementation of these requirements and has monitored the action of plant operators in response to changing threat conditions. For calendar year 2004, we plan to continue inspections of order implementation combined with newly developed portions of the security baseline inspection program, the letter states. Current performance information for Beaver Valley Unit 1 is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BV1/bv1_chart.html. Current performance information for Beaver Valley Unit 2 is available on the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BV2/bv2_chart.html. Last revised Thursday, March 18, 2004 ***************************************************************** 29 Reuters: 2-Report urges power-short Ontario to go nuclear Thu Mar 18, 2004 05:50 PM ET By Rajiv Sekhri TORONTO, March 18 (Reuters) - Ontario's sickly electricity sector needs a strong jolt of nuclear power with money from the private sector, a report said on Thursday, urging that one nuclear reactor should restart next year at a cost of up to C$600 million ($450 million) to ease a supply crunch. The report, on future Ontario power needs, said Ontario Power Generation, the debt-ridden, provincially owned power producer, should be broken up into a nuclear unit and one that handles electricity from hydro and fossil-fuel sources. The study warned that Ontario, Canada's most populous province, could face a severe power shortage by 2007 if new capacity does not come on board. The report was commissioned by the provincial government and drawn up by John Manley, Canada's former deputy prime minister. It said Ontario Power should sell non-core assets like solar and wind power to strengthen its focus. The emphasis on nuclear power comes at a time of serious concerns about Ontario's existing reactors, some of which are mothballed or running well below capacity, or have seen massive cost overruns for refurbishment. But Manley insisted that nuclear, which generates about half of Ontario's power, would prevent the need for costly electricity imports during peak periods. "There is nothing inherent in Canadian companies that says they can't run nuclear (reactors), when the Finns, the French, the Americans and the Koreans can," Manley said. "Let's get our act together because we do not have a lot of other choices." Noting that Canadian-designed nuclear plants are being build on budget and on schedule in China, he added: "If we can do it in China, surely to goodness we can do it in Ontario." Ontario's Liberal government, elected in October, wants to shut its polluting coal-fired plants by 2007 -- and Manley's report backed that position. But analysts have criticized the move and questioned how Ontario can quickly replace electricity generated from coal, which makes up about a quarter of current supply. ***************************************************************** 30 Bellona: Nuclear plant in earthquake zone The site of the planned Russian nuclear power plant in settlement Rikasikha, Arkhangelsk region, is unstable. 2004-03-18 21:41 Director of the Institute of Environmental Problems of the North at the Urals Department of the Russian Science Academy Felix Yudakhin informed the press about that in January. The specialists of the Institute explored the ground in the area of the planned nuclear plant’s construction and detected seismic variability. Yudakhin said, “although the research is not completed, we can absolutely confirm the fact that this territory is seismic”. In response to this statement the deputy governor of Arkhangelsk region on economic development Vladimir Kolomentsev, who is responsible for the nuclear plant’s project, told the journalists that “the scientist did not make any discovery” and all this information is available from before, adding that the planned nuclear plant is designed to resist grade 9 earthquake on Richter scale. He also said that Rikasikha chosen as a staring point for the nuclear plant, but the final location would be determined this year after the state expert review. The State company Unified Energy System of Russia emphasised many times that Northwest of Russia has excessive energy supplies, but Vladimir Kolomentsev was sceptical about the idea to build power lines from the Kola nuclear power plant or Pechora hydroelectric power plant. Agreement to build nuclear heat and power plant near Rikasikha was signed in the end of November 2001. The project’s cost is about $700m and should be financed by Rosenergoatom concern’s investment program, but no money has been allocated yet. The plant’s capacity with the VK-300 type power unit is 600MW and it should be put in operation in 2010. Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] , President: Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no] Information: info@bellona.no [info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no [webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 31 Philadelphia Inquirer: Oyster Creek plant gets more oversight 03/18/2004 | Associated Press LACEY, N.J. - Federal regulators said they would increase their oversight of the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant, resolving a May incident in which workers failed to notice a power line ruined by water. The increased scrutiny by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will continue for at least a year and could last longer if problems persist, officials said. Neil Sheehan, an NRC spokesman, told the Asbury Park Press of Neptune that the agency had not decided how it would boost oversight of the Lacey plant, but that occasional visits by specialists are likely. This was the third time in eight years that a damaged power line had gone unnoticed by plant workers, officials said. Sheehan said the extra oversight was needed because lessons learned from the two prior cable failures should have prevented the latest instance. Gina Scala, a spokeswoman for AmerGen Energy Co., which owns the Ocean County plant, said workers would have noticed the faulty line if a human error had not caused it to be mislabeled in 1996. She said AmerGen would forgo its right to appeal the NRC's finding, adding that the agency would not penalize the plant for the problem. Scala said that if the line had not been mislabeled, plant workers would have listed it for replacement in 2001, or about two years before it triggered a chain of events that forced a reactor shutdown on May 20, 2003. The faulty line caused the loss of a power-distribution box that allocates electricity to safety-related equipment, and NRC regulations mandated that plant operators shut down the reactor as a precaution. Inspectors discovered the most recent line failure while documenting reasons for the shutdown. A preliminary report issued the same day the shutdown occurred had mischaracterized the event as an electrical malfunction. Although the failed line serves an important function in transmitting emergency power to vital equipment, plant officials said the problem never posed any danger, because other provisions could have kicked in. ***************************************************************** 32 toledoblade: Reactor is shut down to fix faulty water valve Thursday, March 18, 2004 Davis-Besse officials say work is routine By TOM HENRY [thenry@theblade.com] BLADE STAFF WRITER FirstEnergy Corp. shut down Davis-Besse's reactor yesterday morning to fix a broken water valve that posed no danger, but would have kept the reactor from ascending to full power. "You expect to run across a few things after a shutdown that was this extensive, and the licensee is responding appropriately," said Christine Lipa, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Midwest regional reactor oversight chief. "Nothing leaps out at us as a red flag or an issue," Jan Strasma, a NRC spokesman, said. A broken feedwater block isolation valve was the most noteworthy of three equipment issues reported to the NRC at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday, when the reactor was engaged in a nuclear mode at 22 percent power with the plant generating electricity. Also reported was a steam leak and a pair of inoperable turbine bypass valves. The plant had been idle for more than two years because of equipment, design, management, and performance issues. Richard Wilkins, a FirstEnergy spokesman, said the utility had announced plans to shut down the reactor before ascending to full power to perform a routine turbine generator test. That shutdown would have occurred even if no problems had been identified. Utilities typically perform multiple startups, shutdowns, and tests as part of a restart process after prolonged outages. Davis-Besse's reactor is going back into a nonnuclear mode until the broken water valve is replaced and other work is done. It is to be cooled down to 200 to 280 degrees, less than half and as little as a third of its normal 600-plus degree operating temperature. "We anticipate being back online sometime next week," Mr. Wilkins said. Once that happens, the utility will take days ascending the reactor's power again. The reactor will be put in a holding pattern for about eight hours when it reaches 50 percent power so more tests can be done. Achieving full power likely will take one to two weeks once the reactor is back online, he said. Contact Tom Henry at: thenry@theblade.com or 419-724-6079 © 2004 The Blade.The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660 , (419) 724-6000 ***************************************************************** 33 Toronto Star: Panel expected to shake up OPG TheStar.com - Thu. Mar. 18, 2004. | Updated at 07:04 PM Recommendation to create separate nuclear division likely Go-ahead on completion of Pickering A station foreseen RICHARD BRENNAN AND JOHN SPEARS STAFF REPORTERS Ontario Power Generation's troubled nuclear division should be hived off into a separate operating unit from the rest of the company's electricity-generating assets, a special panel is likely to recommend today. Speculation is that most of OPG's head office might also move to Niagara Falls from its landmark building on University Ave. in Toronto. A new building to house senior managers of the nuclear division is currently under construction in Pickering. The panel, headed by former federal finance minister John Manley, is likely to lump fossil fuel-burning generators with the hydro division. The province's commitment to closing Ontario's coal-burning plants by 2007 means the fossil operations will shrink, although some new natural gas plants are possible. A recommendation to complete the problem-plagued Pickering A generating station is also widely expected by specialists following developments. The station is three years behind schedule with only one of four reactors up and running. OPG's nuclear business plan, already presented to its board of directors, calls for nuclear spending in 2004 to exceed the level of spending in 2003 by $236 million — an indication that heavy spending at Pickering A is likely to continue despite massive cost over-runs to date. Jake Epp, OPG's interim chairman, is a member of the review panel along with Peter Godsoe, former chairman of the Bank of Nova Scotia. The panel submitted its report Monday to Energy Minister Dwight Duncan, who will release it today. The original approved cost for bringing Pickering A out of mothballs was $1.3 billion. The latest estimate stands at $4 billion. One option for the government is to abandon work on two or three of the remaining reactors. While the panel is likely to recommend that nuclear plants should not be sold, it might suggest that the province explore lease arrangements, management contracts or partnerships with outside operators. An example is the 18-year lease of the Bruce nuclear station to a private partnership. The Ontario Liberal government, after taking power last fall, asked Manley to report on the status of OPG. The company also commissioned a review of its performance by the accounting firm KPMG. The firm reported this week that the company is in dire straits — largely because of failures with its nuclear program — and warned that the company might no longer be viable under its current business plan. While OPG's operations could be split, the province could still take a central role in planning facilities, and in contracting for the purchase of power from either publicly or privately owned power plants. One possibility is a central Ontario power authority that would sign long-term contracts. Private generators have said they need the assurance of long-term contracts if they are to raise the large amounts of money needed to build generating facilities. The contracts could either be for specified amounts of power at set prices, or differently designed contracts for a certain amount of capacity to be built and on call when needed. OPG generates 70 per cent of the province's power. Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All ***************************************************************** 34 Toronto Star: Voices: Nuclear power TheStar.com - Thu. Mar. 18, 2004. | Updated at 09:27 PM DICK LOEK/TORONTO STAR The Pickering nuclear station, shown here from the air. THESTAR.COM STAFF A report into Ontario's electricity supply is calling for an expanded nuclear power base. We asked you what you think of the idea of building more nuclear power stations. Here's what you had to say. Green power is great, but it is not even close to being able to supply the electricity we need in Ontario. Every river that is capable of producing electricity in Ontario does so. Wind power sounds great, but is expensive and it needs large areas of constant wind, which Ontario doesn't have. Solar panels on everybody's house is to expensive and who is going to maintain such an elaborate system? Coal is very dirty. Natural gas is much to expensive and would drive the price through the roof if we built a significant generating capacity. This leaves nuclear as the only alternative for now. We need more power, we need more nuclear plants. John Jennings, Whitby, March 18 I've got an idea: let's pour billions of dollars into technology that has proven itself to be unreliable, expensive, produce waste that has a half-life and is the principle reason we are in this mess. Gee, I'm glad John Manley has cleared this up the disaster that is Ontario's electricity system. I was worried there for a minute. Carl Mavromichalis, Toronto, March 18 What exactly about the performance of the Ontario nuclear industry has inspired this renewal of faith in nuclear power? Cost overruns, mismanagement, lack of a disposal plan for waste and facilities not fulfilling their operating lifetimes have been rampant. $40 Billion? If we decide to go with this nuclear prescription this will balloon to $120 billion even before construction and refurbishment of plants has begun. Paul Tenk, Toronto, March 18 More nuclear plants is fine if they are done right, but why aren't we investing just as much in energy conservation measures at the same time? Jeremy Craigs, Toronto, March 18 Let's stop polluting our wonderful country with more nuclear power plants and instead invest our future in renewable or alternative energy resources, such as wind, solar and hydro. The long-term costs of nuclear power is not something I want my children to pay. Annika Petersson, Kingston, March 18 The Candu Nuclear Technology is a proven safe form of generating electricity. I believe that replacement of the current reactors with new ones would be no problem when we look at the past track record. However, I do believe that any new ones should be built farther from major Metropolitan centres as a precaution. Randy Siemens, Toronto, March 18 Nuclear and private sector saviors in semi-public disguise. Been there. It doesn't work! Don't ask the political hacks, find some innovative thinkers. Les Michalak, Burlington, March 18 Nuclear power is the safest, cheapest, cleanest, form of mass consumption power available. While it might be nice to rely on solar, wind, or tidal power, such alternatives are not economically, or logistically feasible. Organized groups of largely uneducated persons have lobbied against the 'dangers' of nuclear power for years. They are clearly misinformed. The CANDU reactor stands out as a world leader both in safety and output, and yet we Canadians do not embrace it. Nuclear plants have been operating in Canada for over thirty years without major incident. They are extremely safe, with many safety redundancies built in, and they are highly economical when compared to the alternatives. James Stretch, Toronto, March 18 Gas is getting to expensive and is running low. Oil and coal are just plain filthy. Windmills are nice, but the windy areas of the province, no one wants to disturb the natural beauty (Blue Mountain for one) so this is our only choice. Despite what others lead you to believe, it is safe. Darren Romani, Pickering, March 18 Lets get our hydroelectric plants upgraded and expanded. Bob Rae cancelled several hydro projects which were never reinstated. Falling water is cheap, and environmentally friendly. We should go to nuclear only as a last resort. Rob Jackson, Niagara falls, March 18 It is absolutely clear that only an idiot would shut down generating stations without first having alternative sources ready to come on line. Nuclear is the best option given today's technology. CANDU is a viable Canadian source of this technology. Get it on! Lou Lobb, Guelph, March 18 Natural gas plants are the only answer. My wife and I were on our honeymoon in Europe when the nuclear cloud from the Chernobyl reactor meltdown was spreading across the continent (our wedding was the actual day of the disaster -- April 26, 1986). There is no such thing as "containment" when something like this happens and there is no hiding from its consequences. I think my wife and I received a lifetime dose of radiation in the six weeks we were in Europe. "NO" to nuclear for the sake of all of us. Ronald Ziembicki, Toronto, March 18 Go for it. But don't forget wind power. How about giving incentives for homeowners to conserve and to use solar power? The systems are too expensive right now but could be much cheaper if they were mass produced and placed on all new homes. Jason Addims, Scarborough, March 18 Coming from a pro-nuclear community that has been doing it right for the past couple years, it's disturbing to see the media outlets focus on the negative side of nuclear, when in fact, the Bruce Nuclear facility has been a shining example of how the nuclear industry can and does work for Ontario. Bruce Power and Kincardine are leading the way for the future of energy in Ontario with restart projects and hundreds of wind energy projects, all by the private sector. Steve Murray, Kincardine, March 18 Well if we stopped selling off 40 per cent of our electricity to the U.S. we'd have enough power to maintain our own demands. Or better yet, double the cost of hydro that we export to the U.S. Let them pay the $40B hydro tab. Jamie Lopes, Kitchener, March 18 Nuclear is the way to go. Technology is well established. Pollution is minimal compared with fossil plants. Nuclear power plants are super regulated for safety. Ontario has experience in operating and maintaining nuclear power plants. The fuel and materials for nuclear power plants originate in Ontario or Canada. Robert Icely, Oakville, March 18 Haven't we seen this movie before? Isn't this exactly how we got where we are today? Now there will be 2 OPGs. On a positive note however, assuming that this government will implement these recommendations, OPG (Ontario Power Generation) will be required to submit a vision statement on the "environmental sustainability" of its operations. One would assume that the nuclear waste is at the core [no pun intended] of this initiative. Doug Kirby, Orillia, March 18 Why isn't the government even mentioning green alternatives? Wouldn't we be complying with the Kyoto Protocol if we built some wind farms? Peter Exel, Whitby, March 18 Given the horrendous costs and time spent on maintaining our current nuclear energy plants, I have real reservations unless new technology and management methods are employed. Perhaps we should buy necessary energy from the Quebec power grid, which utilizes hydro-electric sources. Michael Moody, Toronto, March 18 Nuclear power? In these dangerous times shouldn't we think about simplifying? How about alternative energy? We have signed on here to get our power from an electric company that harnesses wind power. Wind-mill farms are beginning to line the coast here as more and more people realize that the environment isn't a commodity. Diane Glasz-Ward, Amsterdam, March 18 Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. ***************************************************************** 35 People's Daily: Nuclear energy to relieve China's power demands Last updated at: (Beijing Time) Thursday, March 18, 2004 China's three major nuclear power bases including Qinshan plant, Daya Bay plant and Tianwan plant will boast a combined capacity of 8.7 million kilowatts in two years, outlining the country's nuclear landscape. Kang Rixin, general manager of the China Nuclear Industry Croup Corporation, said at a recent exhibition that nuclear power is expected to become a major means of relieving China's power demands in the first two decades of the 21st century. Electricity generated by nuclear power accounted for only 1.4 percent of China's total electricity supply by May 2003,, compared to 16 percent in developed countries, according to figures from the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). Xu Jianzhong, a researcher with the Institute of Engineering Thermophysics under the CAS said that China is expected to obtain 4 percent of its electricity, or 32 million kilowatts generated by nuclear plants by 2020. Eight generating units are currently operating in the three bases, with another three due to begin operation in the next two years. Qinshan Nuclear Power Plant, the first nuclear power plant on the Chinese mainland, is housed in China's economically developed eastern Zhejiang province, on the northern bank of Hangzhou Bay. Daya Bay Nuclear Power Plant is located in south China's Guangdong Province, and Tianwan Nuclear Power Plant is in Lianyungang City of Jiangsu Province, also in the booming east. Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved ***************************************************************** 36 CTV.ca - Manley report backs nuclear power in Ontario - CTV News, Updated Thu. Mar. 18 2004 3:08 PM ET CTV.ca News Staff A report on the future of the power supply in Ontario recommends that the province finish rebuilding one of three dormant nuclear reactors at Pickering and begin planning now to build new nuclear facilities. The report from the OPG Review Committee, headed by former deputy prime minister John Manley, says Ontario Power Generation needs to act now to address increasing energy supply problems. The report, titled "Transforming Ontario's Power Generation Company," says rebuilding one of the Pickering A nuclear reactors would be the fastest and cheapest way to get Ontario much-needed energy. "The refurbishment of the Pickering Unit 1 nuclear facility should proceed, to be brought on-stream by 2005 -- at an estimated go forward cost of up to $600 million," the report says. Manley acknowledged that Ontario has had a spotty history when it comes to running nuclear power plants without cost overruns and expensive shutdowns, but it's time OPG got its act together. "We don't have a lot of choices,'' Manley told a news conference. "If they can do it in China, surely to goodness we can do it in Ontario.'' The report also recommends that OPG remain in public hands. But it calls on the Ontario government to enter into leases or other arrangements with the private sector for financing. That way, it says, private companies would bear the risk of cost overruns in building new nuclear plants -- not taxpayers or hydro rate payers. Manley says the utility has suffered greatly in recent years from political interference and bungling. "It has also been whipsawed by one policy change after another and subjected to a history of political interference. We need to give it the framework and the tools to get to work on its core business -- providing reliable, competitively priced electricity generation for Ontario," Manley said in a statement. The report recommends OPG be split into two divisions, with one handling its nuclear assets and the other managing hydro-electric, natural gas and other methods of generation. As well, the province should get out of the green power business to let others concentrate on it, the report recommends. At the same time though, it should also encourage more generation from natural gas and renewable sources. The Sierra Club issued a news release ahead of Manley's report saying that reviving the nuclear generators at Pickering would be a mistake. "Support for the Pickering nuclear fiasco repeats the colossal mistakes of the past," said Sierra Club policy adviser Dave Martin. "The Pickering A reactors were built in the 1960s, rebuilt in the 1980s, and we are now paying for them a third time." Energy Minister Dwight Duncan will respond to the committee's report when his ministry unveils its own report in April on its long-term energy plans. "Our plan, when I unveil it, will be designed to take what we've found here and move forward in a way that manages price," Duncan said Wednesday. Earlier this week, OPG reported a $491-million loss, and released an independent audit that revealed massive, systemic financial problems at the utility. The independent audit also showed the utility fell $1 billion short of projections since 1997, and stands in jeopardy unless rising costs can be passed on to customers. Electricity prices in Ontario will begin rise on April 1, when a price freeze imposed by the previous Conservative government comes to an end. The utility will begin charging 4.7 cents per kilowatt hour for the first 750 kilowatt hours consumed by households every month. Beyond that threshold, the price will rise to 5.5 cents. © 2004 Bell Globemedia Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 37 ITAR-TASS: First unit of Bashkir nuclear power station begins operation [ITAR-TASS News Agency of Russia] 18.03.2004, 17.51 NETESHIN, the Khmelnitskaya region, March 18 (Itar-Tass) - The first unit of the Bashkir nuclear power station will begin operation in the town of Agidel in 2012. Four more power units are going to be built at this power station. They will start operation in 2020, General Director of the Rosenergoatom concern Oleg Sarayev said after a visit to the Khmelnitskaya nuclear power plant on Thursday. He believes that the construction may drag on, if the company decides to replace the old VVER-1000 reactors with the VVER-500 nuclear power units. New types of reactors are to be designed for several nuclear power stations in Russia, including in Bashkiria, by 2007. Sarayev said that Russia was not going to change its strategy for developing the nuclear power industry up to the year 2020. Russian nuclear power stations which generated 148.6 billion kilowatt hours of energy in 2003 plan to increase their annual energy production to 270-300 billion kilowatt hours of energy by 2020. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 38 Public Citizen: Davis-Besse Nuclear Plant Shutdown One Day After Restart – Shows Flaws in Regulatory System March 17, 2004 Statement of Wenonah Hauter, Director, Public Citizens Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program Barely 24 hours after the FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company restarted the Davis-Besse nuclear plant, it is being shut down again due to the failure of two types of valves, one of which could allow radioactive steam to be released into the air. Two of these valves at Davis-Besse were found to be inoperable as the reactor was being restarted. While it is appropriate that the plant is being shut down after this discovery, it is troubling that these problems were not identified previously by either FirstEnergy engineers or U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) plant inspectors, especially since the valves were likely malfunctioning before the plants February 2002 shutdown (otherwise, they wouldnt have malfunctioned so quickly) and apparently were not adequately tested during pre-startup exercises of the plant late last year and early this year. Worse, a list of problems that the NRC had with Davis-Besse  a list that had not been fully addressed at the time that the NRC approved the restart of the plant  did not even include the malfunction of the valves that caused this recent shutdown. FirstEnergy, in downplaying this event, claims it expected to "find some issues along the way." It is important to note the original cause for shutdown two years ago, the massive corrosion and deterioration of the reactors vessel head, was itself a problem found "along the way" as the plant was being refueled and inspected for other problems. According to NRC officials, Davis-Besse has the disturbing distinction of being the site for the second and third worst American nuclear incidents after the Three Mile Island partial meltdown in 1979. (The corrosion was the second; coolant problems in 1985 led to the third.) It appears that Davis-Besse is, at best, a mediocre plant that still poses dangers to the surrounding region. This continuing saga highlights what happens when regulators act as promoters of the industry they are supposed to oversee. It is apparent that the NRC is captured by the nuclear industry  Davis-Besse is a glaring example of this inherent conflict. What other dangers await discovery at the nations 102 other nuclear reactors  reactors that have not been the focus of increased industry and regulatory scrutiny for the past two years, as Davis-Besse has? It is astounding that even though Davis-Besse was under a magnifier, officials still missed problems. Again, we call for the NRC to keep Davis-Besse shut down and to penalize FirstEnergy appropriately by revoking its license to operate it. ### ***************************************************************** 39 NRC: Speech - 001 - A Time for Reflection, A Time for Action OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov [opa@nrc.gov] No. S-04-001 PDF Version (32 KB)[PDF Icon] A TIME FOR REFLECTION, A TIME FOR ACTION Remarks of Chairman Nils J. Diaz before the NRC Regulatory Information Conference Washington, D.C. March 10, 2004 I. Introduction and Overview My fellow Commissioners, distinguished foreign guests, and distinguished representatives of the NRC staff, stakeholder organizations, the media, and the public, it is a great pleasure to welcome you here this morning. This is the eighth Regulatory Information Conference I have attended, and I always look forward to this opportunity to see many old friends and acquaintances. This is also a time to take stock of the past and look toward the years ahead. After all, Atoms for Peace is 50 years old, and the 25th Anniversary of the TMI accident is around the corner. This is a good time for reflection and a better time for action. At last years RIC, I presented my approach to regulation, which I described as realistic conservatism: conservative in the sense of preserving adequate safety margins, and realistic in the sense of being anchored in the real world of physics, engineering, and experience. I expanded on my views at the October 2003 annual NRC-sponsored Nuclear Safety Research Conference by discussing Realism and Conservatism and their importance to sound technical decision making and the public well-being. I believed then, but I am convinced now, that 2st century nuclear regulation needs to be anchored in a realistic conservatism, or conservative realism and especially so if we are to avoid the twin pitfalls of under-regulation and over-regulation. I see realism and conservatism as enabling factors for safety and reliability. I promised then that if faced with a damned if you do, damned if you dont choice, I would rather be faulted for action than inaction. I have seen plenty of actions in the past year; I believe you have too. Finally, I promised plain speaking: making clear, as candidly as possible, where I stand on the issues that concern the NRC and its stakeholders. And its in that spirit that Id like to talk to you today about the regulatory challenges we have faced in the past year and those we face now. Specifically, I want to talk about where we are and where we are heading in the areas of reactor safety, security, and emergency preparedness. Putting it that way may sound as though I am talking about three different topics. That is not the case. I see these areas as a tightly connected triad -- three intertwined areas, in which regulation works in an integrated, synergistic way to protect public health and safety. In fact, holistically, it is the functional combination of reactor safety, physical security, and emergency preparedness that provides the basis for the continued overall determination of reasonable assurance of adequate protection. The relationship among these three areas can be understood by looking at their contributions to overall protection provided through defense-in-depth. The concept of defense in depth is a centerpiece of our approach to ensuring adequate protection of public health and safety. Defense-in-depth calls for, among other things, high quality design, fabrication, construction, inspection, and testing; multiple barriers to fission product release; redundancy and diversity in safety equipment; and procedures and strategies to address the expected as well as the unexpected. Defense-in-depth must be dynamic. It must incorporate the dynamics of risk-informed and performance-based decision making. Or better: use risk-informed and performance-based regulation to add realism to defense-in-depth conservatism. But you already know about all of these aspects of reactor safety. What I really want to bring to the forefront are the interrelationships among reactor safety, security, and emergency preparedness and also their importance to our present focus on mitigation of potential terrorist threats. For example, security concerns, including terrorist threats, raise many of the same issues involved in avoiding and mitigating reactor accidents. Potential initiating events, safety functions, safety (and often non-safety) equipment and procedures, and design basis and severe accident management guidelines all converge to a simple postulate: shut down the reactor, cool the core, and maintain barrier integrity. These are things we know how to do well and should be able to do regardless of the initiating event. The NRC is approaching safety, security, and emergency preparedness in an integral manner. For example, that integration can be seen in the application of the new alternate source term. Generally, we can say that what is good for safety is also good for achieving the objective of security. From a structural point of view, it is clear that reactor safety features that are designed to address such external events as tornados, hurricanes, fires, and floods also provide a high level of resistance to terrorist attacks. By the same token, these same structural features supported by the deployment of sound and visible physical protection measures are powerful deterrents to any terrorist activities. Likewise, it is clear that such system requirements as redundant Emergency Core Cooling Systems, redundant and diverse heat removal systems, fire protection features (including separation and suppression systems), and Station Blackout capabilities (either additional AC power sources or coping capability without AC power) provide built-in means of dealing with attempted attacks on nuclear reactors. And lastly, the emergency procedures and severe accident management strategies developed for reactor accidents also provide means for mitigating the potential consequences of terrorist attacks should they occur. The industry has utilized emergency procedures and severe accident management strategies to implement enhancements required by the Commissions security orders of February 25, 2002, because these procedures and strategies are so well suited to be effective against a broad range of events involving possible terrorist activities. With regard to emergencies, both on-site and off-site mitigating measures will be taken. When the defense-in-depth procedures and strategies are used on-site, they are generally considered part of the reactor safety approach; when they go beyond the plant boundaries, they are generally considered part of Emergency Preparedness. In treating emergency preparedness as another level of defense-in-depth, we are recognizing it as an integral part of our approach to protecting the public. Reactor fuel, reactor coolant systems, containment, emergency preparedness -- these are four barriers, each one complementing the others, and each one designed, tested, and inspected to provide a reasonable assurance of protecting the public and the environment from radiological releases. Beyond the general relationships lie the specifics. The details of what challenges each barrier must address come directly from an analysis of the failure modes of the prior barrier. Realistic conservatism is needed to determine the likely, the unlikely, and the remote failure modes; and to identify the parameters and quantify the values important to barrier integrity. The basis for emergency preparedness requirements, including communication and coordination actions, is set by the timing, magnitude, and constituents of a potential radioactive release, which are derived from the capabilities of the reactor coolant system, the containment and other safety systems; that is, by the other defense-in-depth barriers. Let me now turn from these more general thoughts to the specifics of where we are today in each of these areas, and what the path forward looks like to me. II. Reactor Safety Reactor safety refers to plant design and operational characteristics that provide protection against both design-basis accidents and severe accidents and to the training and capacity of the human beings at the controls. Reactor safety thus embraces systems, structures, and components; programs, practices and procedures; and knowledge, skills, and abilities. It also includes a factor not always measurable in numbers, but nevertheless crucially important, and that is commitment: a fundamental commitment to safety. Reactor safety and its regulation are not only about thinking and processes, they are also about knowing and doing. Let me pull no punches: it is about doing it right. Today, reactor safety performance continues to be very sound. Safety measures, including performance indicators and inspection findings, are quite good for most plants. But safety measures by themselves are not enough -- it is essential that both licensees and the NRC maintain a high level of attention on commitment to safety and competence in safety. Commitment to safety must be deep, pervasive, and reflected in managements vision and expectations for success and in its willingness -- indeed eagerness -- to tackle tough day-to-day issues and provide the direction and resources to resolve them. Commitment to safety also means that everyone involved understands the safety implications of his or her job and has a sense of dedication to do it well -- commitment combined with technological know-how. I hope everyone here at this conference realizes I am not talking about plant operators or licensees only. The NRC will maintain vigilance over reactor safety performance through performance indicators, the Reactor Oversight Program, inspection findings, and safety insights associated with cross-cutting issues. We will also use other means, as needed. We need to remember that nuclear power is held to a higher standard than most other technologies; there is no room for slackness, and we will be granted no slack if we fail. This is reality; it might not be fully fair, but it is reality, today and for the foreseeable future. Lets put the issue of nuclear safety in its historical context for a moment. As all of you know, this month marks the 25th anniversary of the Three Mile Island accident. For those who havent yet read the fine new book about those events by J. Samuel Walker, the NRC Historian, let me recommend it now for everyone connected with nuclear power. It is a judicious and fair book, as well as a very readable one. One of its central points is that the accident provided grounds to comfort both the proponents and opponents of nuclear power and also to dismay them. The consequences of a serious accident turned out to be much less severe than what opponents had forecast, but at the same time, the likelihood of such an accident occurring turned out to be far greater than what the industry and the NRC had foreseen. The publics health was not physically harmed, although there certainly was some psychological trauma from the accident. It was, however, a closer call than it should have been, and it revealed that the assumptions of the NRC and the industry had been overly optimistic. The effect was to shake public confidence severely. At the time, there was a segment of the public that wanted to see every nuclear power plant shut down permanently, then and there. Both the NRC and the industry learned some hard lessons from TMI and learned them well. The NRCs regulatory program was overhauled, and the industry, in part through the creation of the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations, undertook a major self-evaluation effort. The objective was internal industry discipline to improve the performance of weaker organizations, in part from the recognition that each operating plant was a reflection, for good or ill, on every other plant. Where are we today, a quarter century later? The record shows that no member of the public has been exposed to a harmful level of radiation from a nuclear power plant; the NRCs licensees have increased the level of safety, and concurrently, reliability of the reactor fleet to match high performance expectations and surpass requirements; our regulations have become more effective in ensuring the protection of public health and safety and the common defense and security; and overall, nuclear power contributes significantly to the nations energy supply and to its energy security. In short, it is a record to be proud of, both for the industry and its regulators. And yet, in the same breath that I say that, I also want to add a word of caution. Of all the risk factors that contribute to serious safety problems, none is more insidious than complacency: the assumption that because nothing bad has happened, nothing bad will happen. The fact that we havent had events that harmed the public doesnt mean we havent seen events that were unacceptable and should never have taken place. Davis-Besse is a prime example. It was resolved without harm to anyone, but still, it was no way to do business, either on the part of the licensee or on the part of the regulators. It shouldnt have been possible; probably most of the people in this room, myself included, if asked several years ago, would have said that such an event, going undetected for so long, was not credible. And yet it happened. We need to learn from that -- not only about the technical problems, but the attitudinal problems that caused the licensee and the NRC to drop the ball. Safety culture is more about know-how and commitment than about culture. Before I go any further, Id like to make emphatically clear that Im not here to make predictions about unacceptable events. What I am saying is that this industry achieved the record of safety it has by knowing what to do, when to do it, and doing it in a very disciplined manner that I like to call the nuclear way. That means turning square corners, not cutting them. It means shunning complacency. It means focusing on what really matters --Safety, with a capital S. It means putting thought, energy, and money not just into operations and maintenance, but also into engineering. The importance of operational safety is etched in my mind, as well as its three vital components: operational safety in operations, in maintenance, and in engineering. And it means above all else, a commitment to Safety. We have to maintain and enhance, with present know how, operational safety done the good old nuclear way. Productivity is a worthy goal, but not at the expense of safety. Putting safety first has to be more than a slogan; it has to be a principle that is applied every day, 24/7. Mottos on the wall, if they arent practiced, dont contribute one iota to safety; on the contrary, they could detract from it, by inducing a false sense of security. Why do I emphasize that today? Because that is my job. In addition, I am hearing some concerns that corners perhaps arent being turned quite as squarely in some cases as they used to be and as they ought to be. It has been my observation that safety and reliability are fully compatible --high capacity factors and efficiencies should be contributors to safety and never achieved at its detriment. While you are keeping costs down and capacity factors up, it is my expectation that safety margins will be maintained. Let me switch gears. Enough on reflection, lets get to the action. I personally see the following activities as critical components to a path forward: + Enhancing the oversight of reactor engineering and design issues (in ROP, licensing and rulemaking) including increased staff expertise in safety systems engineering; increased use of risk insights; and increased use of operating experience; + Making demonstrable progress toward a risk-informed and safety- conscious resolution and implementation of actions related to PWR ECCS sump concerns; + Resolving longstanding fire protection issues, including completion of the Section 50.48 (Fire Protection) rulemaking, endorsing NFPA-805 as appropriate; + Development and implementation of the PRA quality action plan, consistent with the Commissions directions; + Completion of the Section 50.46 risk-informed LOCA redefinition; + Completion of the proposed Section 50.69 to risk-inform Special Treatment Requirements; and + Establishing a clear plan (including the use of pilot projects) for achieving better regulatory coherence in the reactor area through risk-informing 10 CFR Part 50. Many of these items are based on risk-informed and performance-based regulation. I believe they are critical to enable realistic conservative enhancements to the defense-in-depth that is the centerpiece of our approach to ensuring adequate protection of public health and safety. III. Security Id like now to discuss another aspect of my triad and complete some of my thoughts on security. At last years RIC, I reported as follows: In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the Commission, unanimously, undertook a number of measures to improve security at nuclear power plants and to assess areas of possible vulnerability, with the intention to quickly arrive at the probables and work out mitigation strategies. The lessons learned and being learned guide the agencys and licensees actions. I am confident the statement holds true today. A year has passed, and the NRC and the commercial nuclear industry continue to enhance the security of licensed nuclear facilities and of radioactive material. The defenses are there, and the value of deterrence is increasing. Several additional orders to enhance security have been issued, after the fundamental Interim Compensatory Measure order issued in February 2002. In April 2003, orders were issued to nuclear power plants and Category I fuel cycle facility licensees to require security enhancements to protect against the revised Design Basis Threat (DBT). The DBT represents the largest reasonable threat against which a regulated private guard force should be expected to defend under existing law. NRC has defined two DBTs, one for radiological sabotage and the other for the theft and diversion of nuclear material. Two other orders were issued in April 2003 to enhance the readiness and capabilities of the security force personnel at nuclear power plants. One order establishes requirements to limit security force personnel working hours to provide reasonable assurance that the effects of fatigue will not adversely impact the readiness of security officers in performing their duties. The other order requires additional measures regarding security officer training and qualification, including exercising the protective strategies and capabilities required to defend nuclear power plants against sabotage by an attacking force. It also requires frequent firearms training and qualifications under a broad range of conditions representative of site-specific protective strategies. We consider security performance assessment to be an important component of our safety, security, and emergency preparedness program and since February 2003, we have conducted 16 force-on-force exercises to determine the effectiveness of protective strategies. We are planning, on average, conducting two exercises each month in fiscal year 2004, consistent with the Commissions decision to conduct such exercises at each site on a three-year cycle. Force-on-force exercises are conducted to assess and improve, if necessary, performance of defensive strategies at licensed facilities. We are committed to do them more realistically and more effectively. To complement security initiatives, the NRC has enhanced incident response capabilities by increasing the number of emergency exercises with other Federal agencies. In May 2003, NRC participated in TOPOFF 2, the second Congressionally-mandated, national-level exercise involving weapons of mass destruction, and last month the agency took part in UNIFIED DEFENSE 04, a U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) conducted exercise. We continue to coordinate with the Department of Defense, including NORTHCOM and NORAD, and plan on participating in upcoming exercises. We have made significant progress in the past year toward achieving an integrated response program for the defense of nuclear facilities. We will continue to work with the Homeland Security Council, the Department of Homeland Security, NORTHCOM, NORAD, other Federal departments and agencies, and State and local authorities to develop and implement nuclear and radiological security contingency plans that will complement licensees capabilities to ensure protection of critical facilities. Thus, it is clear that the security of our licensed facilities does not rely solely on the number of armed security officers, adequacy of security barriers, or other security features. Security, with a capital S, is provided by multiple layers of defense. I can categorically state that the defensive capabilities of the nuclear power plants, coupled with the Federal, State, and local capabilities and a deployed physical security network is strong and getting stronger. IV. Emergency Preparedness I would now like to turn to the third area of the triad, emergency preparedness. Here, the NRC has had a strong program for more than two decades. The post-TMI improvements in the emergency planning area have served the nation well. It is a vital component of assurance of adequate protection where it counts the most --protection of the public from radiological hazards. It is also, today, an indispensable component of our obligation to earn, and hopefully to ensure, deserved public confidence in the discharge of our mandate. Emergency preparedness is assessed on an ongoing and continuing basis. To further enhance emergency planning capabilities in this era of heightened concern over terrorism, the NRC recently created a new project office within the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. This office serves to consolidate activities related to emergency planning and increase the management attention given them. The new office has identified several areas of emphasis which I see as important to our path forward, including the following: + Improved communications with stakeholders, particularly State and local officials and the public living near nuclear power plants; + Improved integration of security items into emergency preparedness exercises, which will be tested at the Indian Point exercise in the summer of 2004; + Increased coordination among the NRC staff in NRR, NSIR and Research; + A re-examination of the regulatory framework for emergency preparedness; + Increased coordination with FEMA and clarification on addressing FEMA deficiency findings; and + Re-evaluation of means of public notification. Again, many of these initiatives stress the importance of increased integration of reactor safety, security, and emergency preparedness to achieve the objective of protection of the public. Before I conclude, I would like to highlight one thing that is often overlooked or misunderstood regarding nuclear power plant hazards, there would be time to take actions to protect the public from a radiological release from a nuclear facility. This is a very important factor that has been fully taken into account in our emergency preparedness basis and remains true today. V. Conclusion I began my remarks by suggesting that this is a time for reflection and a time for action, and have tried to describe my views about where reflection and action should take us. I have emphasized how the components of the safety, security, and emergency preparedness program must work together. The public health and safety record of nuclear power plants in this country and its regulators during the past quarter century has been dependent on these components and will be in the future. My remarks today reflected both confidence in our capabilities to protect the public, as well as concerns with continuing to maintain and enhance safety. I know my concerns can be addressed because we know what to do, how to do it and when to do it. We also know that success can lead to complacency. Complacency is satisfaction or self-satisfaction accompanied by unawareness of actual damages or deficiencies. Somewhere, sometime, when success is apparent, action must be taken to prevent complacency from threatening success. The nuclear power industry has supplied the American people with reliable electrical energy and a measure of energy security, fully consistent with public health and safety, the common defense and security, and the protection of the environment. That makes it all the more important that we adhere to the practices and attitudes that have served us so well until now. An unswerving commitment to do what is right has brought us this far. It must permeate and help integrate safety, security, and emergency preparedness. We cannot allow that commitment to be compromised -- not in the plants, the boardrooms, or the NRC itself. In another 25 years, when I believe energy portfolios will have been redefined, our country should be in a position to look back at 75 years of safe, secure, and environmentally responsible management and regulation of nuclear energy continuing to serve the American people. To reach that goal, everyone participating in the utilization or regulation of nuclear energy must be guided by the past, must be anchored in the reality of the present, and must be confident that the future can be mastered. This truly is a time for reflection and a time for action. Thank you. Last revised Friday, March 12, 2004 ***************************************************************** 40 National Pos: Ontario's future is nuclear power: report OPG report to recommend more private deals for nuclear plants Ottawa Friday, March 19, 2004 TORONTO -- A report on the future of Ontario Power Generation will recommend that the government look for more private-sector involvement to operate and maintain the province's nuclear power plants, The Canadian Press has learned. The report, slated for release Thursday, will suggest OPG and the government pursue joint ventures, partnerships and long-term leases for the operation and maintenance of its nuclear power stations. The report will also outline other drastic changes at the power company, sources said. The report will also recommend the power company exit non-core businesses. That usually means selling or shutting down businesses that aren't vital to a company's operation. Another recommendation calls for the power giant to divide itself into two operating divisions - one to handle the nuclear plants, and the other to manage hydro and fossil fuel plants. Other recommendations include moving OPG's headquarters out of Toronto and closer to its plants, as well as a major shakeup of its corporate governance structure. The report comes days after OPG reported a $491-million loss last year, including a $475-million writeoff on the value of coal-fired plants that the Liberal government plans to shut down by 2007. That news was accompanied by the details of a damning independent audit that warned the utility, which owns the bulk of the province's generating stations, is on the verge of collapse if its course isn't altered. The audit blamed part of the utility's problems on a flawed strategy to revamp its nuclear power stations - a strategy that has cost billions more than expected and is years behind schedule. Energy Minister Dwight Duncan said Wednesday that the province will have to embark on a hugely expensive plan to fix OPG and the province's electricity sector, with an estimated cost of between $30 billion and $40 billion. The report, by a three-member review committee headed by former federal finance minister John Manley, was charged late last year to look at OPG's future. Other committee members include Scotiabank chairman Peter Godsoe and former federal energy minister Jake Epp, who is now chairman of OPG. The company has already taken a step in the privatization direction recommended by the committee with a deal in July 2000 with Bruce Power. Under the $625-million agreement, Bruce Power signed a long-term lease with OPG to operate the Bruce Power plant near Kincardine, some 50 kilometres southwest of Owen Sound. Bruce was the first nuclear plant in the province to be turned over to private operators. The deal came as part of OPG's agreement to reduce its share of power generating capacity in the province to no more than 35 per cent within 10 years of what was the planned privatization of the energy sector. Four of Bruce's eight reactors at the plant are currently operating. The current lease runs to 2018, with an option to extend it for 25 years. The move towards more private-sector involvement would take advantage of outside experts and help reduce the risk to taxpayers for the costs to upgrade the nuclear power plants, sources said. However, any moves to privatization will be fiercely rejected by those who believe all power generation must remain in public hands. Any moves to turn power generation capacity over to the private sector will be met with fierce resistance, particularly from the New Democrats, whose mantra is "public power." Privatization means less, not more supply, and higher, not lower costs, said New Democrat Peter Kormos. "The private sector, to generate profits, has to keep the price up and you do that by controlling supply," he said. That will hurt consumers and industry as the price of power rises so that private-sector companies make enough money on their investment, he said. Duncan asked the committee to examine OPG's future role in the electricity market, examine its corporate and management structure, and probe whether it should go ahead with fixing chronic problems at the Pickering nuclear power plant. The request followed several troubling reports that painted a picture of mismanagement and financial trouble at the power utility. A report last fall blamed senior managers for billions in cost overruns and delays in restarting the Pickering A reactors. Three top OPG executives were fired as a result. That was followed by a review of the power company's finances, which found that its results fell $1 billion short of its forecast. © The Canadian Press 2004 [http://www.canada.com/] ***************************************************************** 41 National Post: Ontario must look to nuclear power with private-sector help energy report Hamilton March 18, 2004 TORONTO (CP) - The Ontario government must look to nuclear power and the private sector for its future electricity needs and put a stop to years of political interference at Ontario Power Generation, John Manley said Thursday. Efficient, well-run nuclear plants are the cheapest and most viable option for a province that could face a power shortage as early as 2007, the former deputy prime minister said as he unveiled his blueprint to rescue the debt-stricken power generator. The endorsement of nuclear power and private-sector involvement brought swift criticism from groups who say that will only mean higher prices for consumers. Ontario's history shows that nuclear power means unreliable power and massive unforseen costs, they say. But Manley said the first step has to be resurrecting the province's troubled nuclear program, including spending $600 million to finish rebuilding one of three dormant reactors at OPG's controversial Pickering A nuclear facility. "We believe that the project should move forward and that it can be completed on budget," he said. "It is the quickest, least expensive means for Ontario to meet some of its important energy supply needs." Thursday's report, by a three-member review panel comprised of Manley, former federal energy minister Jake Epp and former Scotiabank chief executive Peter Godsoe, also urges the province to solicit help from the private sector to build new nuclear generating stations and operate its current ones. That could include long-term leases, partnerships and joint ventures. The report also said private companies should bear the risk of cost overruns in building new nuclear plants, not taxpayers or hydro consumers. Manley did warn consumers that they need to be prepared to pay the real cost of electricity - something Ontario power users haven't done since 1993. Power rates in Ontario have been frozen in one form or another for the past 10 years, forcing OPG to sell electricity for less than what it cost to produce it, Manley said. "The people who consume electricity are going to have to pay its costs, otherwise you can't possibly have a serious conservation plan," he said. "It's going to cost more, (but it's) hard to say how much more." OPG currently has one private deal where it has a long-term lease with Bruce Power for the Bruce nuclear plant in southwestern Ontario. Manley acknowledged that Ontario's nuclear plants have been plagued over the years by cost overruns, expensive shutdowns and chronic mismanagement. But with the right management and cost controls, the province can fix its reactors on time and on budget, Manley said. Indeed, he noted, it's running out of options. "Let's get our act together, because we don't have a lot of choices," Manley said. "If they can do it in China, surely to goodness we can do it in Ontario." The report also recommends that OPG remain in public hands, but that Premier Dalton McGuinty put an end to the long history of political interference at the utility, "whipsawed" for years by repeated policy changes. "We've told Mr. McGuinty . . .to be the first premier in a hundred years to take his hands off the electricity generator," Manley said. "That's a tough call because, you know what, when the lights go out the people of Ontario blame the premier." The report also recommended OPG remain as a single company, but with two distinct divisions: one to handle its nuclear assets and the other managing hydro-electric, natural gas and other methods of generation. The province must also encourage more generation from natural gas and renewable sources, but OPG should get out of the green power business to let others concentrate on it, said the report. The report comes days after OPG reported a big loss for 2003 after writing off the value of coal-fired plants that the Liberal government plans to shut down by 2007. That news was accompanied by the details of a damning independent audit that warned the utility, which owns the bulk of the province's generating stations, is on the verge of collapse if its course isn't altered because of its flawed strategy to revamp its nuclear power stations. Energy Minister Dwight Duncan said Wednesday it's likely to cost as much as $40 billion in the coming years to fix OPG and revamp the province's electricity sector. © The Canadian Press 2004 Search canada.com About Us Advertise Site Map Privacy [http://www.canwestglobal.com/privacy.html] Terms FAQ Our Partners Copyright © CanWest Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. CanWest Interactive Inc. is an affiliate of CanWest Global Communications Corp. [http://www.canwestglobal.com/] Copyright & Permission Rules [http://www.canada.com/aboutus/copyright.html] [http://www.canada.com/] [ /] ***************************************************************** 42 Citizens Find Bush Guilty of Afghan War Crimes Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 11:25:03 -0600 (CST) Forwarded with Compliments of Government of the USA in Exile (GUSAE): Free Americans Proclaiming Total Emancipation and Working Towards Democracy. NOTE: Thanks to Rick Davis for this. -- kl, pp http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20040314a5.htm Sunday, March 14, 2004 The Japan Times DEPLETED URANIUM SHELLS DECRIED Citizens Find Bush Guilty of Afghan War Crimes By NAO SHIMOYACHI Staff writer A citizens' tribunal Saturday in Tokyo found U.S. President George W. Bush guilty of war crimes for attacking civilians with indiscriminate weapons and other arms during the U.S.-led antiterrorism operations in Afghanistan in 2001. The tribunal also issued recommendations for banning depleted uranium shells and other weapons that could indiscriminately harm people, compensating the victims in Afghanistan and reforming the United Nations in light of its failure to stop the U.S.-led operation there. The tribunal participants spent two years examining Bush's role as the top commander in the war, making eight field trips to Afghanistan and holding nearly 20 public hearings. "Bush said that military presence in Afghanistan is self-defense," said Robert Akroyd, a British lawyer who served as one of the five judges. "But under international law," he said, "a defendant must pay great care to discriminate (between) legitimate objects and civilians" in claiming that one's act is self-defense, said Akroyd, former head of legal studies at Aston University in Britain. Bush failed to do so with the U.S. military's use of "indiscriminate weapons such as the Daisy Cutter (a huge conventional bomb), cluster bombs and depleted uranium shells," he said. Civilians and experts who have supported the tribunal movement agreed to work for creation of an international treaty that would prohibit the production, stockpile and use of depleted uranium rounds, like the Ottawa process that succeeded in 1997 in outlawing antipersonnel land mines. Organizers said the tribunal on Afghanistan was the latest attempt to try a head of state by the efforts of citizens. The history of citizens' tribunals dates back to the 1960s, when the British philosopher Bertrand Russell and others tried to examine the acts of the U.S. government during the Vietnam War. =============================================================================== The Japan Times: March 14, 2004 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 43 [DU-WATCH] map of DU ordnance in Kosovo Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 01:43:51 -0600 (CST) Hello Davey, On this site you can find the map: http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/VISIE/MVC-001F.JPG With regards, Hans de Jonge http://depleteduranium.tk [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 44 People's Weekly World: Why are veterans getting sick? 0> [http://www.pww.org Archive Recent Editions 2004 Editions Mar 20, 2004 Author: David Lawrence, The NationÂ’s Health WorkerÂ’s Safet People's Weekly World Newspaper, 03/18/04 12:25 America’s recent wars have killed many hundreds of American soldiers on the battlefields. There is something else going on that is far more difficult to see – those who survive the fighting are coming home with terrible medical problems by the tens of thousands. Take a look at these facts: • Estimated Gulf War I (1991) veterans: 573,000 • Average soldier exposure to ground campaign: 100 hours • Number of air battle sorties: 32,000 • Number of U.S. casualties: 148 killed, 467 wounded However, the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs are paying out medical disability payments to 221,000 Gulf War veterans. Another 52,000 have claims in for the same status, as of about a year ago. In other words, 39 percent of all the vets who fought in the Gulf War have already been determined by the military to be disabled! Compare this to the rate of approved medical disability claims during World War II (6.6 percent), Korea (5 percent) and Vietnam (9.6 percent). Why are our vets coming home so sick? Could it be the 320 tons of depleted uranium (DU) dust that litters the battlefield? “Part of the threat today includes greater exposure to battlefield by-products of ‘depleted uranium’ munitions used in combat,” notes Dr. Doug Rokke, former director of the Army’s depleted uranium project. “People are sick over there already,” according to Rokke. “It’s not just uranium. You’ve got all the complex organics and inorganics (compounds) that are released in those fires and detonations. And they’re sucking this in. … You’ve got the whole toxic wasteland.” In 1991, Desert Storm commander Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf asked Rokke to oversee the environmental cleanup and medical care of soldiers injured in friendly fire incidents involving DU weapons. Rokke later wrote the DU safety rules adopted by the Army, but was relieved of subsequent duties after he criticized commanders for not following those rules and not treating troops exposed during NATO’s war in Yugoslavia. DU, or Uranium-238, is a by-product of the production of nuclear reactor fuel. It is denser and more penetrating than lead, burns as it flies, and breaks up and vaporizes on impact – which makes it very deadly. Each round fired by a tank shoots one 10-pound uranium dart. In addition to destroying targets, those darts scatter into burning fragments and create a cloud of uranium particles as small as one micron. Particles that small can enter lung tissue and remain embedded there. The Pentagon’s acknowledged failure to follow a 1997 law requiring baseline medical screening of troops before and after deployment complicates efforts to understand potential health impacts. But Rokke says health problems associated with DU exposure are likely to be even more widespread in the current Iraqi war than in 1991. That’s because the military relies more heavily on DU munitions today, and there’s more fighting in this war. It has become commonplace for us to see images on television of soldiers and civilians driving past burning Iraqi trucks that have been destroyed by tank fire. We often see soldiers or civilians inspecting buildings destroyed by missiles. These people are not wearing respirators, notes Rokke, and they all risk radiation poisoning, which can have lifelong consequences. “He’s going to be sick,” Rokke said about one such soldier. “He’s supposed to have full respiratory protection on. That’s required by his (training manual). And when he comes by and he’s downwind, he is supposed to have a radiobioassay. That’s urine, feces and nasal swabs within 24 hours.” When asked why those protocols – part of the DU rules he wrote for the Army – apparently aren’t being followed, Rokke responds that the military doesn’t want to lose the use of DU weapons. He noted that as early as 1991, the military issued memos saying DU ammo could become “politically unacceptable and thus be deleted” if health and environmental impacts were emphasized. So the picture is clear. The same political friends of Halliburton and the oil industry who send us off to wage “preemptive” wars around the world are waging war on our own soldiers. It is, indeed, time to struggle for “regime change” – right here in the USA! The author can be reached at pww@pww.org. PWW: pww@pww.org 235 West 23rd Street New York NY 10011 ph: 212-924-2523 ***************************************************************** 45 Las Vegas RJ: Disabled workers' claims rise Thursday, March 18, 2004 Bill to speed compensation related to test site, other nuclear facilities By TONY BATT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- A backlog of claims by disabled workers from the Nevada Test Site and other nuclear facilities would be processed by 2006 under a bill the Energy Department plans to propose within the next few weeks, Undersecretary Bob Card said Wednesday. The legislation aims to improve the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. From its outset, the program has been plagued by delays in establishing panels of doctors to review workers' claims. During a briefing, Card said the new bill would qualify more physicians to serve on the panels. In addition, the $68-an-hour limit on fees paid to the doctors would be eliminated. "By lifting the salary cap and broadening the applicant pool, we'll be able to bring in a whole bunch more (doctors)," Card said. The compensation law requires the Energy Department to help Nevada and other states identify workers suffering from illnesses caused by exposure to toxic substances at nuclear facilities. Sick laborers may qualify for workers' compensation from states. The law also requires the Labor Department to pay up to $150,000 to workers who suffer from certain diseases, including silicosis. Many test site employees have contracted silicosis, an incurable lung disease. As of March 11, the number of claims filed by test site workers totaled 2,270, according to the Labor Department's Web site. So far, 728 claims have been denied and 129 have been approved. The government has paid a total $12.6 million on 103 of those claims. Seventeen claims have been filed by Yucca Mountain workers. Eleven of those claims have been denied. Four claims have been approved for total payments of $600,000. Nationwide, 52,177 claims have been filed, with 11,641 approved and 15,588 denied. More than $28.3 million in payments were made. Last year, Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., and other senators frustrated by delays in forming the physician panels unsuccessfully sought to remove the Energy Department from the process. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 46 KRT Wire: Federal Nuclear Regulators Fine Alaska Agency for Radiation Hazard | 03/17/2004 | By Richard Richtmyer, Anchorage Daily News, Alaska Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Mar. 17 - The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has fined the state Department of Transportation $21,000 for exposing workers to excessive levels of radiation in the late 1990s. The NRC, in a statement issued Tuesday afternoon, also said state Transportation Department officials had discriminated against a worker, Robert Farmer, who raised concerns about potential radiation exposure to other state employees and blew the whistle on the violations. All of the violations can be traced back to the way the agency stored portable nuclear density gauges at an Anchorage facility between 1996 and 1998, the NRC said. The Transportation Department uses the gauges, which include a small amount of radioactive material, to measure the quality of pavement and the density and moisture content of soils on its construction projects. In a letter to state Transportation Department Commissioner Michael Barton, the NRC said it determined that the agency had improperly stored the gauges in close proximity to office space used by employees not trained in the use of radioactive materials, exposing them to radiation levels in excess of the NRC's limit for such workers. The NRC pointed out, however, that none of the workers was exposed to levels of radiation normally expected to cause health problems. Still, the agency said the Transportation Department's improper storage of the material and its failure to monitor radiation levels in the affected office space "are of particular concern because each involved willfulness, specifically a careless disregard for NRC requirements." The NRC also found that the Transportation Department withheld copies of reports on the incident from all six employees who were affected by it when those reports were submitted to the agency. The agency said the Transportation Department was aware of its legal requirement to give the employees the reports but did not until the NRC compelled it to do so. In a separate but related action, the NRC found that Transportation Department officials had discriminated against Farmer, the department's statewide radiation safety officer between 1999 and 2002, after he reported the violations. Specifically, the NRC said Transportation Department officials gave him unacceptable ratings in three performance appraisals, denied him a merit pay increase, verbally admonished him, gave him written reprimands and denied his request for radiation safety officer-related training. Billie Garde, an attorney for Farmer in a pending federal whistle-blower case, said his supervisors began retaliating against him soon after he brought the issue to their attention and to the attention of employees working in the affected area. The discrimination escalated after he reported the violations to federal regulators after his supervisors refused to, Garde said. The Transportation Department, in a statement issued Tuesday, said the NRC's finding that it retaliated against Farmer conflicted with the view of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which had "exonerated" it from the charge of discriminatory conduct. But Garde refuted that characterization. She said the Labor Department, OSHA's parent agency, hadn't even considered the evidence because it questioned whether it should be handled under state or federal jurisdiction. She said that case is currently under appeal, and she plans to file a state whistle-blower case on Farmer's behalf soon. The NRC's finding that the Transportation Department discriminated against Farmer does not carry with it any civil penalty. However, the Transportation Department said it has agreed to submit to an independent review of its safety program as it pertains to a "safety conscious work environment" and will present a "corrective action plan" to the NRC. The Transportation Department also said it will provide its employees with additional safety training and conduct a "safety culture survey" to assess its performance. ----- To see more of the Anchorage Daily News, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to [http://www.adn.com] © 2004, Anchorage Daily News, Alaska. Distributed by Knight ***************************************************************** 47 Boston.com: Contamination inquiry to start Starmet cleanup still years away By Davis Bushnell, Globe Correspondent, 3/18/2004 Investigations into the extent of contamination on Starmet Corp.'s 46-acre site in West Concord are scheduled to begin this summer, according to the project coordinator for the firm that is spearheading the investigative and design work for the property cleanup. Bruce Thompson of de maximis Inc., based in Weatogue, Conn., said Monday that work on the Superfund site probably will begin shortly after a public meeting is held in July to discuss his firm's 2,000-page project plans. A July meeting date has yet to be selected, he said. The investigation is expected to last 1 years, Thompson said, adding that a risk-assessment phase will take an additional three to six months to complete. It's unlikely that a cleanup plan would be firmed up before 2008. Once that happens, it would take five years, at the very least, to rid the property of all contaminants, he said. The US Environmental Protection Agency is conducting its final review of de maximis's plans, said Melissa Taylor, a remedial project manager charged with the Starmet property cleanup. ''In general, we're impressed with the plan, one of the most conclusive that we've seen," she said. One of the first tasks, Thompson noted, will be digging up and examining between 60 and 70 55-gallon barrels that ''have been underground for some time." Located near a former holding basin and cooling water pond, these barrels are believed to contain some depleted uranium and a mixture of other hazardous materials, possibly including beryllium, he said. Although ground water will be scrutinized, Concord's public water supply does not draw from wells that could be tainted by Starmet ground water, the EPA and Thompson have emphasized. The town relies on a reservoir. Starmet's predecessor firm, Nuclear Metals Inc., made uranium-tipped bullets for the Army in the 1970s, 1980s, and late 1990s. The site off Route 62 went on the EPA's Superfund list in June 2001. The state Department of Environmental Protection is now close to reaching an agreement with the Army on removing 3,700 drums of depleted uranium from Starmet buildings, DEP spokesman Ed Coletta said last Friday. But de maximis will not investigate those buildings until the drums have been removed, Thompson said. Last June, the EPA, which had spent $1.2 million earlier in the year on the temporary cleanup of the Starmet site, cited the Army and four others as the parties responsible for cleaning up the property's contamination. The other parties named were the US Department of Energy; Whittaker Corp. of Simi Valley, Calif.; Textron Inc. of Providence; and MONY Life Insurance Co. of New York City. Under the terms of the EPA consent order, the Army and the Department of Energy will pay 98 percent of the total bill for the final environmental studies, the three companies the remaining 2 percent. The estimated tab for the final studies undertaken by de maximis is $8 million, with a cap of $10 million. © Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company. ***************************************************************** 48 Poughkeepsie Journal: Tell public about plant safety risks Thursday, March 18, 2004 Maintaining public security is essential in this age of terrorism. But it should not come at the cost of the people's right to know. In that light, it's outrageous that state officials might choke off vital information about security at New York's power plants. Safety concerns keep coming up at some of these facilities. Residents need to be well-informed about these issues, terrorism or no terrorism. But they won't be if the Legislature passes a measure introduced by Gov. George Pataki. This measure would amend a law passed last year, which requires officials at the state Office of Public Security to issue reports on safety and se-curity at each of the state's power plants. These reports would ideally provide the public with information about health and safety issues at these facilities. They will likely list these issues, and then say what has been done or is being done to correct them. For instance, the public could be told whether there's still a risk of radioactive steam leaks at Indian Point in West-chester County, or if the plant owner has replaced enough worn-out parts to prevent it from happening again. But, properly, this law also forbids officials from divulging sensitive information that could be used to put the public at risk. For instance, they can't give specifics about exactly how the Roseton and Danskammer power plants in Newburgh might be vulnerable to a terrorist attack, since this information could be used by terrorists. If anyone -- environmental groups or news media, for instance -- thinks officials held back too much information under this law, they can challenge the government in court. The judge can then privately review the information and determine if it can be safely disclosed. However, Pataki's bill would make every word in these safety-and-security reports top secret. Nobody would get a copy of the report without first signing a confidentiality agreement. Which means nobody could tell the public about potential risks -- neither government officials nor the press. This measure could also make reporters vulnerable to prosecution if they divulge contents of the reports, warns Diane Kennedy, president of the New York Newspaper Publishers Association. They, too, would be prevented from doing their job of keeping the public informed. It is essential that government is transparent and accountable. But, if passed, this measure would set a chilling precedent: It would be withholding information from the public because it chooses to -- not because the information is clearly sensitive. The threat of terrorism is real. But it's a poor excuse for taking away the public's right to know about safety and security issues. On the Web To read the power plant secrecy legislation, go to assembly.state.ny.us, click on ''Bill Search &Legislative Information,'' and enter ''S6120.'' , Poughkeepsie Journal . ***************************************************************** 49 AFP: US plan to get highly enriched uranium out of civilian cycle :IAEA WASHINGTON (AFP) Mar 18, 2004 The United States is working on an "action plan" to get countries worldwide to stop using highly enriched uranium, which can be the raw material for nuclear weapons, in civilian programs, UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Thursday. "They are working on an action plan already," ElBaradei, head of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) told reporters after meeting in Washington with US Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. He said the plan was "to clean up all the highly enriched uranium (HEU) and plutonium that is still in the civilian cycle." This represents 100 facilities in 40 countries, ElBaradei said. HEU can be used to make an atom bomb but also as fuel in civilian research reactors. Department of Energy officials had no comment on the plan. ElBaradei, who met Wednesday with US President George W. Bush, said "the president agreed" it was "unacceptable" that countries are still using HEU in civilian programs. He said they had also agreed the time had come to "change many of the rules" in order to strengthen the fight against nuclear proliferation that is the mission of the IAEA. ElBaradei had said Wednesday it did not matter if the HEU which countries possessed had come from Russia, the United States or other weapons powers. "My suggestion to the president is that we need a good plan to clean up all this nuclear weapons useable material that is all over the place," ElBaradei said. Asked if countries would accept recyling HEU to low enriched uraniumwhich is not a weapons risk, ElBaradei said Thursday: "I think that's why we need US, Russian and other leadership." The IAEA is now overseeing a reactor in Libya from which highly enriched uranium is taken to Russia, which is to return it as low enriched uranium, which cannot be used in a bomb. ElBaradei said he thinks most people "understand the security concern and if you get the same results with an LEU research reactor, I don't think anyone will" complain. "It's a question of identifying what needs to be done and who will be in touch with each country on which issues," ElBaradei said. In another front in the non-proliferation fight, ElBaradei said he and Bush had "agreed on the need to revisit the whole export control regime ... as a result of A.Q. Khan associates and the lesson we have learned from that." Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb, confessed in January to running an international black market ring that shared sensitive nuclear technology with Iran, Libya and North Korea for more than a decade. ElBaradei also wants to eliminate the danger that nuclear fuel declared for peaceful uses could also be used to make atomic bombs by having a multilateral body make the fuel, rather than letting individual states do it. The United States has however stressed setting a "moratorium or cut-off date" after which countries that have not mastered the fuel cycle would stop trying to do this. WAR.WIRE ***************************************************************** 50 McCook Daily Gazette: Baker: Waste site deserves look [http://www.mccookgazette.com Thursday, March 18, 2004 With three weeks left in the Nebraska Legislative session, low-level radioactive waste disposal and a property tax levy limit increase are the chief concerns for State Sen. Tom Baker. In his regular Thursday morning conference call, Baker said waste disposal is not as dangerous as many people think, but people are not educated the way they should be about it. Baker repeated his contention that the waste that will fill the site would be items generated in a hospital or gloves and gowns used in a nuclear facility. In Kimball County, Rick Soper is up for recall because of his support of the waste disposal plan. Such a small amount of waste is easily and safely held in a waste site, and does not have the negative effects citizens see in movies and television, Baker said. "We need to at least look at it," Baker said. "Don't slam down on it." Baker said that three of the four letters he received today supported his stance, and that there is little to worry about in the process. "It's not going to cause deformed cattle," he said. "It's not going to glow at night." Education is an important part of the process, in his mind. People have misconceptions because they haven't been educated about it. Education is what may get a boost if the state approves a tax levy limit from 1.05 to 1.10 per $100 valuation. As it stands, many want the levy limit to be a permanent number, but Baker said the Unicameral would likely settle on a three-year limit for the increase. "I don't think there's a downside other than recertification for school district," he said. He noted that the recertification process is a minor detail. School boards used to be able to decide what the tax levy would be. At that time, many would be as high as 1.58 and 1.59. "On a historical level," Brent McMurtrey, Superintendent of Republican Valley School told Baker, "1.10 would have been a bargain." Baker, a member of the revenue committee said that the end of this session is going to revolve around money. His committee and the Appropriations Committee have gone head-to-head on many issues in hopes of creating the best policy to address the state's revenue shortfalls, but now the ball is in the Appropriation Committee's Court. "They threw a stick of dynamite to the Revenue Committee," Baker said. "We lit it and threw it back." ***************************************************************** 51 The Herald: Dounreay clean-up draws world interest Web Issue 1965 March 18 2004 DAVID ROSS, Highland Correspondent March 18 2004 THE world's largest plant for the destruction of liquid metal has begun full operation at Dounreay at a cost of £17m and is attracting close interest from the international nuclear community. It represents a key point in the £4bn decommissioning of the Caithness site. Due to the volatility of the liquid metals, some of which are contaminated with radioactivity, they always posed a potential risk to the safety of the plant. The plant converts sodium from the decommissioning of the coolant circuits of the prototype fast reactor to salt water which can then be discharged safely to the sea. Following the success of its active commissioning phase, consent has now been obtained from the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate of the Health and Safety Executive to begin destroying the remainder of the 1500 tonnes of liquid metal at the reactor. The fast reactors developed at Dounreay were unique in the UK for their use of liquid metals to transfer the heat from the core to steam generators to produce electricity. A number of other countries also experimented with liquid metal coolant systems, and the success of the Dounreay programme is being monitored closely as they prepare to meet their own clean-up challenges. The sodium disposal plant uses various chemical reactions to produce salt water, which is then passed through another system to clean up any radioactivity before it is discharged into the sea. Copyright © Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights [http://www.pressnow.co.uk/] ***************************************************************** 52 Las Vegas RJ: State files another lawsuit challenging Yucca project Thursday, March 18, 2004 Federal officials blamed for sabotaging state's nuclear repository fight By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada officials charged in a new lawsuit Wednesday that the state is being sabotaged financially as it continues to fight the Yucca Mountain Project. Attorney General Brian Sandoval urged judges to force the Energy Department to guarantee Nevada a smooth flow of millions in grants to evaluate DOE's license request for the proposed nuclear waste repository. Until then, the state requested in its lawsuit that judges halt the license application the department plans to file in December. Nevada is "severely handicapped" preparing for upcoming license hearings because of financial shortfalls brought on by DOE, according to the state's lawsuit. It says the Energy Department has ignored requests to set up new grants. DOE spokesman Allen Benson would not comment. Department managers in the past have indicated they follow the direction of Congress when it comes to distributing grants for the state and counties to oversee work on the Yucca project. The new lawsuit advances the idea that DOE is obligated to give Nevada the money it says it needs no matter what Congress does. Nevada's funding for Yucca Mountain oversight has fluctuated, from a high of $11 million in 1989 to several years in the mid-1990s when the state got no federal grants. But the stakes have become higher because the state plans to use federal grants to pay experts and gather evidence to fight the repository in license hearings that will be held by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The lawsuit is the seventh one the state has filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit challenging the repository. A three-judge panel consolidated the earlier six cases and heard arguments on them Jan. 14. Attorneys expect decisions in those cases this spring. Sandoval accused the Energy Department of recommending minimal amounts of federal grant funding to shortchange adversaries in the state. "It's a blatant conflict of interest when the agency in charge of funding your participation moves to sabotage your participation," Sandoval said in a statement. Attorneys for the state plan to file a motion seeking quick consideration of the lawsuit since the department plans to file its license application later this year. The department recommended that Congress set aside $1 million this year for Nevada funding for Yucca Mountain, while state officials said they wanted $5 million. Last year, the Energy Department recommended no state funding, and Congress provided only $1 million, according to the lawsuit. Nevada probably will require more than $10 million a year to review Yucca Mountain science and to prepare and mount its license challenges, according to Bob Loux, director of the state's Agency for Nuclear Projects. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 53 Salt Lake Tribune: A question of bias March 18, 2004 Fax: 801-257-8950 It's hard to know which was worse, Sen. Curtis Bramble's prickly remarks about an advocacy group critical of Envirocare of Utah or the setting in which he made them. It is certain, though, that the combination of the two calls into question the Provo Republican's impartiality and will taint any recommendations of the Legislature's Hazardous and Radioactive Waste Task Force if he is allowed to remain co-chairman. Under the circumstances, Bramble should resign his leadership position on the task force. Failing that, the Legislature's leaders should remove him. Bramble attended a meeting sponsored by Envirocare at a museum in Tooele. One purpose of the meeting was to discuss how the company's employees could become involved in the political process. Envirocare operates a landfill for hazardous and radioactive waste near Clive in that county and is a principal firm in the industry that the legislative task force is studying. The company's applications to receive various classifications and concentrations of waste are the subject of perennial political debate in Utah, and the task force is charged with making policy recommendations about the industry, how it is regulated and taxed. During the course of the meeting, Bramble told the crowd that the acronym HEAL should stand for "Help Educate Anal Liberals." Two members of HEAL, whose actual name is Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, took offense and left the meeting. Their departure was accompanied by applause from the company's supporters. Even if the senator's remark was an intemperate joke, and was not intended as cheerleading for Envirocare, it betrays a bias. The setting in which Bramble made it compounds that impression. In another context, an elected public official should be applauded for encouraging people to make their voices heard in the political process. But Bramble's ideological name-calling should be out of bounds for any senator serving on a task force that is supposed to be evaluating highly volatile public policy issues with an open mind. The task force itself is an outgrowth of ongoing policy debate about Envirocare. Just in the latest legislative session, a bill proposed by the task force to clear up uncertainties about how the state regulatory scheme applied to certain categories of federally classified nuclear waste went through a bruising battle before passing. Regulation of hazardous and nuclear waste is both highly technical and widely misunderstood. To maintain public confidence, the impartiality of the legislative task force must be trusted. Sen. Bramble's conduct has brought that into question, and he should be removed as co-chairman. © Copyright 2004, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 54 RIT: Reactor of the future destroys nuclear waste - KTH to head major EU project to cut storage times dramatically The Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) 18.03.2004 A power plant that generates energy from used nuclear waste and destroys it as well. Could this become a reality? A three-year research project involving 23 European partners coordinated by KTH is being launched to investigate the matter. In the last few years great strides have been taken in research into so-called transmutation (see footnote) of nuclear waste. Therefore, the EU is now committing €4 million in Project Red Impact. The objective of the project is to present several alternatives for neutralizing Europe’s nuclear waste. The environmental, economic, and social consequences of the respective alternatives will be studied. Great attention will also be paid to analyzing how waste management is affected by the transmutation process. Red Impact will be coordinated by the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm (KTH). Another Swedish participant is the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company. Major sections of the nuclear power industry and a long line of research institutions from other European countries are also represented. Several of the parties will meet at Oskarshamn in Sweden on Thursday. “Red Impact will hopefully be the kick-off for the important task of neutralizing nuclear waste,” says Waclaw Cudowski, coordinator for the project. More information: www.kth.se/eng/ ***************************************************************** 55 AU ABC: Howard stands firm on radioactive dump site for SA. 18/03/2004. ABC News Online "Australian Broadcasting Corporation Online"> Prime Minister John Howard has defended the proposed national radioactive waste dump planned for outback South Australia. Mr Howard winds up his four-day visit to South Australia today and this morning he was questioned about the dump by a caller to ABC Radio. He says the South Australian site has been determined as the most appropriate place for the dump. "I mean everybody can find a reason why it shouldn't be somewhere but the experts told us that the site identified was the most appropriate and therefore we've accepted their advice," he said. © 2004 Australian Broadcasting Corporation This service may include material from Agence France-Presse (AFP), AAP(International), APTN, Reuters, CNN and ***************************************************************** 56 Whitehaven News: DON'T GIVE US YOUR N-WASTE Published on 18/03/2004 DOUNREAY should keep its low-level nuclear waste and build its own new storage facility as a matter of urgency, says Copeland Council. Any movement of waste from Scotland to West Cumbria would be detrimental to the area, said Coun Brian Dixon (Lab) at Tuesday’s Executive meeting. “It is a subtle way to make this a dumping ground for Britain and for Europe,’’ he said. In response to a recent proposal to move such waste from Dounreay to the Drigg disposal site, the council says any capacity at Drigg will be needed as local decommissioning work takes place at Sellafield. It has told the UKAEA: “Once existing capacity is used at Drigg there should be no assumption that further low-level waste disposal capacity will be made available in Copeland.” The UKAEA has applied to the Scottish Environment Protection Agency to transport solid low-level nuclear waste from Dounreay to BNFL for long-term storage, as the available storage at the Scottish site has run out. The proposal is to move between 10,000 to 12,000 sq metres of waste to Drigg by 2012 at the rate of one or two containers per week. Last year Copeland expressed its concerns to SEPA about similar proposals to move waste from Rosyth to Drigg. Council leader Elaine Woodburn said: “What benefit would there be to Copeland in this – none.’’ [http://www.whitehaven-news.co.uk ***************************************************************** 57 Whitehaven News: BNFL TO CONSTRUCT A BLAST PROOF WALL Published on 18/03/2004 A MASSIVE blast-proof wall is to be built around one of the most potentially dangerous parts of Sellafield. The concrete protective barrier will be built around the plutonium storage vaults and plutonium storage building on the nuclear site. The protection is understood to be designed to offer greater protection against such risks as aircraft impact. BNFL has been reluctant to comment in detail on the subject. A spokesman said: “We have received planning permission to build new structures on the Sellafield site as part of our ongoing pro-active and responsible security enhancements programme. “We naturally take a cautious approach in discussing details of buildings on any of our licensed nuclear sites as it would compromise the effectiveness of security mechanisms to discuss them in detail. “It should however, be recognised that safety and security enhancement programmes are under way at all of the UK's licensed nuclear sites, not only Sellafield." ***************************************************************** 58 Whitehaven News: REPROCESSING BEATS TARGET Published on 11/03/2004 DESPITE industrial action which forced plant shutdown, Sellafield workers have chalked up their best Magnox reprocessing record for years. BNFL say that operators working round the clock have reprocessed more than 1,000 tonnes of spent fuel over the past 12 months – about 100 tonnes above the set target. After the best performance since the mid-1990s, Magnox chief Alan Britcher said: “This is a truly superb performance.” BNFL is investigating an incident involving a worker in a Windscale suit designed to protect him from contamination. The worker lost his air supply while carrying out work in a waste recovery decommissioning facility. He noticed his air supply had stopped and the suit was not fully inflated. However, according to management, it was not necessary for the man to use his emergency breathing tube and he did not suffer any ill effects. Checks showed that he did not receive any contamination. ***************************************************************** 59 KRT Wire: University of California Hits Snags in Las Alamos Business Partner Plan | 03/18/2004 | By Adam Rankin, Albuquerque Journal, N.M. Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Mar. 18--LOS ALAMOS, N.M. - A Los Alamos National Laboratory and University of California initiative to acquire business partners to strengthen laboratory management and prepare for next year's competition to operate the laboratory has hit a snag. LANL associate director Rich Marquez said National Nuclear Security Administration officials objected to plans to acquire a business partner without a competitive process. "We are going to try to find a plan B or plan C, as necessary," he said. Local NNSA officials could not be reached for comment. In January, the University of California Board of Regents gave President Robert Dynes authority to hire outside experts to help with laboratory management. At the time, Robert Foley, the university's vice president for laboratory management, said negotiations were under way with two potential industrial partners. One specializes in dealing with high-hazard chemical and radioactive materials while the other focuses on improving business management. University officials anticipated a partnership would be struck within weeks of the board granting Dynes authority. NNSA's disapproval now means the university and LANL must find a new tack. UC spokesman Chris Harrington would only say negotiations are continuing. "We are in consistent and ongoing discussions with relevant parties and are looking at moving forward on this issue in a constructive manner," he said. Harrington said the goal of working with an industrial partner is to "ensure business and management practices are adequately enhanced at LANL." To see more of the Albuquerque Journal, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to [http://www.abqjournal.com] © 2004, Albuquerque Journal. Distributed by Knight ***************************************************************** 60 Reuters: UN Watchdog, U.S. Want to Clean Up Atomic 'Mess' Thu Mar 18, 2004 01:23 PM ET By Louis Charbonneau WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The head of the U.N. atomic watchdog said on Thursday the United States would help it clean up all the weapons-grade nuclear material spread across the globe to keep it from being used in bombs. International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei met with Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to follow up on discussions he had with President Bush on Wednesday. ElBaradei told reporters after the meeting at the Department of Energy that he and Abraham discussed a number of issues, particularly a plan to clean up highly enriched uranium and plutonium still in civilian sites. "There's about a 100 facilities in 40 countries with research reactors and others that still use highly enriched uranium (HEU). The president agreed that this is unacceptable," ElBaradei said. The atomic energy agency is pushing a plan under which reactors fueled by HEU would be converted to ones using low-enriched uranium, which would not be suitable for a bomb. The weapons-grade material would be evacuated to Russia, the United States or elsewhere. Both the United States and Russia made reactors that used highly enriched uranium, though such reactors have become obsolete. "A lot of it's Russian," ElBaradei said. "There are 21 Russian HEU reactors around the world." However, he said, "Irrespective of whether it's Russian, irrespective of whether it's American, we need to clean up the mess, if you like, clean up the potential threat." Asked who would pay for the recovery of the HEU and conversion of the plants, ElBaradei said: "I don't think the resources are an issue." Earlier this month, the IAEA supervised an airlift to Russia of enriched uranium from a reactor near Tripoli, the Libyan capital. It said the metal was almost pure enough to be used in a nuclear weapon. Libya has agreed to give up its weapons of mass destruction programs. The IAEA has often said the chances of terrorists being able to build a full-scale nuclear weapon were slim. It says the real danger was that terrorists would make a "dirty bomb" -- a conventional bomb laced with radioactive material. A dirty bomb would cause more panic than actual physical damage, nuclear experts say. It would take 55 to 80 pounds of highly enriched uranium to make a conventional nuclear bomb, but a Vienna-based nuclear expert that it would be possible to make a crude nuclear-fission device with "just a few kilos" of HEU. The result would be "a very badly done, but done nuclear weapon," he said. [http://about.reuters.com ***************************************************************** 61 Oak Ridger: Deadline set for K-25 preservation Story last updated at 11:48 a.m. on March 18, 2004 INTERESTED INDIVIDUAL: 'It's extremely important to tell the story of K-25 to future generations.' By: Paul Parson | Oak Ridger Staff [paul.parson@oakridger.com] With a deadline apparently set, efforts are moving forward to preserve the historical significance of the Oak Ridge K-25 site - particularly part of the building that bears its name. "We have until April 2005 to come up with an acceptable plan and identify sources of outside funding," said Susan Gawarecki, executive director of the Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee. Gawarecki was one of several local officials who took part in discussions earlier this week on the issue. Other participants included representatives from the city of Oak Ridge, the Oak Ridge Site-Specific Advisory Board, the state of Tennessee, the Atomic Heritage Foundation and the Oak Ridge Heritage and Preservation Association. In some form or fashion, efforts to preserve a portion of the K-25 building have been going on for several years. Most recently, Ehrenkrantz Eckstut &Kuhn Architects released a document outlining several options with varying costs for saving a portion of the building. The K-25 building covers 40 acres at the K-25 site and is considered one of the "signature facilities" of the Manhattan Project - a secret effort for developing an atomic bomb during World War II. "It's extremely important to tell the story of K-25 to future generations," said Bill Wilcox, a member of the Heritage and Preservation Association. That sentiment has been echoed by several community members. However, the K-25 site is currently in the midst of a major accelerated cleanup effort that will result in an industrial park at the location. Set for completion in 2008, the cleanup work involves the demolition of several facilities, and the K-25 building is on the list of structures scheduled to come down. During a meeting Tuesday on the preservation effort, officials discussed a draft agreement that would allow for the preservation of nine small, 1940s era buildings at the K-25 site. "This will allow the accelerated cleanup to proceed without significant delays," said Gawarecki, whose organization closely monitors Department of Energy cleanup efforts. Gawarecki said officials also discussed Tuesday identification of important artifacts located in the K-25 building and how to preserve them. In addition, some local officials offered other options to go along with those identified in the Ehrenkrantz Eckstut &Kuhn document. Wilcox, who reportedly suggested the other scenarios, opted not to discuss them with The Oak Ridger. "(The architects) gave us a lot of food for thought, especially with the different themes and how the Manhattan Project could be presented to the public," said Gawarecki. "Although the costs are not realistic, they are structured to be a general basis of comparison." Ultimately, the architects ruled out saving the entire K-25 building, which currently still contains residual uranium and some other nuclear materials as well as uranium processing equipment and hazardous materials such as asbestos. The architects did choose three so-called schemes for future consideration: * "Scheme 1B" - Considered the least expensive, this involves the demolition of the entire K-25 building. A small sample of the equipment will be saved and displayed elsewhere. The original footprint of the building will be recreated in pavement, and the story of the K-25 site will be told at a new visitor's center. * "Scheme 3A" - This option assumes that all of the building except the slab and a section measuring 350 feet by 400 feet - 9 percent of the total structure - will be demolished. One piece of equipment that would be decontaminated and reinstalled would be the Roosevelt Cell - a piece of operating equipment that was spruced up for a planned visit by President Franklin D. Roosevelt that never occurred. The interior of the structure will be clean and able to accept visitors. Exhibit materials that explain K-25's operations could be placed in this structure while other artifacts would be housed in a new visitor's center. * "Scheme 3B" - This option calls for the removal of the entire building except for the slab and an area measuring 550 feet by 400 feet - 13 percent of the total structure. The remaining area will not be decontaminated. Visitors will be able to view the building and equipment through special glass barriers. A visitor's center is also called for in this scheme. Cost estimates for tackling the three schemes are $475.6 million for 1B, $537 million for 3A and $501 million for 3B. Annual operational costs for the three schemes are $10 million for 1B, $19.3 million for 3A and $24.6 million for 3B. Cindy Kelly, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Atomic Heritage Foundation, also participated in local discussions this week on the K-25 preservation effort. Kelly's organization has been working to authorize a study on the inclusion of the Manhattan Project sites in the National Park System. The designation could increase tourism and help guarantee that some of the Manhattan Project heritage and facilities would be preserved. ***************************************************************** 62 Oak Ridger: Tool detects nuclear threats Story last updated at 12:13 p.m. on March 18, 2004 EVENT: Instrument will be unveiled Monday afternoon. By: Paul Parson | Oak Ridger Staff paul.parson@oakridger.com [paul.parson@oakridger.com] A new device will essentially snoop out nuclear threats. The Detective will provide first responders - hazardous materials teams as well as police and fire personnel - and government authorities, such as customs inspectors, with the ability to quickly screen objects for potential dangerous nuclear material and determine their threat, according to Richard Bly, marketing services manager of AMETEK Inc. The portable, battery-operated instrument will be manufactured by Oak Ridge-based ORTEC, which is owned by AMETEK - a global manufacturer of electronic instruments and electric motors. Officials will unveil the Detective during a ceremony from 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. Monday at the AMETEK facility, 801 S. Illinois Ave. U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-3rd District, is scheduled to attend the event. Officials said the aftermath of Sept. 11 resulted in an urgent need for many types of improved instrumentation to fight illicit trafficking of nuclear materials in a variety of scenarios. ***************************************************************** 63 News-Miner: Galena eyes energy options Fairbanks Daily News-Miner · 200 North Cushman Street · Fairbanks, AK · 99707 · (907) 456-6661 [http://www.news-miner.com/] March 18, 2004 Fairbanks, AK Staff from the U.S. Department of Energy will be working in cooperation with the University of Alaska Fairbanks to examine long-term energy solutions for Galena, according to city manager Marvin Yoder at a town hall meeting on the topic last month. Yoder has been looking for ways to quell the rising cost of electricity in the village, which is 28 cents per kilowatt-hour. Among the possible solutions are an upgrade to the city's diesel generator system, a switch to coal, coal bed methane or alternative energies like solar power, hydropower or a nuclear battery an idea presented by Toshiba last summer. On paper, Toshiba's 4S micronuclear power plant could lower the cost of energy by more than 75 percent with little capital cost to the city, if the community allows Toshiba to build the prototype in its backyard. Toshiba hopes to have a 4S system operational by the end of the decade, but the cost of testing and licensing the prototype to the satisfaction of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could keep it from getting off the ground. In 2001, the Baker Institute for Public Policy at Rice University released working papers that examined the 4S system and three similar reactors. The report was co-authored by Neil Brown, a nuclear engineer at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. In a phone interview, Brown explained that in addition to being smaller than most reactors, the 4S also differs from conventional thermal reactors, which use water as a coolant. The 4S is a sodium-cooled fast spectrum reactor; its radioactive core heats liquid sodium that is then directed to a steam generator to produce electricity. According to Brown, there are 21 sodium-cooled fast reactors around the world, including Japan's MONJU. Toshiba was one of four companies that made up a joint enterprise that constructed MONJU. The design of MONJU began in 1968 and construction finally got under way in 1985. The plant went online in 1994, but was shut down after an accidental sodium leak and fire occurred in late 1995 while the plant was operating on low power, well below its 280 megawatt capacity. No radiation leaked, but community concerns have kept MONJU shut down, despite pushes for a restart. "MONJU has definitely not been a success," said Paul Gunter, a reactor specialist with the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Washington, D.C. Gunter said that experience with sodium-cooled reactors in the United States has not been much better. "The main concern (with this type of reactor) is that sodium and water have a tremendous explosive reaction. There was another near accident in Detroit at Fermi Unit One in 1966 resulting from loose parts." It took nearly four years to repair the reactor at Fermi Unit One, which was only operated intermittently before being decommissioned in the mid-1970s. Toshiba representatives say the system is nothing like the infamous nuclear power plants of the past. Rather, it is more comparable to a "nuclear battery," which is self-contained and automated without any moving parts. At the heart of the 4S system is a log-sized uranium core, which would generate power for 30 years before needing to be disposed of and replaced. Brown said the reactor is similar to the first submarine reactors and that Toshiba's design includes inherent safety characteristics. "(The design) allows it to be a low-pressure, self-cooling reactor," he said. Other communities like Unalaska also have shown an interest in the 4S. Yoder told Galena residents that the Department of Energy should be able to present its findings this summer. He also stressed that it could be a few more years before the time comes when the community would need to make a final decision on the Toshiba system or another option. Eric Mack is a freelance writer in Galena. His column appears weekly in the News-Miner. ©2004 MediaNews Group, Inc. and Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, Inc. ***************************************************************** 64 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 14:24:08 -0800 (PST) VOICES: Nuclear power Toronto Star - Toronto,Ontario,Canada A report into Ontario's electricity supply is calling for an expanded nuclear power base. We asked you what you think of the idea ... See all stories on this topic: US to stop use of nuclear raw materials in civilian programs Xinhua - China ... Agency (IAEA) Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei said here Thursday that the United States is work on an "action plan" designed to stop the use of raw nuclear ... See all stories on this topic: CHINA ’ s Nuclear Ties In These Times - USA Bejing—Documents declassified March 6 indicate that while President Bush was crusading against Iraq’s mythical nuclear program, three other “axis of evil ... See all stories on this topic: NUCLEAR labs cut training for guards The Argus - Fremont,CA,USA WASHINGTON -- Nuclear weapons plants and labs have reduced training for guards responsible for repelling terrorist attacks, the Energy Department's internal ... See all stories on this topic: ONTARIO needs nuclear boost, Manley says Toronto Star - Toronto,Ontario,Canada Well-run nuclear plants will be central to meeting future power needs in Canada’s most populous province, former finance minister John Manley said today in ... See all stories on this topic: PAKISTAN: inside the nuclear closet Open Democracy - USA ... The deepest reason for Musharraf’s current satisfaction is the way that his treatment of Pakistan’s hugely popular nuclear hero, Abdul Qadeer Khan ... See all stories on this topic: UN briefs US on nuclear controls BBC News - London,England,UK The US and the UN's nuclear watchdog have agreed to work on new rules to curb nuclear proliferation, the UN body's chief Mohamed ElBaradei says. ... See all stories on this topic: FOUR nuclear power units to be launched in Russia by 2008 ITAR-TASS - Moscow,Russia NETESHIN, the Khmelnitsky region, March 18 (Itar-Tass) - Four new nuclear power units will begin operation in Russia before 2008, General Director of the ... See all stories on this topic: IRAN president hits at US over nuclear agency 'pressure' Financial Times - London,England,UK Mr Khatami said Iran would co-operate with the IAEA only "as long as our interests require" and would not give up its right to develop the whole nuclear fuel ... See all stories on this topic: GERON Receives Favorable Ruling in Nuclear Transfer Patent ... Business Wire (press release) - USA ... Worcester, Mass. ("ACT"). The decision finds all claims in the issued ACT nuclear transfer patent to be unpatentable. All motions ... 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/ ***************************************************************** 65 Universe Today: NASA and Department of Energy Working on Nuclear Reactor [http://www.universetoday.com/ Summary - (Mar 18, 2004) NASA and the US Department of Energy announced this week that they will be working together to develop a nuclear reactor system for space exploration. One goal for this partnership will be to develop the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO) mission, which will visit and examine Jupiter's three icy moons. The reactor will provide the electricity for a high-powered ion engine, which will allow JIMO to get into orbit around each moon and then out again. Image credit: NASA/JPL [http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/jimo/] NASA has a new partner in its mission to explore the universe and search for life. The Department of Energy's (DOE) Naval Reactors (NR) Program joins NASA in its effort to investigate and develop space nuclear power and propulsion technologies for civilian applications. These activities could enable unprecedented space exploration missions and scientific return unachievable with current technology. NR brings 50-plus years of practical experience in developing safe, rugged, reliable, compact and long-lived reactor systems designed to operate in unforgiving environments. NR is a joint DOE and Department of the Navy organization responsible for all aspects of naval nuclear propulsion. The partnership is responsible for developing the first NASA spacecraft, the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO), that will take advantage of a nuclear-reactor energy source for exploring our solar system. JIMO will visit Jupiter's three icy moons, Ganymede, Callisto and Europa. These icy worlds, in particular Europa, are believed to have liquid-water oceans, under a thick layer of ice on their surfaces, which could potentially harbor life. The reactor system will provide substantially more electrical power. This will greatly enhance the capability of ion-drive propulsion, the number and variety of scientific instruments on the spacecraft, the rate of data transmission, and orbital maneuvering around Jupiter's moons. NASA sought this partnership because NR has an enduring commitment to safety and environmental stewardship that is a requirement for an undertaking of this magnitude, " said NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe. "This partnership will help ensure the safe development and use of a space-fission reactor to enable unparalleled science and discovery as we explore the solar system and beyond. This work is an integral piece of the President's exploration agenda," Administrator O'Keefe said. NASA, through its newly created Office of Exploration Systems, expects that several reactor modules of the same or similar design as that required for JIMO would be developed for use on future exploration missions. NR will direct and oversee the development, design and delivery of, and operational support for these civilian reactor modules. The Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology, another DOE organization with extensive nuclear-reactor development experience, will retain responsibility for supporting NASA's other space nuclear technology efforts, including long-term space-reactor science and technology development not associated with NR's responsibilities. All activities in support of NASA will be conducted as part of NR's civilian responsibilities for the National Nuclear Security Administration, a semi-autonomous agency of DOE. Activities in support of NASA are not part of NR's Navy responsibilities or any Department of Defense activities. This partnership with NASA is consistent with NR's history of supporting fission-reactor work for civilian applications, including the first U.S. commercial production of electricity from nuclear power at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station. NASA will fund all work under the partnership. Specific roles and responsibilities will be defined in Memoranda of Understanding and Agreements currently being drafted by NASA and NR. NR and the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy will also review capabilities and facilities at DOE laboratories outside NR for consideration in support of JIMO and other Project Prometheus activities. Established in 2003, Project Prometheus is developing radioisotope electric power sources for use in space and on planets or moons, as well as new fission-reactor power sources for advanced missions into deep space requiring higher power levels for science observations, propulsion, communications and life support systems. More information on Project Prometheus is available at: http://spacescience.nasa.gov/missions/prometheus.htm [http://spacescience.nasa.gov/missions/prometheus.htm] More information on the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter is available at: http://spacescience.nasa.gov/missions/JIMO.pdf [http://spacescience.nasa.gov/missions/JIMO.pdf] Original Source: NASA News Release Advertise Copyright © 1999-2004 Universe Today, All rights reserved. - ***************************************************************** 66 AZoM: EU Announces Hydrogen Fuel Cell Initiatives European Research Commission [http://europa.eu.int] has presented current and future key EU initiatives for a transition from a fossil fuel-based economy to a hydrogen-based one at a "Fuels for a future generation" conference held in Brussels. Some 100 million of EU funding, matched by an equivalent amount of private investment, is currently being awarded to research and demonstration projects for hydrogen and fuel cell after the first call for proposals of the 6th EU Research Framework Programme. This will be reinforced via further calls for R&D proposals worth a public and private investment of 300 million (EU funding 150 million). These projects represent the initial phase and form a basis for the large scale "Quick Start" initiative for hydrogen production and use, which is being launched jointly by Vice-President Loyola de Palacio and Commissioner Busquin. The "European Growth Initiative" earmarks an indicative 2.8 bn public and private funding for these partnerships over the next ten years. The Commission is thus helping to implement the ambitious vision of the European Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Platform, which held its first general assembly on 20 January 2004, under the aegis of Commission President Romano Prodi, and is now developing coherent European research and deployment strategies. Hydrogen and fuel cells, what is it about? Hydrogen is a clean and storable energy vector that can be produced from a variety of primary energy sources (including fossil, renewable and nuclear). It can be converted into electrical and mechanical power and heat using both conventional combustion energy converters, or by the so called "fuel cell energy converters". Hydrogen fuelled fuel cells are intrinsically clean, very efficient, electro-chemical energy converters that can be adapted to a wide range of applications such as stationary combined heat and power generation, vehicle propulsion and portable and micro-power devices (e.g. laptops). Hydrogen and fuel cells together offer great potential to address the problems of energy supply security and mitigating the effects of climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels. A further 300 million in 2004-2005 The first quarter of this year is seeing the launch of many new research projects for hydrogen and fuel cells. After the first call for proposals of FP6 the Commission is now awarding ten contracts worth about 62 million of EU funding in the field of hydrogen and six contracts worth 30 million for fuel cells (see Tables attached in Annex I ; these contracts involve similar amounts of private funding). The Commission intends to further reinforce research in hydrogen and fuel cell technologies in the remaining part of the Framework Programme with joint and co-ordinated calls for R&D proposals as the first phase of the "Quick Start" hydrogen initiative that will provide a strong basis for the hydrodgen partnerships for large scale research and lighthouse demonstration projects. These further calls could be launched as early as July 2004 and be drawn from all relevant priorities of the Framework Programme, including energy, aeronautics, surface transport, nanotechnologies, materials and production technologies. These calls could be worth a public and private investment of 300 million (EC funding 150 million). These activities should provide a fresh multi-disciplinary approach aimed at achieving real technology breakthroughs in materials and processes for hydrogen production, storage and distribution as well as for fuel cells and their applications in transport and power generation, to put Europe at the forefront of these technologies. They will also establish a European test framework for hydrogen technologies ready for demonstration. Progress of the European Hydrogen and fuel Cell Technology Platform Substantial progress has been made since the establishment of the Advisory Council of the European Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Platform in December 2003 and the general assembly of the Platform held in January 2004. Co-operation has been established with EU Member States to co-ordinate national research activities in this field, following the recommendations of the Platform. The Platform steering panels are now starting work to identify the detailed targets and priorities for research on hydrogen and fuel cells and to develop a deployment strategy, addressing key issues and actions needed for bringing hydrogen and fuel cells successfully to the market place. A Strategic Research Agenda and a Deployment Strategy should be delivered by the end of this year and they will be a major input for the definition of the subsequent phases of the Quick Start hydrogen initiative. Progress of the Hydrogen "Quick Start" public-private partnerships In July 2003 the Commission launched the European Initiative for Growth to boost EU economic development. As part of this initiative, the Commission presented in November 2003 a "Quick Start Programme" with a list of public/private investment projects for developing European infrastructures, networks and knowledge. The aim is to encourage the creation of public/private partnerships in co-operation with the industry, the research community, and other partners, including notably the European Investment Bank to leverage finance. Member States should also contribute to these partnerships. For more information on hydrogen [http://www.azom.com/SearchResults.asp?MaterialKeyWord=Hydrogen] Posted 18th march 2004 AZoM" - Metals, Ceramics, Polymers, Composites, An Engineers Resource...Copyright © 2004 by AZoM".com Pty.Ltd ***************************************************************** 67 Press Action: Duck Hunting, the High Court, Corruption and Slam Dunk [http://www.democracynow.org] March 18, 2004 By Tracy McLellan [http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/00_columns/121200.htm] Antonin Scalia has announced he will not recuse himself from the Supreme Court case in which it is to be determined whether or not Dick Cheney must make public the notes of his secret energy task force that formulated Bush energy policy in the spring and summer of 2001. Cheney's task force met on scores of occasions with executives from the fossil fuels and nuclear industries, including former Enron Chairman Ken Lay several times, but with nary an advocate of consumers, the environment, or the solar and alternative energy industries. Only weeks after the Supreme Court agreed to take the case, which had been making its way through the appellate courts, Cheney and Scalia chummed around on a private duck-hunting trip in Louisiana. Cheney's rationale for keeping his notes secret, he says, is that he doesn't want to jeopardize future officers of the executive branch in their ability to hold similar clandestine proceedings, which would interfere with their ability to formulate policy. Cheney has been silent about bribery and collusion and has not given even a semblance of an argument as to why, in a democracy, secret energy policy deliberations are necessary. Who can blame him? With our media, reasons and arguments are unnecessary. Don't you love surprises? When Bush's energy policy was announced, it was an extended commitment to polluting fossil fuels, including tens of billions of dollars in subsidies and tax credits to the already stinking petroleum industry, resurrection of moribund nuclear power, with a token handful of dollars for solar and alternative energy sources. There was nary a word about conservation, which would, after all, interrupt the massive profits of Bush and Cheney's friends, nor a peep about the environment. Being a perjured judge goes hand-in-hand with being a lousy writer and Scalia does not disappoint. His written decision in this case sounds like the ramblings of a skid row drunk. To call him a liar is to pay the scoundrel a compliment. In short, he's an unhinged lunatic. How his kind has come to positions of power and respect in what is supposed to be the greatest country in the world and the standard bearer for democracy is an issue so far out of the pale, only history knows — and she ain't speaking just yet. Scalia is a piece of a puzzle of an administration completely out of control, a gang of thugs and neo-conservative extremists who make the time of the robber barons of the late 19th century and the Teapot Dome era seem like the golden age of philanthropy. I cannot even decipher Scalia's lie in order to unravel it. Here is part of what he said in his written decision: "Recusal would in my judgment harm the court. If I were to withdraw from this case, it would be because some of the press has argued that the vice president would suffer political damage if he should lose this appeal. ... But since political damage often comes from the government's losing official-action suits; and since political damage can readily be characterized as a stain on reputation and integrity; recusing in the face of such charges would give elements of the press a veto over participation of any justices who had social contacts with, or were even known to be friends of, a named official." According to Scalia, his recusal may, of all things, damage the vice president. Another surprise. Some people might call that justice. And really the law is not at issue here. A democracy is, by definition, of the people, by the people, and for the people; not of the secret energy task force, by the secret energy task force, and for the secret energy task force. The people have a right, not to speak of an obligation, to know what went on in those secret tête-à-têtes. Worse, Scalia goes on to reproach the mainstream press poodle as if it is a badger in reporting on corruption of unimaginable proportions, rather than extolling it as state-cheerleader and Ministry of Propaganda, which would have been more accurate, let alone honest. Scalia says critical reporting threatens the appearance of judicial integrity on the high court and insists his duck-hunting trip doesn't. Scalia went duck hunting and palled around with Dick Cheney. Now he is back at his job on the high court, as is Dick Cheney back at his or at a secret, undisclosed location. Soon Cheney's case will come before Scalia and the Supreme Court. I haven't the first idea why anyone would think there would be any bias in his decision. Tracy McLellan is a writer and activist living in the suburbs south of Chicago, and can be reached at [tracymclellan@netzero.net] . Posted March 18, 2004 Comments (0) Address Mark Hand P.O. Box 326 Arlington, VA 22210 Copyright © 2004, Mark Hand. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************