***************************************************************** 06/15/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.142 ***************************************************************** 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 CNN.com: Cheney claims ties between Saddam, al Qaeda - 2 Guardian Unlimited: Europe Seeks Iran Nuclear Reprimand 3 New York Times: Agency Presses Iran to Disclose Nuclear Activities 4 BBC: Iran's nuclear anger 5 baltimoresun.com: U.S. wants to press Iran over nuclear program 6 AFP: Europeans urge swift conclusion of Iran nuclear probe 7 National Post: ElBaradei harshs Iran 8 albawaba.com: Iran dismisses nuclear watchdog criticism on probe del 9 Las Vegas SUN: Europe Seeks Iran Nuclear Reprimand 10 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Toward real detente 11 UPI: N.Korea talks to open next week: Seoul - 12 Korea Herald: N.K. leader wants better ties with Seoul 13 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Kyodo News Agency: Talks on North Korea's 14 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Fmr. President Highlights Importance of P 15 Xinhuanet: New round of 6-way talks to start next week in Beijing 16 KoreaTimes: Nukes Block NK Leader's Road to Seoul 17 Newsday: China to Hold Talks on North Korea Nukes 18 US: [CMEP] Nuke Waste Action / Groups Urge NM Gov. to Oppose Nuke 19 US: Moscow Times: Questioning Bush's Foreign Policy 20 Japan To Go Nuclear? 21 OECD: New 2003 nuclear energy data just released 22 UPI: China calls U.S. report Cold War falsehood - 23 BBC: 'Poor' infrastructure under fire 24 BBC: French power strikers target PM 25 Slovak news: Economy minister predicts 2009 energy crisis 26 IAEA: Introductory Statement to the Board of Governors 27 Sify: 'Nuke spy' deported on mere suspicion 28 ThisisLondon: Government 'failing' on energy crisis NUCLEAR REACTORS 29 US: Arizona Republic: Palo Verde shutdown has utilities scrambling 30 US: Free Lance-Star: Nuclear energy potential? Just a lot of major p 31 US: SignOnSanDiego.com: Nuclear regulators inspect Palo Verde, plant 32 Interfax: Russia to continue building nuclear plant in Iran 33 US: San Luis Obispo Tribune: Public tours of Diablo Canyon plant may 34 US: NRC: NRC Sends Augmented Inspection Team to Palo Verde 35 US: John Blair: Nukes Are No Solution to Global Warming 36 US: foxreno.com: Glitch Shuts Down Nuke Plant; Triggers SJ Blackout 37 BNN: Thyroid cancer high since Chernobyl 38 US: NRC: NRC Seeks Topics for Upcoming 17th Annual Regulatory Inform 39 US: Arizona Daily Sun: Power grid disturbance shuts down nuke plant 40 US: PRN: Americans Need New Nuclear Energy, Taylor Says 41 US: The Courier: Arkansas Nuclear One's Unit 1 taken off line 42 US: NRC: Southern California Edison Company, San Onofre Nuclear 43 US: AZR: Feds to probe failure of Palo Verde's backup generator NUCLEAR SAFETY 44 [du-list] BCC: confirming evidence of DU weapons from spent 45 US: [du-list] RE: BCC: confirming evidence of DU weapons from 46 [du-list] DU in the news 15th June 04 - Oakridge and Warsaw 47 U.S. Trucks Carrying Radioactive Materials Intercepted In 48 US: AP Wire: Officials practice 'what-if' incident involving nuclear 49 US: House of Rep.: House Debate on Workers Compensation NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 50 US: Salt Lake Tribune: On the Stump: Stop demonizing N-waste, says T 51 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Bridgewater faults Swallow on N-waste 52 US: Las Vegas RJ: Reid expands hold on nominees (to NRC) 53 BBC: Radioactive waste train derailed 54 Las Vegas SUN: State keeps close watch on Yucca data 55 Las Vegas SUN: Reid pushes to get aide on nuclear panel 56 US: Tri-City Herald: State: Shipments to Hanford may violate court o 57 US: AP Wire: Nelson introduces bill to make all nuclear waste compac 58 PRN: LES Reaffirms Commitment to State Participation in Licensing Pr NUCLEAR WEAPONS 59 US: IPS-English DISARMAMENT:U.S. Nuclear Policy Bombarded by 60 US: IC: Time to Bring Back the Nuclear Freeze 61 asahi.com: U.S. should set an example by changing its stance. US DEPT. OF ENERGY 62 Guardian Unlimited: DOE Official in Charge of Cleanup Resigns 63 KIFI: Detecting Destruction at the INEEL 64 U.S. Newswire: DOE Sec. Abraham Announces Community Service 65 Times-News: INEEL ready to hire for expanded research mission 66 Hawk Eye: Plant alums listen, question 67 KATU 2: Hanford reactor named to endangered historic property list OTHER NUCLEAR 68 Google News Alert - nuclear 69 Salt Lake Tribune: Confirmation hearings coach now in the hot seat 70 EnergyPulse: Renewable Fraud ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 CNN.com: Cheney claims ties between Saddam, al Qaeda - Jun 14, 2004 ORLANDO, Florida (AP) -- Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that Saddam Hussein had "long-established ties" with al Qaeda, an assertion that has been repeatedly challenged by some policy experts and lawmakers. The vice president offered no details backing up his claim of a link between Saddam and al Qaida. "He was a patron of terrorism," Cheney said of Hussein during a speech before The James Madison Institute, a conservative think-tank based in Florida. "He had long established ties with al Qaeda." In making the case for war in Iraq, Bush administration officials frequently cited what they said were Saddam's decade-long contacts with al-Qaeda operatives. They stopped short of claiming that Iraq was directly involved in the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, but critics say Bush officials left that impression with the American public. Cheney listed what he described as the accomplishments of the Bush administration in the war on terror, including fledgling democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq; and the decision by Libya's leader, Moammar Gadhafi, to abandon his nuclear ambitions. Sen. Bob Graham, D-Florida, countered that the Bush administration had "a sorry record in the war on terror." Graham, former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, spoke Sunday in a conference call arranged by John Kerry's presidential campaign in anticipation of Cheney's speech. The State Department said last week it was wrong in stating that terrorism declined worldwide last year in a report that the Bush administration initially cited as evidence it was succeeding against terrorism, Graham noted. Both the number of incidents and the toll in victims increased sharply, the department acknowledged. Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This ***************************************************************** 2 Guardian Unlimited: Europe Seeks Iran Nuclear Reprimand From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday June 15, 2004 2:16 PM AP Photo VIE108 By ANDREA DUDIKOVA Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Europe's major powers floated a finely tuned draft resolution Tuesday that reprimands Iran for delaying an investigation into its suspect nuclear activities but refrains from direct threats of sanctions. Even without such threats, the toughly worded document under consideration at a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency maintains pressure on Iran to come clean on aspects of what was a covert nuclear program for nearly 20 years until discovered two years ago. The new draft, written by France, Germany and Britain and seen by The Associated Press, toned down demands on Iran to abort plans to build a heavy water reactor and slightly modified tough language taking Tehran to task for hampering the IAEA probe. But the overall wording remained tough. One key phrase ``deplored'' the fact that Iran's cooperation ``has not been complete'' - strong terminology in diplomatic language. Still, the draft contained no deadline or ``trigger mechanism'' as sought by the United States and its allies that could set into motion possible sanctions on Iran if it continued its foot dragging past a certain date. Delegates, who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity, said that the draft was unlikely to undergo major changes before being formally submitted for a vote later in the week. Earlier Tuesday, Iran rejected the IAEA criticism. ``We have no plans to produce weapons and all of our activities are for peaceful purposes and nothing is wrong,'' Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi told reporters in Istanbul, Turkey. In a letter to the leaders of the European powers that drafted the text, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami warned them against giving in to ``U.S. pressure.'' Quoting from the letter, the daily Sharq cited Khatami as saying that ``Iran's cooperation with the international community for the peaceful use of nuclear energy'' was at stake. But in Vienna, Kenneth Brill, the chief U.S. delegate to the IAEA, said Washington remained convinced that Iran was ``trying to hide ... a weapons program.'' As a meeting of the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors opened Monday, the agency's chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, reflected the general frustrations with Iran's delaying tactics, saying his agency's probe ``can't go on forever.'' The agency is mainly concerned with ambiguous, missing or withheld information on the scope of Iran's uranium enrichment program, and the source of enriched uranium found inside the country. ``These are two issues where we need accelerated and proactive cooperation,'' ElBaradei told reporters. ``The way they have been engaging us on these issues has been less than satisfactory.'' In Washington, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said ElBaradei's views provided ``further evidence that Iran's troubling lack of cooperation with IAEA continues.'' He said the United States believes IAEA's board must adopt a strong resolution that calls on Iran to cooperate with the agency and to resolve all the outstanding issues regarding its nuclear program. Asked why the United States at present does not think Iran should be referred to the U.N. Security Council over its lack of cooperation with the IAEA, a move that could lead to formal U.N. sanctions against the country, Boucher replied that the agency's investigation and verification work in Iran must continue for the foreseeable future. ``We think the agency has continued to find out things about the program, to conduct valuable investigations, to continue to bring facts to light and to continue to keep the pressure on Iran to comply,'' Boucher said in Washington. Under growing international pressure, Iran has suspended uranium enrichment and stopped building centrifuges. It also has allowed IAEA inspections of its nuclear facilities without notice. Iran has rejected U.S. allegations that its nuclear program is a smoke screen for making weapons. Instead, the country says its uranium-enrichment - which could be used to make bombs, once fully operational - is geared solely toward generating electricity. The IAEA report, written by ElBaradei, says Iran inquired about buying thousands of magnets for centrifuges on the black market - casting doubt on Iranian assertions that its P-2 centrifuge program was purely experimental and not aimed for full uranium enrichment. On the traces of enriched uranium - which include minute amounts at weapons-grade levels - Tehran says they were not domestically produced but inadvertently imported in purchases through the nuclear black market. The IAEA's investigators have not been able to fully test that claim because Pakistan, the main source of the equipment, has blocked free access to its nuclear material. --- On the Net: International Atomic Energy Agency, http://www.iaea.org Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 3 New York Times: Agency Presses Iran to Disclose Nuclear Activities By MARK LANDLER Published: June 15, 2004 [.] International Atomic Energy Agency (iaea.org) [http://www.iaea.org/] [F] RANKFURT, June 14 - Frustrated with Iran's "changing and at times contradictory" stories about its nuclear program, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency demanded Monday that Tehran provide a full accounting "within the next few months." The remarks by the director, Mohamed ElBaradei, were uncharacteristically blunt, according to diplomats meeting in Vienna this week to review Iran's compliance with the United Nations watchdog agency. Iran is likely to be sharply criticized in a resolution that the United States and other members of the agency's board are scheduled to vote on later this week. The White House said it shared Dr. ElBaradei's "serious concerns," and urged Iran to "come clean and abide by its international agreements." The American ambassador to the agency, Kenneth C. Brill, said Dr. ElBaradei's statement "showed how clear the contrast is between what the Iranians say and what the I.A.E.A. finds the reality is." The Bush administration welcomed the director general's statement, and officials expressed hope that it would add to pressure from Europe and Russia - as well as the United States - to force Iran to disclose its nuclear activities. They said they would leave open the possibility of seeking action at the United Nations Security Council if current efforts failed. "Our view is that the I.A.E.A. has documented already 18 years of clandestine nuclear activities in Iran," said Richard A. Boucher, the State Department spokesman. "Tehran has repeatedly failed to declare significant troubling aspects of its nuclear program. It's interfered with and suspended inspections, and it's failed to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency in resolving outstanding issues related to its program.'' Much of the debate in Vienna has centered on whether the agency should impose a deadline for Iran to cooperate - something the United States has sought. Dr. ElBaradei has not called for a deadline, though his statement to the agency's board suggested he was running short of patience. Nor is it considered likely that the resolution, which is being drafted by Britain, France and Germany, will set a deadline, a diplomat involved in the deliberations said. Iran says it has cooperated with the agency and is trying to soften the resolution. It insists its activities are geared toward producing commercial nuclear energy. But feelings toward Tehran have soured in the wake of fresh disclosures, according to diplomats. The agency said in a recent report that Iran was continuing to produce parts for centrifuges, which can be used to enrich uranium to a grade suitable for weapons. It is also preparing to make uranium hexafluoride, the material that is fed into centrifuges to produce enriched uranium. Dr. ElBaradei said it was "premature to make a judgment" about whether Iran's program was military. But the agency has been in an increasingly tense standoff with the Iranians in the two years since it began investigating a program that Iran covered up for nearly two decades. Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company ***************************************************************** 4 BBC: Iran's nuclear anger Last Updated: Tuesday, 15 June, 2004 [Iranian press graphic] The Iranian press has reacted angrily to comments on Iran's nuclear programme by the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei. Mr ElBaradei said on Monday that Tehran was not co-operating satisfactorily with the IAEA. Some papers accuse the agency of following policies set out by the United States and Europe, while another says Iran should consider withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. By reading the report that the Americans had prepared for him and in his name, Mohamed ElBaradei has destroyed what remained of the world prestige of the IAEA and proved that this agency is a tool in the hands of satanic powers, which they use to pursue their objectives and programmes. Jomhuri-ye Eslami From the point of view of many political observers and diplomats, ElBaradei's requests encompassed the demands made of him by America and the three European countries, notably Britain, in the course of the past two weeks... Some people [in Iran] are in favour of breaking relations not only with the IAEA but also with Germany, France and Britain, as the compilers of the [IAEA] board of governors' resolution. Others are advising the government that Iran should not give up its only negotiating partner, that is, Europe... In the opinion of these analysts, Iran and Europe do have the potential and capability to ultimately resolve the problems between them and, in reality, shunning Europe would only lead to bringing Europe and America closer together. Etemaad Perhaps it will be difficult for those who had confidence in the mediation of the three European countries over Iran's nuclear defiance to accept the fact that they have been lowered into the depths with America's rope of deceit and the Zionists' lobby... There is no doubt that the ultimate solution is to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty... Examining the direction of our country's foreign policies towards European countries such as Britain, France and Germany could be one of the concerns of the fundamentalist seventh Majlis. Kayhan This is the first time that the Europeans are using the words "Stop" and "End" [in the draft resolution] and Iran has reacted to this... After the publication of the draft of ElBaradei's report, the secretary of the Supreme National Security Council [Hasan Rowhani] declared that the report did not contain anything new from the technical standpoint and that, in Iran's view, the file is closed. Sharq The head of the Leader's Office, Hojjatoleslam Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani, said that using nuclear technology for peaceful purposes is the right of the Iranian nation. He added that the hegemonic powers are worried about Iran's progress in all scientific fields... Mohammadi Golpayegani pointed out that they deceive naive people in such a way that these people say Iran should come to terms with the US. "It is naivety to presume that if we were to obey the US, we will retain our dignity and independence," he added. Iran Daily [http://www.monitor.bbc.co.uk] , based in Caversham in southern England, selects and translates information from radio, television, press, news agencies and the Internet from 150 countries in more than 70 languages. ***************************************************************** 5 baltimoresun.com: U.S. wants to press Iran over nuclear program Officials hope U.N. report rouses member nations By Mark Matthews Sun National Staff Originally published June 15, 2004 WASHINGTON - Alarmed that Iran may be getting closer to producing nuclear weapons, the Bush administration hopes to mobilize international pressure this week by spotlighting fresh concerns by the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency. But a U.S. official acknowledged yesterday that the United States is limited to trying to exploit Iran's fear of being viewed as an international outlaw. Hopes of getting the U.N. Security Council to impose sanctions against Iran appear doomed for the foreseeable future by the prospect of vetoes by Russia and China, said a U.S. official involved in efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear arms. At the same time, a Washington analyst who closely follows Iran warned that Tehran might try to exploit the turmoil in neighboring Iraq as a way to force the United States to ease pressure on Iran to halt its nuclear program. IAEA criticism The IAEA's board of governors, meeting this week in Vienna, Austria, is expected to issue what a Western diplomat described as "very firm" criticism of Tehran for failing to cooperate with the nuclear watchdog agency's inspectors. The agency's director-general, Mohamed ElBaradei, faulted Iran yesterday for "less than satisfactory" cooperation. In a report to the board, ElBaradei appeared to reject Iran's explanation for traces of weapons-grade nuclear materials found during inspections. Iran claims that the traces came from contaminated equipment imported from abroad. But ElBaradei said Tehran's information "has not been sufficient to resolve this complex matter." ElBaradei contended that Iran has given "changing and at times contradictory" data to inspectors about its efforts to import and manufacture centrifuges, which can be used to produce weapons-grade uranium. He said it is "essential" to resolve gaps and discrepancies in Iran's nuclear program "within the next few months." U.S. officials were encouraged by ElBaradei's statement, which they took as a sign of growing impatience with Iran at the IAEA and among major European powers. Last year, Britain, France and Germany won Iran's agreement to give inspectors a full accounting of its nuclear program, which Tehran has said is intended to generate electricity, not produce weapons. U.S. diplomats say there are increasing signs that Europeans agree that Iran is trying to hide a nuclear arms program. One said Iran's foreign minister, Kamal Kharrazi, didn't help his country's relations with the IAEA when he declared that Iran "has a high technical capability and has to be recognized by the international community as a member of the nuclear club," a term widely applied to nations that have nuclear weapons. The IAEA's action this week is expected to stop short of declaring Iran in violation of the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and seeking action from the Security Council. Such a move is unlikely before fall, even if Iran's level of cooperation fails to improve, and might not come until spring, U.S. officials said. While the Security Council could impose sanctions, the likely outcome would be a deadlock, with Russia and China threatening to veto any strong punishment of Iran, a U.S. official said. President Vladimir V. Putin refused again last week to cancel Russia's contracts to help Iran develop its Bushehr nuclear power plant, which the United States has tried unsuccessfully for years to block. "We could stop our cooperation with Tehran if Iran refuses to be transparent and cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency," Putin said at a news conference at the end of the Group of Eight summit in Sea Island, Ga., where he held a separate meeting with President Bush. "But for the moment, we have no reason to do that." Spotlight on Tehran Despite the probable deadlock in the Security Council, the slowly building pressure on Iran would have an impact, a U.S. official said. "Iranians don't like being branded an international outlaw," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. He said the threat of a high-profile Security Council debate on Iran would "keep the spotlight" on Tehran to cooperate with international weapons inspectors. "It puts the world on notice that Iranians are involved in nuclear weapons preparations." No state could justify providing equipment that could be used to make nuclear weapons as well as to generate electricity, he said. "The Russians couldn't justify Bushehr." Having been burned by poor intelligence data on Iraq's programs to develop banned weapons, U.S. officials are circumspect in describing Iran's progress toward becoming a nuclear power. They appear to be more willing to listen to ElBaradei, who publicly contradicted last year Bush administration claims to have incriminating evidence against Iraq. "They're not near a bomb, as far as we can tell," a U.S. official said. He described Iran as being five or 10 years away from developing a nuclear weapon. But a senior Bush administration official involved in nonproliferation issues said: "The more I learn, the more worried I am." Iran appears to be able to manufacture parts for generating nuclear weapons fuel and to "put them together in a way that works," the official added. Tehran might believe that the United States' failure to stabilize Iraq works in Iran's favor, analysts said. "The reality is that Iran has lots of ways to make life very unpleasant for us in Iraq," said Geoffrey Kemp, a White House Middle East specialist under President Ronald Reagan and now director of regional strategic programs at the Nixon Center, a Washington think tank. Iran could supply weapons to dissident groups in Iraq and Afghanistan, he said. "The Iranian card in Iraq serves as a counterpoint to our enormous pressure on them over the nuclear issue," Kemp said. Patrick Clawson, research director at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the instability and continued widespread poverty in Iraq have been witnessed by hundreds of thousands of religious pilgrims and have served to ease pressure on Tehran's clerical regime. He said Iranians also are cheered by the strains between the Bush administration and Europe and by the unpopularity of the United States across much of the Middle East. "There's little doubt that the Iranian leadership thinks things are just going wonderfully," he said. Copyright © 2004, The Baltimore Sun [http://www.baltimoresun.com] ***************************************************************** 6 AFP: Europeans urge swift conclusion of Iran nuclear probe [http://www.spacewar.com/ VIENNA (AFP) Jun 15, 2004 Britain, France and Germany proposed a draft resolution to the UN atomic agency Tuesday calling for a probe into Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program to be toughened and wrapped up within months, despite new Iranian threats to break off cooperation. The draft picked up on UN nuclear chief Mohamed ElBaradei's hardening the tone of the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) investigation into Iran's nuclear program, which is now more than a year old. ElBaradei told the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors Monday: "It is essential for the integrity and credibility of the inspection process that we are able to bring these issues to a close within the next few months and provide the international community with the assurances it urgently seeks regarding Iran's nuclear activities." Intense talks were underway at IAEA headquarters in Vienna Tuesday, with Iran pressing for a softening of the text after leaders in Tehran reacted angrily to the fresh pressure from the UN nuclear watchdog by threatening to reconsider cooperation with inspectors. The new conservative speaker of parliament, Gholam Ali Hadad-Adel, warned that the assembly may not ratify Iran's signature of the additional protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) allowing tougher UN inspections. "The three European countries are demanding parliament adopt the protocol, but I say to France, Germany and Britain not to tell the Iranian parliament what to do," Ali Hadad-Adel told deputies. President Mohammad Khatami has meanwhile told Britain, France and Germany in writing to ease the pressure, or risk pushing Iran to consider "other alternatives," according to press reports. Khatami also reportedly accused the so-called Euro-3 of aligning themselves with Iran's arch-enemy, the United States. The United States is pressing for Iran to be hauled up before the UN Security Council for allegedly developing nuclear weapons in secret, but has not won support for this yet at the IAEA. Tehran has consistently denied the allegations. A diplomat in Vienna close to negotiations on the draft resolution told AFP that the three big European powers, helped by the United States and other members of the 35-nation IAEA board of governors, had revised their original text after ElBaradei's speech. Calls to resolve the probe in a few months and echoes of ElBaradei's criticism of Iran's lack of cooperation had now been incorporated into the draft, according to a copy made available to AFP. The draft "deplores... that overall Iran's cooperation has not been as full, timely and proactive as it should have been" and "underlines that with the passage of time, it is becoming ever more important that Iran work proactively with the agency." The text was softened in one point, however, backing off from a demand that Iran halt uranium conversion operations and construction of a heavy water research reactor that are a key part of the nuclear fuel cycle. The draft now merely asks Iran to "reconsider" these decisions. Iran is pressing for this clause to be dropped entirely, an Asian diplomat told AFP. Meanwhile, a US demand to give Iran a deadline in the revised text for compliance had been rejected since it was better to give "a sense of urgency at this stage (to resolve the issue) but avoid any idea of deadlines," which could incite a confrontation with Iran, another diplomat said. Elbaradei told the IAEA board that the UN agency had been aware of "Iran's undeclared nuclear program" for almost two years but had been kept from getting to the bottom of it due to "less than satisfactory" cooperation from Iran. On Monday the United States called on Iran to come clean on the extent of its nuclear ambitions and demanded that the UN nuclear watchdog press Tehran this week to cooperate with inspectors. The IAEA board is not expected to debate the draft resolution in plenary session until later in the week, possibly Thursday or Friday, diplomats said. WAR.WIRE ***************************************************************** 7 National Post: ElBaradei harshs Iran nationalpost.com June 15, 2004 It looks increasingly as if there really is an "axis of evil" country with a nuclear weapons program that poses a serious threat to world security. The normally circumspect head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, spoke out yesterday against Iran at an IAEA meeting, calling Tehran's level of co-operation with his organization "less than satisfactory." Mr. ElBaradei also said Iran's answers to questions about its P-2 centrifuges, advanced devices that can be used to enrich uranium to weapons-grade, have been "changing and at times contradictory." Mr. ElBaradei's rebuke is the strongest language he has used to date regarding Iran's nuclear development program. It is long overdue. Earlier this month, the IAEA released its latest report on Iran's nuclear program. The findings were worrying. Iran has not provided a clear explanation as to how and from whom it obtained its uranium. Iran has also delayed for a month scheduled visits by inspectors to its nuclear sites, an effort presumably aimed at concealing prohibited assets. The mullahs are violating an agreement reached in October to address world concerns about Iran's nuclear activities. Under the terms of that deal, Tehran was required to suspend all uranium enrichment, spell out all of its previous nuclear activities and sign an additional protocol to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. (The protocol was signed, but has not yet been ratified by Iran's parliament.) But there seems little hope that Iran will voluntarily fulfill its obligations: On Saturday, Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi declared that his country "has to be recognized by the international community as a member of the nuclear club." The existence of Iran's covert effort to develop nuclear weapons came to light in the summer of 2002, when an Iranian opposition group disclosed details of the mullahs' secret nuclear facility at Natanz. Iran continues to maintain that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. There is no good reason to believe that claim. A nation with oil reserves as bountiful as Iran's has no practical need for nuclear energy. Iran's real interest is in nuclear weapons. With fledgling democracies to its west (Iraq) and east (Afghanistan), bolstered by large numbers of American troops in the region, Iran -- listed by the U.S. State Department as the world's top sponsor of terrorism -- seeks a trump card. It is time for the IAEA and the United Nations to start treating Iran's threat seriously. A nuclear bomb in the hands of Tehran's theocrats would alter the geopolitical map of the Middle East. It would endanger Western allies and imperil future prospects for peace in the region. At its meetings this week, the IAEA should pass a resolution establishing a deadline for Iran to come clean and co-operate fully with IAEA inspectors. If Iran refuses, the matter should be referred to the UN Security Council in order that sanctions can be adopted, a step Washington has long sought. The threat of economic suffocation is likely to be the only language the mullahs understand, and the only chance we have at averting a more serious conflict. ©  National Post 2004 ***************************************************************** 8 albawaba.com: Iran dismisses nuclear watchdog criticism on probe delay ['middle east news information' src 15-06-2004, 12:13 Iran on Tuesday rejected criticism from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that it has been delaying a probe into suspected nuclear activities. "We have no plans to produce weapons and all of our activities are for peaceful purposes and nothing is wrong," Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi told reporters in Istanbul, Turkey. "We are quite transparent and have decided to cooperate fully with IAEA and the international community," he said. On Tuesday, Europe's major powers floated a fine-tuned draft resolution at an IAEA meeting in Vienna, Austria. It rebukes Iran for delaying an investigation into its suspected nuclear activities but refrains from direct threats of sanctions. "So far, many issues have been verified. There are minor issues that (are) still under consideration," Kharrazi said. "We don't have any concerns. Everything is transparent and we will continue our cooperation." Kharrazi is in Istanbul to attend a meeting of the foreign ministers of Islamic countries. (Albawaba.com) © 2004 Al Bawaba (www.albawaba.com) [http://www.albawaba.com] ***************************************************************** 9 Las Vegas SUN: Europe Seeks Iran Nuclear Reprimand By ANDREA DUDIKOVA ASSOCIATED PRESS VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Europe's major powers floated a finely tuned draft resolution Tuesday that reprimands Iran for delaying an investigation into its suspect nuclear activities but refrains from direct threats of sanctions. Even without such threats, the toughly worded document under consideration at a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency maintains pressure on Iran to come clean on aspects of what was a covert nuclear program for nearly 20 years until discovered two years ago. The new draft, written by France, Germany and Britain and seen by The Associated Press, toned down demands on Iran to abort plans to build a heavy water reactor and slightly modified tough language taking Tehran to task for hampering the IAEA probe. But the overall wording remained tough. One key phrase "deplored" the fact that Iran's cooperation "has not been complete" - strong terminology in diplomatic language. Still, the draft contained no deadline or "trigger mechanism" as sought by the United States and its allies that could set into motion possible sanctions on Iran if it continued its foot dragging past a certain date. Delegates, who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity, said that the draft was unlikely to undergo major changes before being formally submitted for a vote later in the week. Iran rejected the IAEA criticism. "We have no plans to produce weapons and all of our activities are for peaceful purposes and nothing is wrong," Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi told reporters Tuesday in Istanbul, Turkey. In a letter to the leaders of the European powers that drafted the text, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami warned them against giving in to "U.S. pressure." The daily Sharq quoted Khatami as saying that "Iran's cooperation with the international community for the peaceful use of nuclear energy" was at stake. In a session broadcast live on Tehran radio, Iran's conservative parliament also threatened not to ratify a protocol that would continue to allow surprise inspections of nuclear facilities. Khatami had been allowing the IAEA inspections as a goodwill gesture, but the protocol still needs approval from the Majlis. In Vienna, Kenneth Brill, the chief U.S. delegate to the IAEA, said Washington remained convinced that Iran was "trying to hide ... a weapons program." As a meeting of the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors opened Monday, the agency's chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, reflected the general frustrations with Iran's delaying tactics, saying his agency's probe "can't go on forever." The agency is mainly concerned with ambiguous, missing or withheld information on the scope of Iran's uranium enrichment program, and the source of enriched uranium found inside the country. "These are two issues where we need accelerated and proactive cooperation," ElBaradei told reporters. "The way they have been engaging us on these issues has been less than satisfactory." In Washington, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said ElBaradei's views provided "further evidence that Iran's troubling lack of cooperation with IAEA continues." He said the United States believes IAEA's board must adopt a strong resolution that calls on Iran to cooperate with the agency and to resolve all the outstanding issues regarding its nuclear program. Asked why the United States at present does not think Iran should be referred to the U.N. Security Council over its lack of cooperation with the IAEA, a move that could lead to formal U.N. sanctions against the country, Boucher replied that the agency's investigation and verification work in Iran must continue for the foreseeable future. "We think the agency has continued to find out things about the program, to conduct valuable investigations, to continue to bring facts to light and to continue to keep the pressure on Iran to comply," Boucher said in Washington. Under growing international pressure, Iran has suspended uranium enrichment and stopped building centrifuges. Iran has rejected U.S. allegations that its nuclear program is a smoke screen for making weapons. Instead, the country says its uranium-enrichment - which could be used to make bombs, once fully operational - is geared solely toward generating electricity. The IAEA report, written by ElBaradei, says Iran inquired about buying thousands of magnets for centrifuges on the black market - casting doubt on Iranian assertions that its P-2 centrifuge program was purely experimental and not aimed for full uranium enrichment. On the traces of enriched uranium - which include minute amounts at weapons-grade levels - Tehran says they were not domestically produced but inadvertently imported in purchases through the nuclear black market. The IAEA's investigators have not been able to fully test that claim because Pakistan, the main source of the equipment, has blocked free access to its nuclear material. --- On the Net: International Atomic Energy Agency, http://www.iaea.org [http://www.iaea.org] -- ***************************************************************** 10 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Toward real detente 2004.06.16 It was reassuring to watch the television footage of South Korean sailors calling "Baekdusan, Baekdusan" in their first radio communication with their North Korean counterparts in a part of the high seas which has been the scene of bloody naval clashes in recent years. The ship-to-ship contact to prevent accidental battles in the sensitive area, as agreed in inter-Korean military officers' talks, is a small but significant step forward to easing tension between the two sides. Throughout the two rounds of the flag officers' conference, and in the follow-up field grade officers' talks, the North Korean delegates did not recognize as the legal maritime border the so-called Northern Limit Line, drawn up unilaterally by the U.N. Command at the end of the Korean War. But they tacitly accepted the status quo on the sea and agreed to detailed steps to ensure that naval craft and civilian fishing boats on both sides respect the demarcation line and refrain from taking instant military action in cases where the border is violated inadvertently. Since the 1953 cease-fire, the narrow strip of water between the North Korean coast and the five islands held by the South has remained a volatile zone. While patrol craft from the two opposing sides were training their guns on each other day and night, air force fighters from the North and South were often engaged in aerial maneuvers, although live fire was rarely employed. North Korea's occasional claim of rights to the entire sea area off its coast, stretching beyond the South Korean islands, had heightened the level of tension. On land, propaganda broadcasts along the Military Demarcation Line ended as of midnight Monday, also in accordance with the agreement at the generals' talks. All facilities used for psychological warfare will be removed within the next few weeks. The Southern authorities will also have to dismantle Christmas trees and Buddhist towers erected along the truce line. Meanwhile, celebrations are underway to mark the fourth anniversary of the historic June 15, 2000 inter-Korean summit between former president Kim Dae-jung and North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, with the participation of 130 North Korean delegates. Amid the renewed mood of detente, some ruling Uri Party lawmakers recommend that the former president be sent to Pyongyang as a special envoy to help improve bilateral relations. All these developments offer many people in the South grounds for optimism on the future of the Korean Peninsula. But serious questions are also raised about the effect of these "breakthroughs" on the realities of the North-South confrontation. Skeptics warn against being misled by what they describe as "only symbolic and cosmetic changes" while the core problem - the North's nuclear development - remains untouched. Since the Pyongyang summit, the level of humanitarian aid to the North has steadily increased, and the Mount Geumgang tourism project and the Gaeseong City industrial estate construction work are being expedited with apparent Northern enthusiasm. Roads and railways were reconnected half a century after they were cut by the war. But internationally, Pyongyang's profile as a world menace grew, as it continued to develop its nuclear capabilities. Along the border, the high-powered loudspeaker systems will soon be removed, but barbed wire fences there will not be lowered by even an inch. Land mines, tank barriers and traps will remain in place along with artillery pieces, armor, equipment and missiles, while 1.1 million men in the North and 650,000 men in the South will be spending their precious youth watching the other side around the clock. The new peace steps on the West Coast are welcome, but these measures will be meaningless without further confidence-building and tension-reducing actions between the North and South. Now is the time for the Seoul government to take the initiative by proposing bold arms reductions, both in military hardware and troop strength. The planned reduction of the U.S. forces in Korea provides an opportunity to launch fresh efforts to bring the North to disarmament talks. 2004.06.16 ***************************************************************** 11 UPI: N.Korea talks to open next week: Seoul - (United Press International) June 15, 2004 Seoul, South Korea, Jun. 15 (UPI) -- A new round of six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program will be held in Beijing on June 23-26, South Korea announced Tuesday. The meeting will come after a two-day working-level session from June 21 to set the topics for full-fledged negotiations, said Yoo Eyu-sang, deputy director-general of the Foreign Ministry's task force on the nuclear issue. "We will just work hard in the negotiations to help the talks make progress," he said in a press briefing. Next week's meeting will be the third round of six-way talks involving North and South Korea, the United States, China, Japan and Russia, aimed at breaking a 20-month deadlock over ending North Korea's nuclear weapons drive. No clear breakthrough was made in the previous talks in February and August as the participants failed to resolve differences between the United States and North Korea. [UPI Perspectives] ***************************************************************** 12 Korea Herald: N.K. leader wants better ties with Seoul 2004.06.16 By Seo Hyun-jin Roh promises comprehensive assistance to North after nuclear settlement By Seo Hyun-jin North Korean leader Kim Jong-il expressed his commitment to enhancing inter-Korean relations, and President Roh Moo-hyun promised comprehensive economic assistance to the North once Pyongyang's nuclear standoff is settled, a presidential spokesman said yesterday. The two leaders indirectly exchanged the pledges as the Korean Peninsula marked the fourth anniversary of its historic bilateral summit. The amicable mood came ahead of multilateral talks next week on the protracted North Korean nuclear issue. North Korean chief delegate Ri Jong-hyuk speaks at a global forum marking the fourth anniversary of the June 15 summit declaration between South and North Korea in a Seoul hotel yesterday. South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun and former President Kim Dae-jung look on. [The Korea Herald] "Kim said the two Koreas should greatly improve South-North relations by moving forward the ongoing good tides," Ri Jong-hyuk, a vice president of the North's Asia-Pacific Peace Committee, told Roh at a brief meeting before the opening of an international forum in Seoul. Ri said the North Korean leader directed him to convey the message, as well as his best regards to Roh, according to presidential spokesman Yoon Tai-young. Ri is one of seven North Korean officials on a four-day visit to the South to attend the forum commemorating the inter-Korean summit on June 15, 2000 between former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung and the North's Kim. It is the first time that the North's leader has delivered a message to Roh since the South Korean president took office in February last year. Roh thanked him for the message and stressed the need for the two sides to maintain confidence and their promises to implement the June 15 Joint Declaration, which laid the groundwork for inter-Korean reconciliation, Yoon said. Roh continued his goodwill gesture to the North as he delivered a congratulatory speech at the forum, which was jointly organized by the South's Yonsei University, the Korea Institute for National Unification and the North's Institute on Unification. "Inter-Korean cooperation will be accelerated if the North Korean nuclear issue is resolved, and we are preparing comprehensive and concrete plans for that," Roh said at the forum in the Grand Hilton Hotel in Seoul. The president added the South would actively cooperate for the North to establish an infrastructure and enhance its industrial productivity, which would lead to epoch-making economic development of the impoverished country. Presidential officials said Roh was reaffirming the government's intention to speed up economic cooperation with the North, which would span energy, transport, communications and modernization of production facilities. The South will also help the North obtain international aid by normalizing relations with foreign countries and affiliating with international organizations, the officials said. "Roh's proposal is 'comprehensive' in that it supposes cooperation covering all industries for North Korea's economic development, and it is 'specific' in that it details economic exchanges according to stages and areas in the process of resolving the nuclear issue," the presidential spokesman said. The pledge drew particular attention because of its possible positive impact on North Korea's stance when it attends the third round of nuclear talks with South Korea, the United States, Japan, China and Russia scheduled to take place in Beijing June 23-26. Washington has so far insisted Pyongyang dismantle its nuclear weapons-related programs in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner. Pyongyang says it will abandon nuclear weapons development in return for economic assistance and security assurances. Former President Kim urged the two countries to end the dispute, which erupted in October 2002, and engage in direct negotiations. "North Korea should make a decision which is acceptable to the world and the United States should guarantee the security of North Korea and open the way for it to advance into the international community," Kim said. He also called on the North Korean leader to keep his promise that he would visit Seoul "at an appropriate time." "The people in the South will warmly welcome (North Korea's National Defense Chairman) Kim to Seoul," said Kim Dae-jung, who won the 2000 Nobel Peace Prize for his contribution to inter-Korean reconciliation. "Our people want to see the leaders of the two Koreas sit together again and discuss the cooperation, prosperity and unification of the Koreas," Kim said. North Korean official Ri stressed that South Korea should put more weight on its relations with the North than on the half-century alliance with the United States. "The alliance is important, but the South-North relationship is more important. There is cooperation with an ally, but national cooperation is fundamental," Ri said. During the seminar, renowned international experts pooled their wisdom on bringing about peace on the peninsula, which remains the world's last Cold War frontier. Former U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Donald Gregg also called for direct U.S. talks with North Korea on the nuclear issue. "The longer the U.S. refuses to enter into negotiations, the higher the price becomes for transition into this new era, while the dangerous prospect of North Korea becoming a permanent nuclear power also steadily increases," he said. (shj@heraldm.com) 2004.06.16 ***************************************************************** 13 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Kyodo News Agency: Talks on North Korea's Nuclear Program to Updated Jun.15,2004 11:04 KST There is more indication that another round of six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program will be held next week in Beijing. Japan's Kyodo news agency Monday quotes sources involved with planning the talks as saying they will begin June 23. Kyodo says a formal announcement from China is expected soon. The news agency also says more working-level discussions will be held in advance of the formal talks. South Korean sources also have confirmed the date of the six-party talks. North and South Korea, the United States, Japan, China and Russia have held two rounds of discussions on Pyongyang's nuclear program. They have achieved no real progress, other than an agreement to let working groups handle the tough negotiations on contentious issues. VOA News ***************************************************************** 14 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Fmr. President Highlights Importance of Pyongyang-Washington Updated Jun.15,2004 14:17 KST As the two Koreas commemorate their landmark summit anniversary, former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung shared his opinions on the inter-Korean peace process since his meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-il four years ago. He and other North Korea experts who attended the World Economic Forum here in Seoul offered advice on ways to break the deadlock over Pyongyang¡¯s nuclear standoff. It is important that the United States and North Korea reach a bilateral agreement to resolve the current nuclear impasse. This was former President Kim Dae-jung's main point at the World Economic Forum's Asia Strategic Insight Roundtable. "If Pyongyang and Washington give and take what each other wants, the matter will surely be resolved. Once an agreement is reached, the 6-way multilateral framework should support it. This is the best solution." Kim, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate who met with North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in a historic inter-Korean summit four years ago noted on the improved ties between the two Koreas. He cited frequent reunions between separated family members across the border and the construction work to relink severed railways and roads. Maurice Strong, a special advisor to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, echoed similar sentiments. He said that North Korea seems to have accepted the fact that it has to dismantle nuclear facilities in order to get international aid and move into the world economy. The Governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson, also participated in the discussions. Richardson dealt extensively with North Korea during the Clinton administration. "I believe that unless there's an agreement in June, we will lose momentum for at least a year. Because of the American Presidential election and because of the frustration on the part of members of the 6 party talks." Richardson said during the upcoming negotiations that Washington and Pyongyang should work to achieve short-term progress, such as a guarantee of energy assistance in exchange for a verifiable freeze of nuclear facilities. He added that small but significant steps are needed at the current stage and he also said countries participating in the 6-way talks should focus more on the issue of spent fuel rod reprocessing rather than suspicions over uranium enrichment. Though North Korea experts have varied opinions and different solutions in mind, one thing is for sure: They all anticipate tangible results from the 6-party talks slated to be held later this month. ***************************************************************** 15 Xinhuanet: New round of 6-way talks to start next week in Beijing www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-06-15 19:18:46 BEIJING, June 15 (Xinhuanet) -- The third round of six-party talks on the Korean nuclear issue will be held between June 23 and 26 in Beijing, said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue here Tuesday. The second working group meeting of the six-party talks will start from June 21 to 22 to make preparations for the new round of talks, Zhang said at a regular press conference. The previous two rounds of six-party talks, which involved China, the Democratic People Republic of Korea (DPRK), the United States, the Republic of Korea, Russia and Japan, were held in the Chinese capital August last year and February this year respectively. The inaugural working group meeting was held here from May 12 to May 15, at which the six parties agreed to meet for the third round of talks in late June. Zhang said it is China's hope that the parties concerned would show their utmost sincerity and flexibility for cooperation in the spirit of mutual respect and equal consultation for progress in the third-round talks. After the previous two rounds of six-party talks and one working group meeting, the six parties have reached a consensus on the such issues as peaceful solution of the nuclear issue through dialogue, a nuclear-weapon-free Korean Peninsula as the ultimate goal, and nuclear freezing as the first step to complete nuclear abandonment, while addressing the security concerns of the DPRK. China hopes the parties concerned would, based on the consensus,continue in-depth discussions, expand common grounds to push forward the talks, said Zhang, adding that the nuclear issue is a complicated one, and it is unwise for any side to expect that it could be solved after one or two rounds of talks. According to Zhang, the major tasks of the second working group meeting are to make preparations for talks on substantial issues and get related documents and the working agenda ready. The Chinese delegation to the talks, including the head of the delegation, will remain unchanged and a press center will be set up during the talks for the convenience of the media, Zhang said. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 16 KoreaTimes: Nukes Block NK Leader's Road to Seoul Hankooki.com > Korea Times > Nation By Reuben Staines Staff Reporter Before North Korean leader Kim Jong-il can make a visit to Seoul in reciprocation for the 2000 inter-Korean summit in Pyongyang, an array of obstacles must first be cleared away on both sides of the military border, experts say. Former President Kim Dae-jung, speaking on Teusday on the anniversary of the breakthrough summit, repeated his call for the North¡¯s reclusive leader to visit the South. ``The South Korean people will warmly welcome Chairman Kim to Seoul,¡¯¡¯ said the former president, who won the Nobel Peace prize for his role in engaging Pyongyang. ``Our people want to see the leaders of the South and the North get together again and discuss the cooperation, prosperity and unification of the two Koreas.¡¯¡¯ With President Roh Moo-hyun reiterating his offers of a massive aid package to the North in return for cooperation, Kim may indeed be tempted to travel to the South for a second inter-Korean summit. In recent months, Pyongyang has shown an increasing openness and flexibility. ``Kim Jong-il is trying to find a solution to North Korea¡¯s economic difficulties and he knows South Korea is ready to assist, so he is trying to improve relations,¡¯¡¯ explained Yoo Ho-yeol, professor of North Korean studies at Korea University. But Yoo said the South Korean government is unlikely to accept a visit from the ``Dear Leader¡¯¡¯ until he negotiates an end to the standoff with the United States over his nuclear programs. ``If Kim Jong-il really considers coming to Seoul, he should solve the nuclear crisis first,¡¯¡¯ Yoo said. Seoul has sought to mediate a deal between Pyongyang and Washington at the six-way nuclear talks in Beijing, but it has stuck by U.S. demands that the North should agree to dismantle its nuclear facilities before being rewarded. Even before the nuclear dispute flared up in late 2002, however, Kim was showing no signs of making a return visit to Seoul. ``At that time, Kim Jong-il didn¡¯t have enough trust in the South Korean government or society,¡¯¡¯ Yoo said. Another North Korea expert, Hanyang University professor Kim Hwang-yong, explained that Pyongyang put a number of conditions on participating in a second inter-Korean summit in the South. ``Given the current situation, these conditions have not been met in the eyes of North Korea,¡¯¡¯ he said. The declaration signed at the 2000 summit specified that Seoul should guarantee the safety of the North Korean leader during his visit and offer more regular economic support. Hanyang University¡¯s Kim said North Korea might also push for the scrapping of the South¡¯s anti-communist National Security Law and a complete withdrawal of U.S. troops in exchange for the visit. The benefits for Seoul of a successfully hosted summit are obvious. The security situation on the peninsula would be significantly improved and this would in turn encourage investment, Kim said. But he believed the North¡¯s leader will not visit the South until the situation is ripe. When the South Korean president visited Pyongyang in 2000, he was greeted with crowds of people waving flowers, Kim said. ``But if Kim Jong-il visits Seoul, there would be no such thing,¡¯¡¯ he added. ``In my opinion, he will not visit South Korea any time soon.¡¯¡¯ rjs@koreatimes.co.kr 06-15-2004 20:58 ***************************************************************** 17 Newsday: China to Hold Talks on North Korea Nukes Newsday.com [http://www.nynewsday.com] [June 15, 2004] By AUDRA ANG Associated Press Writer BEIJING -- China said Tuesday a new round of six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear program will be held in Beijing on June 23-26. In Seoul, South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun said his nation will provide huge infusions of economic assistance to North Korea if the nuclear weapons dispute is resolved peacefully. "Inter-Korean cooperation will be accelerated if the North Korean nuclear issue is resolved, and we are preparing comprehensive and concrete plans for that," Roh said. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue said lower-level meetings will be held June 21-22 to set the agenda for the talks. "China hopes that the parties concerned will show their utmost sincerity and flexibility for cooperation ... so as to make headway in the third round of talks," she said at a briefing. In Washington, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher stressed that the talks' aim "is to find a diplomatic resolution to the threat that's posed by North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons." "That's a threat to the security and stability in Northeast Asia and to global nonproliferation efforts," he said. The standoff with Pyongyang began in October 2002, when the United States said North Korea admitted operating a nuclear weapons program in violation of a 1994 agreement. Two previous rounds of discussions involving China, the two Koreas, the United States, Japan and Russia ended without settlement. Zhang said that the new talks would be a chance for the parties "to build on consensus achieved before and go deeper into the issues." The contentious issue of whether North Korea has a secret uranium-based project would be discussed, she said. The South Korean president's comments came in a speech marking the anniversary of a 2000 summit that launched a reconciliation process. South Korea's Yonhap news agency quoted Roh as saying that Seoul would cooperate closely with the North to help it "build infrastructure and enhance industrial production capacity, which will develop North Korea's economy in an epochal manner." "We will also cooperate with neighboring countries to help the international community enhance economic cooperation with North Korea," he said. South Korea already has economic contacts with the communist North. Washington has demanded a "complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantling" of North Korea's nuclear weapons facilities. North Korea says it is willing to freeze its nuclear program in return for economic aid and will only dismantle it if the United States promises not to invade. The North staked out its negotiating position with tough rhetoric Tuesday -- a common maneuver for the isolated Stalinist regime -- saying that the talks will be fruitless if Washington insists on a complete dismantling of the North's nuclear program. Such a demand "can be forced on a defeated country only," North Korea said on its official KCNA news agency. North Korea denies U.S. claims that Pakistan provided it with uranium enrichment technology. It has said it has only one nuclear weapons program based on plutonium. Zhang also said reports that Beijing was sending nuclear technology to Iran in exchange for fuel and allowing North Korea to ship missiles and other weapons through China were untrue and "full of Cold War mentality." The reports on Beijing's dealings with Iran and North Korea were based on findings by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, which advises the U.S. Congress. The commission accused China of continuing to help "weapons of mass destruction-related programs in countries of concern ... despite repeated promises to end such activities and the repeated imposition of U.S. sanctions," the reports said. The commission also questioned the effectiveness of China-U.S. relations. Zhang, who said she hadn't seen the news reports, nevertheless stressed that "China has always attached great importance to the issue and firmly opposes the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction." In recent years, China has enacted "comprehensive laws and regulations" controlling the export of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, Zhang said. "We have taken effective measures," she said. "If we find that any departments or organizations violated those laws and regulations, China's government will punish them in accordance to law." "China-U.S. relations have witnessed great improvement and U.S. leaders have stressed the importance of developing China-U.S. relations on many occasions," Zhang said. "I hope people drafting that report will make clear the U.S. government's position on developing relations with China." Copyright © 2004, The Associated Press ***************************************************************** 18 [CMEP] Nuke Waste Action / Groups Urge NM Gov. to Oppose Nuke Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:46:33 -0500 (CDT) *** Apologies for cross-posting *** June 15, 2004 This e-mail contains two items: (1) An ACTION ALERT regarding a Senate vote on the government's management of high-level radioactive waste. (2) A PRESS RELEASE about a letter from over 60 organizations urging New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson to oppose a company seeking to build a uranium enrichment plant in his state. =-=-=-=-=-=-= !!! A C T I O N A L E R T !!! After Narrow Defeat on First Vote, New Cantwell Amendment to Ensure Proper Cleanup of Nuke Waste Up for Vote This Week By a vote of 48 yeas to 48 nays, U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell's (D-Wash.) amendment to "ensure adequate funding for, and the continuation of activities related to, the treatment by the Department of Energy of high level radioactive waste," failed in the Senate on Thursday, June 3. Despite the loss, the vote was close, no doubt due in part to your action on this issue. The Senate bill (S. 2400, the 'National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005,' to which Cantwell offered the amendment) still must be reconciled with the House version, which does not currently contain the waste reclassification language that gives the DOE license to abandon high-level radioactive waste. Moreover, Sen. Cantwell has offered a second amendment to the same effect of the first. There is still hope that this environmentally irresponsible legislation will not become law! TAKE ACTION! You may also send a "thank" or "spank" e-mail to your senators expressing your gratitude or disappointment at their votes and urging their support of the second Cantwell amendment to keep the DOE's nuke waste cleanup program in check: http://action.citizen.org/pc/issues/alert/?alertid=6006281 BACKGROUND Sen. Cantwell's first amendment would have struck sections 3116 and 3119 from the Senate's Defense Authorization bill (S. 2400, the "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005"). The language in those sections will allow the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to shirk its cleanup responsibilities by reclassifying high-level radioactive waste in South Carolina so that it can be simply covered with cement and abandoned in aging tanks. The legislation also requires that the states of Washington and Idaho agree to these lower cleanup standards -- or they will lose funding for the cleanup of their nuclear waste legacy sites. This legislation could make these sites high-level waste dumps, threatening severe contamination of important water resources such as the Savannah River. =-=-=-=-=-=-= *** P R E S S R E L E A S E *** For Immediate Release: June 15, 2004 Contact: Erica Hartman, Public Citizen, 202-454-5174; Joe Malherek, Public Citizen, 202-454-5109; Michael Mariotte, NIRS, 202-494-0785 (cell) 60+ Organizations and Celebrities Urge New Mexico Governor to Oppose Proposed Nuclear Facility HOBBS, New Mexico -- More than 60 organizations from across the United States, as well as music stars Bonnie Raitt and Ani DiFranco, urged New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) to oppose the licensing of the proposed Louisiana Energy Services (LES) uranium enrichment plant that would be built near Eunice, N.M. Sponsored by Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) and Public Citizen, the letter was delivered today at the first pre-hearing conference on the licensing of the facility. NIRS and Public Citizen jointly have intervened in that process, raising several substantive issues that raise serious questions about the merits of the LES project. The state of New Mexico has also petitioned to intervene through its environment department and attorney general. Issues raised by the groups include inadequate and implausible radioactive/hazardous waste disposal plans by LES; greatly underestimated costs of waste disposal and ultimate decommissioning of the proposed facility; impacts of the plant on groundwater and local water supply, need for the facility, and its negative impact on national security and critical U.S. nuclear non-proliferation programs. "This letter -- signed by a broad spectrum of national and international groups -- represents the degree of suspicion held against LES, a company that has been plagued by security problems and has been less than forthright in its dealings with the public," said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. "Government officials in Tennessee got wise to LES when it tried to locate a plant there -- let's hope the same is true for New Mexico." After initially supporting the proposed LES facility, Gov. Richardson has backtracked in recent months, and has raised serious concerns about its radioactive waste disposal plans. The group letter noted that one of the key partners in LES' parent company, the European consortium Urenco, is British Nuclear Fuels, Ltd, a nearly-bankrupt British-government-supported company that almost lost its ability to operate in the U.S. when Gov. Richardson was the energy secretary under former President Bill Clinton, due to its inability to meet U.S. environmental regulations. "The state of New Mexico has good cause to oppose this project," said Michael Mariotte, executive director of NIRS. "We believe that New Mexicans have more to lose than to gain with LES, and we hope that the state will be a vigorous critic in this hearing." To read the letter, please go to http://www.citizen.org/documents/richardsonletter.pdf . Copies of the intervention petition are available at www.nirs.org . ### ********** 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 ***************************************************************** 19 Moscow Times: Questioning Bush's Foreign Policy Opinion / Comment Wednesday, June 16, 2004. Page 10. By Graham Allison, Mark Brzezinski and Toby T. Gati In the past week, Russia celebrated the 14th anniversary of its declaration of state sovereignty, and a state funeral in Washington marked the death of Ronald Reagan, the United States' 40th president. Both events remind us how much has changed since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. America now faces new enemies and looks to its leaders to ensure that America's principles and values will not be compromised during a time of turbulence. Russia has been transformed, both politically and economically -- but progress has been uneven. Recent trends raise troubling questions about human rights, the rule of law and the imbalance between an ever more powerful state and civil society. Some things have not changed, however. A strong U.S.-Russian partnership is still very much in the interest of the United States. So is Russia's integration into the global economy and the establishment of an open and free society based on democratic values and the rule of law. And the American people will always remember the solidarity of the Russian people with their country after the 9/11 tragedy and Russia's immediate support for the war on terrorism. As we look ahead, our relationship with each other must develop in a way that makes the Russian and American people safer, freer and more secure. Part of the answer to that question will certainly depend on how the United States meets the challenge of global leadership. America is strongest when its foreign policy engages its allies and reflects the clear moral leadership that helped end the Cold War. American credibility suffers when the country is not true to its principles. The easy way out is to pretend that mistakes are never made and hope that over time people at home and around the world will stop asking tough questions about how decisions were made. The refusal to level with the American people about the decision to go to war in Iraq and unwillingness to explain either to Congress or the American people how long our brave troops will stay and what the costs will be contradicts essential principles that have long guided U.S. leadership. A central building block for a more peaceful and prosperous future is how successful the people of Russia are at building the political and economic institutions necessary to safeguard their freedom and civil liberties. There is a connection between internal values and ideals and the kind of world people want to live in -- why else would the recently concluded G8 meeting, in which President Vladimir Putin participated, spend so much time discussing a Greater Middle East Initiative to bring political reform and democratic values to that important region? There is also a direct connection between economic prosperity and the legal and political reforms that create the environment for growth. Surely a country that wants to be in the G8 must listen when foreign leaders speak frankly about what is happening inside the country. And the weight of evidence -- from statements by concerned Russians, from reports by Western governments, organizations like the OSCE, nongovernmental organizations like Human Rights Watch, and even from the U.S. State Department -- shows that hard-won gains are being eroded and that pressure is growing on political parties, civic groups and independent media. Russia deserves to be taken seriously by the United States, and nothing is more serious for a member of the G8 than a commitment to democratic norms. The business community might not use the same words, but investors always put a risk premium on countries where transparency and the rule of law are weak. Legal certainty is the best catalyst for prosperity. The American people understand that Russia matters and that how the relationship between the two countries develops is important to their safety and well-being. For this reason, President George W. Bush will be asked tough questions about foreign policy in the next few months. The American people understand that personal relationships, handshakes and happy talk can only take us so far. Americans also want to know why the Bush administration cut budget requests for money to secure Russian nuclear weapons until Congress stepped in and restored the money. They want to know why the administration sought to cut funding by 50 percent for the Freedom Support Act, which augments the efforts of Russians who support political pluralism and civil society. Americans are united in their determination to fight terrorism and to control the spread of weapons of mass destruction. We can show the world that it is not necessary to choose between democracy and security by what they do at home and by the company they keep abroad. They need a president who can return America to the principles of engagement and leadership espoused by Harry Truman and, yes, by Ronald Reagan. Graham Allison, Mark Brzezinski and Toby T. Gati served as officials in the Clinton administration, where they were engaged in U.S. policy towards Russia. They remain active in Democratic Party policy debates and have from time to time provided advice to the Kerry campaign. They contributed this comment to The Moscow Times. © Copyright 2004, The Moscow Times. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 20 Japan To Go Nuclear? Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 03:58:57 -0400 From: John Hallam Nuclear Weapons Campaigner Friends of the Earth Australia, nonukes@foesyd.org.au 61-2-9567-6222, 61-2-9567-7533/7644 fax 61-2-9567-7166 1 Henry Street Turella NSW Aust 2205 ------------------------------------------- Discussion of Nuclear Weapons No Longer Taboo in Japan VOA News June 13, 2004 http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200406/200406130015.html Japan, as the first and only nation to be the target of wartime atomic weapons, has long had what is called a "nuclear allergy." The country has vowed never to produce, introduce or possess nuclear weapons. But recently there has been debate about whether Japan should one day cure itself of that allergy and abandon its post-World War II pacifism. It had long been taboo for any Japanese politician to discuss the possibility of Japan going nuclear, especially with the country sitting under the protection of the U.S. nuclear umbrella. As recently as 1999, Defense Agency vice minister, Shingo Nishimura was fired for suggesting there might be nuclear weapons in Japan's future. In recent years such comments have not been career-ending utterances. And among those making the once taboo statements are not just hawkish members of the conservative governing coalition, but some leading lawmakers in the main opposition party, as well. The change has come in wake of what are regarded here as hostile intentions by North Korea, its nuclear weapons development program, the test firing of missiles over Japan and clashes between the Japanese Coast Guard and North Korean spy ships. There is also a rising mood that Japan eventually might not be able to or should not rely on the American nuclear umbrella. The director of policy studies at Japan's National Institute for Research Advancement, Akiko Fukushima, is an advocate of discussing the nuclear option. "We shouldn't negate our option to go nuclear," said Akiko Fukushima. "But I do not see any reasonable reasons for Japan to go nuclear at this point of time. If U.S. decides not to provide nuclear deterrence to Japan then [at] that time we have to make a very difficult decision." Some analysts say the contemporary discussion about a nuclear-armed Japan also results from the perception that countries without such weapons are not being taken seriously on the world stage. Professor Matake Kamiya teaches at Japan's National Defense Academy. "That kind of attitude taken by major powers in the world could drastically alter the calculation in the minds of the Japanese people," he said. Public opinion surveys have consistently indicated that around 80 percent of Japanese oppose their country going nuclear, even if the security alliance between Tokyo and Washington were to end. When he was chief cabinet secretary, Yasuo Fukuda - a longtime confidant of Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi - once commented that "depending upon the world situation, circumstances and public opinion could require Japan to possess nuclear weapons." Experts have little doubt Japan could quickly produce its own nuclear arsenal, perhaps within a year. Japan's domestic atomic power program is based on reprocessed plutonium. Technology and capital would also not be a problem for the world's second largest economy. Lawmaker Ichiro Ozawa, now a leading figure in the opposition Democratic Party, has previously warned if China were to be perceived as a nuclear threat to Japan then Tokyo could respond by making "several thousand" nuclear weapons, making the country an unbeatable military power. But professor Kamiya says despite the potential nuclear threats in the region, there would be little for Japan to gain by having its own such weapons. "For this country, even militarily, nuclear weapons actually don't bring much benefit," he said. "Because of my argument like this I have been strongly criticized by so-called right wing conservative people in this country." Professor Kamiya and others argue if Japan turned its back on the nuclear proliferation treaty - which it ratified in 1976 - that would totally destroy its diplomatic legacy of advocating the abolition of such weapons. But there is a loophole in the treaty, allowing a signatory state to withdraw if "extraordinary events" jeopardize its "supreme interests." Yoshihide Soeya, a professor of political science at Keio University who has been consulting on Japan's 21st century defense goals, agrees there is little point for Japan to have nuclear weapons. "I can't think of any possibility of Japan actually going nuclear, even though I understand the topic will remain, perhaps, real in the minds of many people," he said. Japan's government, at least behind the scenes, seems to have less of an aversion to nuclear weapons than stated in its non-nuclear principles. In recent years, secret agreements have been uncovered by researchers showing Tokyo has permitted U.S. nuclear warheads to be kept on Japanese territory and unloaded at American naval bases in the country. This seeming contradiction can be best explained if one understands the Japanese concepts of "honne" and "tatemae", which are integral parts of social behavior here. Honne is the actual truth of a matter, which is not expressed openly to maintain tranquility. Tatemae is a kind of polite or tactical facade but without the negative ramifications in this society of what non-Japanese might consider deception. Proponents of the nuclear option seem to be quietly biding their time awaiting changes in the geopolitical situation. Those on all sides of the argument acknowledge raising the issue in parliament prematurely would polarize the public and paralyze the domestic political process. There is also little doubt it would also ignite a huge diplomatic row with Japan's neighbors and possibly be the catalyst for the likes of South Korea and Taiwan to join a new nuclear arms race. -- Posted for educational and research purposes only, ~ in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 ~ NucNews Links and Expanded Archives - http://nucnews.net ***************************************************************** 21 OECD: New 2003 nuclear energy data just released Press Communiqué 14 June 2004 - [OECD Nuclear Energy Agency / L'Agence pour l'énergie [http://www.oecd.org] PRESS COMMUNIQUÉ Paris, 14 June 2004 NEW 2003 NUCLEAR ENERGY DATA JUST RELEASED The latest official figures released today by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) reveal that nuclear electricity generation in OECD member countries decreased by nearly 2% in 2003 in comparison with 2002. Prolonged inspections and maintenance outages in Japan and the United States were the main reasons for the fall in overall nuclear electricity production. Despite this decrease, nuclear power plants still provided some 23 % of total electricity generated in OECD member countries in 2003. Nuclear power's contribution to the electricity generation in six OECD member countries ( Canada , the Czech Republic , Mexico , the Republic of Korea , the Slovak Republic and Sweden ) actually increased during 2003. These figures are drawn from the just-published 2004 edition of Nuclear Energy Data , more commonly known as the "Brown Book". The Brown Book gives an overview of the status and trends in nuclear electricity generation and the fuel cycle for OECD member countries and makes projections up until 2020. It is considered a reference in terms of nuclear data. At the start of 2003, there were 359 nuclear units in operation in OECD countries, three less than in 2002. Six units were under construction, with firm commitments for 20 more, representing around 30 GWe. All but one of these units is in the OECD Pacific region. By contrast, 20 units representing around 4.5 GWe are expected to be shut down within the next five years, 16 of which are in the United Kingdom.* While not reflected in the preceding figures, additional units in Germany are expected to be shut down over the next 30 years in line with the government decision to phase out nuclear energy. The NEA consists of 28 OECD member countries. The mission of the NEA is to assist its member countries in maintaining and further developing, through international co-operation, the scientific, technological and legal bases required for a safe, environmentally friendly and economical use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The NEA also provides authoritative assessments and forges common understandings on key issues, as input to government decisions on nuclear energy policy and to broader OECD policy analyses in areas such as energy and sustainable development. The 16 units scheduled for decommissioning in the United Kingdom over the next five years are all gas-cooled reactors. The total electricity generating capacity of the units to be decommissioned amounts to 2.8 GWe. At present, the UK has 31 nuclear units with a total capacity of 12.3 GWe. ### NUCLEAR ENERGY DATA OECD, Paris, 2004 – ISBN 92-64-01632-5 21, £ 15, US$ 26, ¥ 2 700 Please quote the title and reference in any review. Commercial orders may be directed to Extenza-Turpin Stratton Business Park , Pegasus Drive , Biggleswade, Bedfordshire , SG18 8QB , United Kingdom OECD Customer Service: +44 (0)1767 604960 Main Switchboard: +44 (0)1767 604800, Fax number: +44 (0)1767 601640 E-mail: oecdrow@extenza-turpin.com [oecdrow@extenza-turpin.com] – Website: www.extenza-turpin.com [http://www.extenza-turpin.com/] Online ordering: www.oecd.org/bookshop [http://www1.oecd.org/scripts/publications/bookshop/redirect.asp? 662004073P1] (secure payment with credit card) News media contacts: Karen Daifuku Head of the Executive Office, Central Secretariat, External Relations and Public Affairs Tel. 33 (0)1 45 24 10 10 Fax 33 (0)1 45 24 11 10 E-mail: daifuku@nea.fr ***************************************************************** 22 UPI: China calls U.S. report Cold War falsehood - (United Press International) June 15, 2004 Beijing, China, Jun. 15 (UPI) -- China Tuesday called "totally false" a U.S. commission report claiming it trades oil for nuclear technology with Iran and abets North Korea's weapons trade. The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission issued its annual report to Congress on Monday, saying China's "failure to adequately curb its proliferation practices poses significant national security concerns to the United States." The two most serious charges made in the report are that China is trading nuclear technology with Iran in exchange for oil, and that it allows North Korea to use its port, air, and rail facilities to ship missiles and other weapons. Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue told United Press International her government attaches great importance to non-proliferation treaties and has enacted domestic laws to prevent such activity. Zhang had not yet read the USCC report but said such allegations were "totally false." She added that the report reflected the "Cold War mentality" of its authors. [UPI Perspectives] ***************************************************************** 23 BBC: 'Poor' infrastructure under fire Last Updated: Tuesday, 15 June, 2004 [Chapelcross power station] Power generation caused particular concern The state of Scotland's infrastructure has come under fire from a leading professional engineering body. The Institution of Civil Engineers said that the Scottish Executive and the parliament could not manage a single A grade in any public service provision. It raised specific concerns about the state of public transport and power generation provision. The Scottish Executive said it was surprised and disappointed because its top priority was growing the economy. Life-support systems It said it was investing record amounts to create the right conditions. This is the first time the leading professional body for engineers has produced a separate report on the state of Scotland's civil life-support systems. It looked at transport, sanitation, energy, water and waste management systems and the communities that form modern society. "The Scottish report will make uncomfortable reading for the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive - indeed, for all levels of government in Scotland," the ICE report said. "After five years of devolved government, Scotland still has to suffer a 'Poor' infrastructure ... a D Grade in terms of our State of the Nation Report." The M8's not going to away, can we make it a genuine motorway? Wylie Cunningham ICE The report said there have been some improvements over the past year, but they have not gone far enough. It said Scotland's infrastructure was "becoming increasingly geriatric and fragile". The report said: "Scotland is entitled to ask what the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive are achieving with all the power and all the resources the voters gave them when the country still cannot achieve a single A Grade in any of our public sector services. "The best we can manage is a couple of 'Fairs' in sub sections of the transport system. "Almost every area we cover in State of Nation reveals a lack of joined up government thinking, delay and uncertainty, more talk than action, and a regrettable emphasis on worthy intentions rather than deliverable realities." Renewable energy Wylie Cunningham, ICE executive secretary for Scotland, said: "We're not going to dig up roads and turn them back into potato fields, so if we've got roads, let's make sure they are to the highest possible standards. "The M8's a good example, the M8's not going to go away, can we make it a genuine motorway?" The organisation also expressed concern about power generation. It said coal-fired power stations were on the way out and renewable energy was not capable of filling the gap. The closure of nuclear plants means there will be an increasing need for gas plants to make up the difference. ***************************************************************** 24 BBC: French power strikers target PM Last Updated: Tuesday, 15 June, 2004 [An electricity pylon] French power workers have stepped up their protests against plans for the partial sell-off of the country's state owned electricity firm EdF. Electricity supplies to the homes of Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin and other politicians have been cut. The action follows localised power cuts, strikes, drops in power and marches by disgruntled union members. The cuts came on the day the French parliament was debating a draft law paving the way for EdF's privatisation. The cut at Mr Raffarin's country home - rather than his official Paris residence - was one of several commando-style operations targeting the country's top names. Politicians targeted A CGT union official told Reuters: "We took the electricity counter away with us just now. "As of now there's no power at Mr Raffarin's house." Other politicians affected by similar action included culture minister Jack Lang and former PM Michel Rocard, while the holiday home of the head of France's main business federation was also hit. [French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin] Mr Raffarin was targeted by disgruntled EdF workers Earlier, parts of Bordeaux and Grenoble were plunged into darkness as unions staged a walkout ahead of a parliamentary debate on the government's plans. Strikers were reported to be targeting regions represented by deputies that back the proposed sell-off. According to the CGT union, the walkout has cut EdF's output by about 12%. Separately, strikers disrupted operations at gas utility GdF, also earmarked for privatisation. Stand off As the action escalated the CGT said 70,000 workers took part in marches across France - claiming between 4,000 and 5,000 joined such a protest in Paris. However, reports from the sceneestimated the numbers to be much lower. Energy market traders said the strike pushed up prices on France's electricity market. Meanwhile, ministers and EdF have vowed to stand by the reforms despite the widespread protests. "There is no going back," EdF chief executive Francois Roussely said of the planned part privatisation on Europe 1 radio. The strikes are timed to coincide with a parliamentary debate on a government proposal to transform EdF and GdF into limited companies, a move which would pave the way for privatisation. Parliament will decide src=] Patrick Devedjian, French industry minister The centre-right government wants to sell off up to 30% of EdF in order to fund urgently-needed investment in France's electricity network without putting its already overstretched finances under additional strain. But the CGT union said the government had neglected alternatives to privatisation. "A decision of this nature and importance cannot be taken when there is so much controversy, when expert advice on other ways of responding to the challenges facing EdF and GdF," CGT president Bernard Thibault told RTL Radio. Higher prices French industry minister Patrick Devedjian said the government would stand firm. "The matter is being put before parliament, it represents the nation, and EdF belongs to the nation. Parliament will decide," he said. And finance minister Nicolas Sarkozy said electricity prices would have to rise in order to shore up EdF's financial position. "The price of electricity in France has been built, to a large extent, on the deterioration of the financial situation of (EdF)," he told RTL. Eric Chanay of Morgan Stanley told the BBC's World Business Report that the protests were misguided. "The unions have made a big mistake," he said. "People have been stranded in stations for hours - public opinion is not backing EdF employees." The latest round of protests - which follow a 24-hour stoppage three weeks ago - look set to pile further pressure on France's ruling UMP party, which was trounced in last week's European elections. ***************************************************************** 25 Slovak news: Economy minister predicts 2009 energy crisis Slovakia's English language newspaper June 14 - 20,2004, Volume 10, Number 23 [http://www.relo.sk] SLOVAKIA will face an energy crisis in 2009 due to a shortage of electrical energy, Economy Minister Pavol Rusko has warned. In 2008, two blocks of the Jaslovské Bohunice nuclear power plant will be decommissioned and cease production, yet the third and fourth blocks of the Mochovce nuclear plant will not yet be launched, the news wire SITA wrote. Slovakia will have an electricity production shortage of 1,600 megawatts in 2009, experts estimate. The country will not be able to import the missing energy, as the country’s dominant electricity transmission provider, Slovenská elektrizaèná prenosová sústava, does not have the capacity to import so much electricity. Rusko proposed a system of energy allotment as a solution. "We will have no other possibility," he said. Rusko is a strong advocate of finishing the additional blocks of the Mochovce Compiled by Beata Balogová from press reports The Slovak Spectator cannot vouch for the accuracy of the information presented in its Flash News postings. [6/15/2004 10:16:24 AM] Copyright © 1998-2003 The Rock spol. s r.o. All rights ***************************************************************** 26 IAEA: Introductory Statement to the Board of Governors + [IAEA.ORG :: Atoms for Peace] Statements of the Director General 14 June 2004 | Vienna, Austria IAEA Board of Governors by IAEA Director General Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei Our agenda for this meeting covers a broad range of issues, including the Agency’s Annual Report, the Technical Cooperation Report, the Safeguards Implementation Report, the report of the Programme and Budget Committee, and a number of specific nuclear technology, safety and verification issues. I will briefly address these and other issues of interest to the Board. ANNUAL REPORT The Annual Report serves as the Board’s report to the General Conference, and as the Agency’s report to the United Nations and the general public. The draft report before you summarizes the scope and the results of the Agency’s programme of work in 2003. In particular, it highlights the role of the Agency in transferring nuclear science and technology to Member States to promote social and economic development, our verification role in support of the non-proliferation regime, and our efforts to enhance nuclear safety and security. THE AGENCY’S TECHNICAL COOPERATION PROGRAMME You have before you the Technical Cooperation (TC) Report for 2003. The Agency’s TC programme continues to be a principal mechanism for implementing the Agency’s basic mission: “Atoms for Peace”. The report reviews the achievements of the TC programme in the past year. Despite factors that hampered programme delivery — including the outbreak of SARS in the East Asia and Pacific region, and security related issues in a number of regions — programme implementation in 2003, measured in financial terms, reached an all-time high of $76.1 million. This naturally has continued to help developing countries in many areas. Nuclear medicine and radiotherapy projects increased the availability of cancer diagnosis and treatment and improved the radiation protection of patients and technicians. Crop production, for both local consumption and export, was increased through the use of the sterile insect technique, as well as through improved varieties of fruits and legumes resistant to disease and drought. Progress in identifying water resources and mapping aquifer flows was made using isotope hydrology methods. And we continued to make progress in upgrading radiation protection infrastructures in all regions. TC Programme Management Country programme frameworks (CPFs), used as planning tools to design TC projects within the context of national priorities, are now being applied in 89 countries. Thematic plans — which use the results of field experience to highlight particular technical areas in which a nuclear technology could have a significant impact — were prepared or are under way on the use of medical imaging technology in diagnostic radiology, and the use of nuclear analytical techniques in managing air pollution. This will make a total of 14 thematic plans in place. The Agency expanded its partnerships with other United Nations system organizations, international financial institutions, regional organizations and other relevant bodies. For example, the Agency last year entered into a partnership with the Global Environment Facility to develop a framework for sustainable management of the Nubian Aquifer system, using isotope hydrology. This will enable the countries that use the aquifer — Chad, Egypt, the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (Libya) and Sudan — to develop an effective groundwater management plan. The Secretariat continues to work with Member States to mobilize extrabudgetary resources. Extrabudgetary contributions by donor countries increased to about $6.9 million in 2003, covering projects that ranged from radiotherapy and agriculture to nuclear safety and security. In addition, cost-sharing by recipient countries increased to $4.3 million last year. For example: Jordan contributed $300 000 towards a sterile insect technique project to eliminate the Mediterranean Fruit Fly; Nigeria contributed $400 000 towards the installation and commissioning of a tandem accelerator; and Angola, Bolivia, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Malaysia, Nicaragua and the United Republic of Tanzania all made substantial contributions towards either establishing or enhancing facilities for radiotherapy or nuclear medicine. Programme of Action for Cancer Therapy As I mentioned in March, the Secretariat has been working on a new approach to raise public awareness of the impending crisis of cancer in developing countries. As presented last year in an Agency booklet entitled ‘A Silent Crisis: Cancer Treatment in Developing Countries’, a large deficit exists in equipment and staff in developing countries that prevents many patients from receiving appropriate radiotherapy treatment. The report before you outlines an approach — referred to as Programme of Action for Cancer Therapy (PACT) — which seeks to increase our capacity to assist Member States in providing cancer treatment and care, working in conjunction with the World Health Organization and others, mainly by expanding our fundraising efforts with non-traditional donors. This is the first effort of this sort by the Agency. With your support and the cooperation and assistance of others, we will endeavour to make it a success on which we can build further. TC Programme Funding Let me turn briefly to a number of other issues related to TC programme funding. You will recall that the TC programme received considerable attention during the Board’s discussion of the budget package proposal agreed on last year. Among other considerations, the Board agreed to suspend Assessed Programme Costs (APCs) for 2004, and agreed further that in June, the Board would decide on the future of APCs. An open-ended working group was convened to reach consensus on this issue, led by the Governor from India. The report of the working group before you presents the consensus proposal arrived at — which, I am pleased to note, continues to recognize the shared financial responsibility of both recipient and donor States. An informal working group has also been meeting on the Rate of Attainment mechanism, focusing on ways to ensure that Technical Cooperation Fund (TCF) resources are assured, sufficient and predictable. A third question relates to the harmonization of the TC programme cycle with that of the regular programme and budget. The Secretariat has prepared a document that reviews the implications of harmonizing the two cycles. Based on last year’s budget package agreement, the Board is to take a decision in September of this year on whether to recommend harmonizing the cycles in 2008. As the Board considers these issues, we should continue to remember that the overall objective is adequate and reliable funding for the TC programme. As you will recall, the situation of the TCF was a matter of some concern at our March Board meeting. I am pleased to report that, since that time, a number of Member States have made contributions to the 2003 TCF, bringing the rate of attainment for 2003 to 86.8% — the highest percentage ever achieved, although below the target rate of 90% agreed for that year. This is a positive development — offset, however, by the fact that late payments, particularly those involving large contributions, lead to programme uncertainty and have an impact on operational efficiency. I would reiterate that, in order to facilitate efficient and effective budgeting and programme delivery, TC funding must be timely, predictable and assured. TC Programme Oversight In the past year, a number of reviews of the TC programme and its management have been undertaken, by both internal and external oversight bodies. Recommendations have been made both regarding improvements to the delivery of the TC programme and on how to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of TC programme management. The Agency Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) report on its review of TC processes and workload is before you. It notes the initiatives already taken to improve TC programme management and the good track record on self-assessment. Based on the potential for improvements noted in this review, we are developing a framework for implementing a change initiative covering the next 12 months. The review concluded that TC needed a limited increase in human resources, but that any such increase should also consider ongoing corporate restructuring efforts, the potential use of outsourcing and fluctuations in the TC project portfolio. The review also suggested a flatter and more consolidated organizational structure for the Department of Technical Cooperation. I am closely examining these recommendations with a view to continuing to improve performance. NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY Action Plan on Decommissioning You have before you for approval a draft action plan on the decommissioning of nuclear facilities, which incorporates the recommendations from the Agency’s conference on safe decommissioning for nuclear activities held in 2002 in Berlin. The proposed plan would, inter alia: strengthen the planning, management and organization of decommissioning projects; enhance the sharing of information on different national practices; and highlight the essential information to be retained for deferred decommissioning projects. The plan also aims to improve methods of safety assessment and stimulate harmonized safety requirements related to decommissioning. Status of INPRO The Agency’s International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO) has begun Phase 1B. Six case studies by INPRO member countries are under way to provide feedback on the effectiveness of the INPRO methodology for assessing innovative energy systems — in Argentina, China, the Czech Republic, India, the Republic of Korea and the Russian Federation. Experts are carrying out eight additional studies to cover technologies not addressed in the national studies. Later this year, once the results have been received and the INPRO methodology updated accordingly, this updated methodology will be made available for the assessment of current and future innovative reactor and fuel cycle systems. NUCLEAR SAFETY AND SECURITY Nuclear Installation Safety Although substantial progress has been made in improving the safe operational performance of nuclear installations over the past years, a number of issues continue to be of concern. As nuclear power technology continues to spread and more countries develop indigenous plant designs, the resultant diversification highlights the importance of: ensuring quality; managing and sharing knowledge; utilizing common, internationally accepted safety standards; balancing the needs of safety and security; promoting cooperation and sharing of experience among regulatory authorities; and adapting the practices of international vendors and contractors to the diverse cultures of countries with new nuclear programmes. In addition, events continue to be reported with root causes that call into question the effectiveness of safety at nuclear facilities. Analyses of these events often reveal operational practices that contributed to questionable decisions being taken, and sometimes point to the need for improvements within both the regulatory authorities and the operating organizations. And a number of issues related to the long term operation of nuclear facilities — such as equipment ageing concerns — require further attention. The Agency continues to work towards the development of an international consensus on sound approaches for dealing with these issues. To that end, we will hold a major conference in October in Beijing, focused on ‘Continuous Improvement of Nuclear Safety in a Changing World’. I welcome wide participation in this conference, and look forward to its findings and recommendations. Transport Safety As called for in the Action Plan approved by the Board in March, the Secretariat has completed its revision of its Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material, and the document is before you for approval. Other issues covered in the Plan are being actively addressed. The denial of shipments of radioactive material continues to be of significant concern — particularly when shipments involve radionuclides intended for use in medical activities. Within the next few months, we expect to have recommendations on how to minimize these denials. While on the topic of transport safety, I should note that the Agency in April completed a comprehensive Transport Safety Assessment Service (TranSAS) mission to France, with particular attention paid to maritime and air transport. The final report is being completed and will be published in the next few months. I continue to urge all countries involved in the transport of nuclear and radioactive materials to take advantage of this Agency service. Emergency Preparedness and Response The 2002 General Conference asked the Secretariat to seek ways to facilitate cooperation among Parties to the Early Notification and Assistance Conventions. Last year’s General Conference supported the Secretariat’s intention to develop an action plan to enhance the international emergency preparedness and response system, working with the Competent Authorities for these Conventions. The resulting action plan is before you for approval. Global Threat Reduction Initiative While on the topic of nuclear safety and security, I would note that, last month in Vienna, US Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham announced an expanded ‘Global Threat Reduction Initiative’, with the objective of securing weapons-usable nuclear material around the world. We are in dialogue with the US Department of Energy to see how this initiative can support the Agency’s activities in this field. I will naturally keep the Board informed. NUCLEAR VERIFICATION The Safeguards Implementation Report and Safeguards Statement for 2003 The Safeguards Implementation Report (SIR) for 2003 is also before you. For 19 States with both a comprehensive safeguards agreement and an additional protocol in force or being otherwise applied, the Agency was able to conclude — having found no indication of the existence of undeclared nuclear material or activities — that all nuclear material had been placed under safeguards and remained in peaceful nuclear activities or was otherwise adequately accounted for. For 125 other States (and Taiwan, China), the Agency was able to reach a more limited conclusion — namely, that the nuclear material and other items that had been placed under safeguards remained in peaceful use or were otherwise adequately accounted for. With regard to Libya and the Islamic Republic of Iran, both of which had been engaged in undeclared nuclear activities, the Agency was not able to draw this conclusion. Implementation of Safeguards in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Since 31 December 2002, when on-site verification activities were terminated at the request of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), the Agency has been unable to draw any conclusions regarding the DPRK’s nuclear activities. Unfortunately, I have no new developments to report. Implementation of Safeguards in the Islamic Republic of Iran You have before you a detailed progress report on the Agency’s verification work in Iran. I will limit my remarks to a few key observations. First, the Agency is making steady progress in understanding the nature and extent of Iran’s nuclear programme and in resolving most aspects of Iran’s uranium conversion and laser enrichment activities. Iran has continued to act as if its additional protocol were in force and in May provided its initial declarations. With Iran’s cooperation, the Agency has had access to all requested locations. We have also made progress on verifying Iran’s suspension of enrichment related and reprocessing activities, although the suspension is not yet comprehensive due to the continued production of centrifuge components at some workshops. While a number of issues remain open regarding various aspects of Iran’s nuclear programme, the central question is whether Iran’s uranium enrichment activities have been fully declared. Two aspects relevant to this question are still being investigated. The first relates to the origin of the particles of high enriched and low enriched uranium contamination found at various locations related to uranium enrichment in Iran. The information provided by Iran in April 2004 — information requested since August 2003 — has not been sufficient to resolve this complex matter. Iran should make every effort to provide additional relevant information, particularly about the origin of the components in question, and explanations about the presence of a cluster of 36% uranium-235 particles at one location. Resolving the issue of contamination, however, requires the cooperation of other States from which the contaminated equipment is believed to have originated. I would call on those States to make every effort to help us resolve these issues. I should clarify, in this regard, that our mention in some of our reports of ‘supplier States’, or the involvement of other States in different forms, does not imply that the transactions involved took place with the knowledge of the respective governments. Second, we need to gain a fuller understanding of the extent of Iran’s efforts to import, manufacture and use centrifuges of the P-2 design. As mentioned in my report, the information provided by Iran with regard to the P-2 centrifuge programme, after repeated requests, has been changing and at times contradictory. Let me illustrate. In Iran’s October 2003 declaration, the P-2 centrifuge programme was not mentioned. Then, in January 2004, Iran acknowledged that it had received P-2 drawings from a foreign intermediary. At that time, Iranian authorities stated that Iran had not obtained any P-2 centrifuges, or components thereof, from abroad, and also stated that the P-2 programme had been only for small scale R. In April, however, Iran informed the Agency that it had, in fact, imported some components relevant to its P-2 enrichment activities — and in late May acknowledged specifically that these components were magnets relevant to P-2 centrifuges, and that, in 2002, it had attempted to obtain thousands of these magnets. At the time of issuance of the report before you, additional information on the P-2 centrifuge issue was being provided by Iran, which we are currently assessing. We have also taken environmental samples relevant to this issue, which are currently undergoing analysis. I do hope that this information will help us in understanding and clarifying all issues relevant to the P-2 programme. Clearly, this pattern of engagement on the part of Iran is less than satisfactory if it wishes to build confidence in the international community that Iran has indeed revealed the full extent of its nuclear programme. After a year of difficulties encountered by the inspectors, Iran needs to be proactive and fully transparent. It has been almost two years since Iran’s undeclared nuclear programme came to the Agency’s attention. It is essential for the integrity and credibility of the inspection process that we are able to bring these issues to a close within the next few months, and provide the international community with the assurances it urgently seeks regarding Iran’s nuclear activities. In that regard, the prompt cooperation of Iran is essential. Moreover, the cooperation of all other countries involved is also key to our ability to resolve some of these outstanding issues. Implementation of Safeguards in the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya You also have before you a report on the Agency’s verification activities with respect to Libya. Last December, Libya announced its decision to eliminate all materials, equipment and programmes leading to the production of internationally proscribed weapons — including nuclear weapons. In the months since, we have been working closely with the Libyan authorities to gain a complete picture of its nuclear programme. The report before you summarizes the details of those efforts. Libya has proactively cooperated with the Agency by providing information and prompt access to all locations requested. We are making good progress in understanding Libya’s past nuclear activities but some aspects still need to be assessed, and it is important that Libya provide the necessary information to enable that assessment to be made. Examples of these issues include: confirmation of the origin of the uranium hexafluoride (UF6) Libya received in 2000 and 2001; verification of Libya’s planned capabilities for UF6 production; and understanding the source of high enriched and low enriched uranium contamination on gas centrifuge equipment in Libya. Implementation of Verification Activities in Iraq The recent UN Security Council resolution 1546, inter alia, reaffirmed the intention of the Council to revisit the mandate of the Agency in Iraq. It has now been more than a year since our inspectors were last in Iraq. I sincerely hope that the Security Council will soon provide the long-awaited guidance on the future of this mandate. Given the current level of instability in the country, and Iraq’s past nuclear weapons related activities and capabilities, it is important and urgent that a credible verification and monitoring system be reinstalled. Status of Safeguards Agreements and Additional Protocols Our goal continues to be the ability to provide credible, comprehensive assurances regarding all States that have made non-proliferation commitments. This requires that States have both a comprehensive safeguards agreement and an additional protocol in force. The Board has on its current agenda the approval of additional protocols for Albania, Cameroon and Morocco. On 30 April, additional protocols entered into force for the then 15 States of the European Union and for Euratom. Following the recent entry into force of additional protocols with Cuba, El Salvador, Ghana and Uruguay, the Agency now implements additional protocols in 60 States. Although this status represents a marked improvement over the past year, more needs to be done. Forty-three States party to the NPT continue to have no safeguards agreements in force, and 129 do not have an additional protocol in force or otherwise applied. I reiterate my call to all States that have not done so to conclude and bring into force their respective safeguards agreements and additional protocols. Integrated Safeguards Work continues on the implementation of integrated safeguards — limited, of course, to those States that have in force both a comprehensive safeguards agreement and an additional protocol. I am pleased to note that the Secretariat was recently able to reach all conclusions needed for the implementation of integrated safeguards in Japan — the State with the largest nuclear programme subject to Agency safeguards. The comprehensive nature of this work has enabled the Agency to enhance the effectiveness of safeguards in Japan and will result in reducing the frequency of its inspections at a significant number of Japanese facilities. Safeguards Reviews Two evaluations of the Agency safeguards programme have recently been completed — one by external evaluators, coordinated by OIOS, and the other by the Standing Advisory Group on Safeguards Implementation. Taken together, these reviews covered the full range of management and technical issues, including operational practices and safeguards criteria. While we are still studying the results of these reviews, I would note that the analyses were overall quite positive regarding the effectiveness and efficiency of the safeguards programme, and provided a broad range of recommendations. After reviewing these recommendations, I intend to report to the November Board. REPORT OF THE PROGRAMME AND BUDGET COMMITTEE The Board has before it the report of the Programme and Budget Committee (PBC). The discussions at the PBC last month were relatively straightforward, owing in part to the agreement reached last year on the budget ‘package proposal’. I will make just a few remarks on the documents before you. With regard to the Agency’s Accounts and the External Auditor’s Report, I would like to reiterate my appreciation of the work over the past years by our External Auditor, Sir John Bourn, the Comptroller and Auditor General of the United Kingdom. As he has noted, the large majority of his recommendations have been implemented, with positive results. I look forward to an equally constructive relationship with his successor, Mr. Norbert Hauser, Vice-President of the German Supreme Audit Institution. On the Programme Performance Report for 2002–2003, we appreciate the suggestions made by Member States to improve the assessment process and the report format. This was our first such report — and the first within the United Nations system — to use a full results based assessment of outcomes achieved in Member States, using pre-established performance indicators. The Draft Budget Update for 2005 adheres to the financial envelope set in last year’s ‘package proposal’, adjusted for price changes calculated according to our established methodologies. Looking ahead to the 2006–2007 biennium, the Secretariat has proposed strategic issues to be considered and programme changes to be made. Finally, let me note the importance of measures to enhance the security of the Vienna International Centre and the urgency of implementing those measures. Similar to the United Nations headquarters in New York, the Secretariat intends to request a supplementary appropriation when the details of these necessary security enhancements become clearer — most likely by the September meeting of the Board. EXPERT GROUP You may recall that at the March meeting of the Board, I said that it was clear that the wide dissemination of the most proliferation-sensitive parts of the nuclear fuel cycle — the production of new fuel, the processing of weapon-usable material, and the disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste — could be the ‘Achilles’ heel’ of the nuclear proliferation regime and that it was important to tighten control over these operations, which could be done by bringing them under some form of multilateral control. I also said that I was aware that this is a complex issue and that a variety of views exist on the feasibility or possible modalities of such a multilateral approach, but that we owe it to ourselves to examine all possible options. I have now appointed an international expert group to consider possible multinational approaches to the front and back ends of the nuclear fuel cycle. The mandate of this group is to identify issues and possible options in this regard. I intend to submit a report on their findings to the March Board next year. I have asked Mr. Bruno Pellaud, former Deputy Director General and Head of the Department of Safeguards, to chair this group. SCIENTIFIC FORUM I would also like to inform the Board that, at this year’s General Conference, our Scientific Forum will focus on important issues and challenges related to the nuclear fuel cycle, including: advanced reactor and fuel cycle design, developments in spent fuel management, reprocessing, and waste treatment; progress in research reactor utilization, including conversion of facilities from using high enriched to low enriched uranium; and key issues requiring further R&D. CONCLUSION The Secretariat remains committed to the efficient and effective implementation of programmes that reflect the priorities of all our Member States. Our success will naturally continue to depend on your guidance and support. More DG Statements » Copyright 2003-2004, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100, Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail: [Official.Mail@iaea.org] Disclaimer ***************************************************************** 27 Sify: 'Nuke spy' deported on mere suspicion By Pramod Kumar Singh in New Delhi Wednesday, 16 June , 2004, 03:34 After nearly 72 hours of interrogation, the intelligence agencies have laid hands on the first worthwhile piece of information regarding deported 'nuke peddler' Akhtar Hussain Qutabuddin Ahmed. Well-placed sources said that Akhtar Hussain was getting regular remittance from Dubai in his Standard Chartered Bank account in Green Park. The money transfers into his accounts varied between Rs one lakh to Rs 1.50 lakh which he claimed were paid for his export business. Joint teams of intelligence agencies have been questioning Akhtar Hussain at an undisclosed destination in Mumbai ever since he landed at Sahar International airport on Sunday. Agencies are trying to find out the real motive behind his attempt to impress upon the diplomats of various countries based in United Arab Emirates (UAE) that he was in a position to pass on Indian nuke secrets. There are indications that he could be booked for perpetuating fraud and cheating in Mumbai itself, well placed sources said.##Ad## Till about three months back, Hussain lived in the upmarket Green Park area of South Delhi colony with his wife and two children. He vacated his rented accommodation at H-20, 2nd floor, Green Park Main in March, 2004 and reportedly left for Dubai under his assumed name of Akhtar Hussaini. It was immediately not known whether he took his two children and wife with him or not. When this reporter visited the house where he lived, the owner and the neighbours refused to speak. All they said was that he lived here for 18 months and they were not sure what he really did to earn his living. Sources said, since Akhtar was seen frequenting various embassies at New Delhi, he was put under surveillance by the Intelligence Bureau (IB) as his activities were found to be suspicious. He was initially denied visa by Gulf countries owing to the "internal alert" of the IB. However, his younger brother, Asif sent him a ticket along with a passport issued in his name by the Indian Embassy in UAE. The visa was granted to him in the name of promoting tourism but he returned in 2000 and since then his activities were under the scanner. He managed to get a new passport (E-5516172) from Delhi in March, 2003 by changing the spelling of his name from Hussain to Hussaini. He travelled to Dubai on the basis of this passport and started his shady business of so called "nuke secrets". Central intelligence agencies scanned the list of the employees of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) since its inception to know whether any scientist named Ahmed Hussain as claimed by Akhtar had ever worked at BARC. Even travel records of those BARC employees who had gone to the Gulf countries for attending seminars on atomic energy were tooth-combed but nothing was found, the sources maintained. The authorities at Dubai were contacted to ascertain the real facts behind his summary deportation but no concrete information was provided by them. Sources maintained Indian intelligence agencies were not happy with the Dubai administration for its inept handling of the whole affair. They deported Akhtar Hussain to India on mere suspicion that he was trying to sell Indian nuclear secrets to the friendly countries. UAE authorities have been refusing to acknowledge Indian requests for handing over the underworld kingpins ranging from Anees Ibrahim Kaskar, Abu Salem, Chhota Shakeel and others owing allegiance to mafia don Dawood Ibrahim for over a decade. Despite repeated requests none of these were accepted. However, in this case, the Dubai Police hastily put Akhtar on an Air India flight and deported him back without any papers and solid evidence, they said. © Copyright Sify Ltd, 1998-2004. All rights reserved. See ***************************************************************** 28 ThisisLondon: Government 'failing' on energy crisis Robert Lea, Evening Standard 15 June 2004 BRITAIN is moving closer to a blackouts crisis in the energy industry, as the Government was today accused of wasting another year by burying its head in the sand. In a report published today, the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) said the Department of Trade and Industry fails to grasp that a shortfall caused by closing nuclear and coal-fired power stations cannot be replaced in time by the growing investment in wind farms. 'Last year we asked the question, will the lights stay on? One year on the Government still believes that the market will provide and that renewables and energy conservation will bridge an impossibly large shortfall,' the ICE report says. 'Today, electricity is generated by 35% from coal, 22% from nuclear, 38% from gas, 2% from renewable and 3% from other sources. 'By 2010 that mix will be very different, with coal falling to 17% and nuclear to 16%. Six years is a perilously short time to make good the generation gap.' David Anderson, chairman of the ICE's energy board, said: 'The Government is busily promoting renewables, but since we warned about the future of energy supply not much has been done and another year has gone by.' He says electricity companies are not investing in new, cleaner, gas-fired plant because they cannot make an economic return. Power generators need a sufficient 'spark spread' - the difference between the cost at which they buy the gas and then sell the electricity - but that is being hampered by rising wholesale gas prices in a competitive energy supply market which is keeping retail electricity prices down. ©2004 Associated New Media [http://www.anm.co.uk] | Terms thisislondon.com ***************************************************************** 29 Arizona Republic: Palo Verde shutdown has utilities scrambling [http://www.azcentral.com/ 65,000 lost power after grid glitch Max Jarman Jun. 15, 2004 12:00 AM A power grid malfunction early Monday sparked blackouts in the West Valley, Wickenburg and Tucson and idled three major power plants, including the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station. The plants shut down automatically when they lost outside power. The shutdowns prevented a chain reaction similar to the one that caused last summer's enormous widespread East Coast blackout. "The system functioned as it was supposed to," said Jim McDonald, a spokesman for Arizona Public Service Co. To stabilize the grid after the plant outages, officials at APS and Tucson Electric Power ordered power cut to a combined 65,000 customers at 7:45 a.m. "Some lost power, and some just saw their lights dim," McDonald said. Power had been restored to all of the affected customers by 10 a.m. Related link  12 News video: Power problem forced school's evacuation It could be a week before Palo Verde, which is west of Phoenix, is back in service. That could create supply shortfalls for plant owners APS and Salt River Project. Both utilities said Monday that they believed there would be no shortages. "We're in good shape in serving our customers today and probably for the rest of the week," McDonald said. Although electricity demand typically increases throughout the week, temperatures are expected to fall and reduce the amount of energy used for air-conditioning. The officials at the power companies acknowledged the remote possibility of more selective blackouts if they can't find other sources of electricity, or if a plant unexpectedly shuts down. APS cut power to about 30,000 customers at 7:45 a.m. Monday when the Palo Verde shutdown created instability on the grid. An additional 35,000 customers in the Tucson area saw their power cut by Tucson Electric Power Co. "We lost 60 megawatts from Palo Verde and had to shed load to balance the system and keep our plants from going down," said Steve Lynn, a spokesman for TEP. About 1,000 SRP customers also lost power during the outage. Most of the affected APS customers were in the vicinity of Sun City and Sun City West, but lights flickered as far away as central Phoenix. A Nuclear Regulatory Commission bulletin attributed the outage to a malfunctioning transformer, but McDonald said the cause is still under investigation. He said it appeared to have started on a high-voltage line near 115th Avenue and Union Hills Drive in Surprise. On Monday, McDonald said the three generators at Palo Verde and two at the nearby Red Hawk Power Plant shut down when outside power to the facilities was interrupted. Duke Energy Corp.'s nearby Arlington Valley Power Plant also shut down. Both Arlington and Red Hawk, which is owned by Pinnacle West Energy, a subsidiary of APS parent Pinnacle West Capital Corp., were up and running by midmorning. But restarting nuclear-powered Palo Verde takes more time. It could be the end of the week before all three of Palo Verde's 1,300-megawatt generators are operating at full capacity. Meanwhile, Palo Verde owners APS and SRP have to find other sources of electricity to replace the lost supply. Spokesman Scott Harelson said SRP pressed seldom-used older generators into service and was buying electricity on the open market to cover its shortfall. The price of electricity at the Palo Verde Switchyard on the Western Power Grid jumped $7.70, or 16 percent, Monday to $55.46 per megawatt hour. Those costs could be passed onto customers. APS also had to buy on the spot market, but it must seek regulatory approval for a rate increase. SRP put its customers on interruptible contracts on notice but got through the day without reducing their power. Those customers pay lower rates with the understanding their power could be cut in times of short supply. Although none of its wholly owned plants were affected, SRP owns 17.5 percent of Palo Verde, which entitles it to about 683 megawatts. One megawatt can supply power to 250 to 1,000 homes, depending on use. APS owns 29.1 percent of Palo Verde and is entitled to about 1,130 megawatts. Other Palo Verde owners are El Paso Electric Co., 15.8 percent; Southern California Edison, 15.8 percent; Public Service Co. of New Mexico, 10.2 percent; Southern California Public Power Authority, 5.9 percent; and Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, 5.7 percent. McDonald said APS will look to acquire power on the market and fire up units that are not operating. Last summer, workers failed to reopen a ground switch after making repairs to a high-voltage line and knocked out power to several Valley power plants, cutting electricity to 90,000 customers. [http://www.azcentral.com/php-bin/clicktrack/popular.php] | Copyright 2004, azcentral.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 30 Free Lance-Star: Nuclear energy potential? Just a lot of major problems [http://www.fredericksburg.com] Date published: 6/15/2004 Mr. Walt Velona ["Nuclear power could mean the end of America's oil dependence," June 1] recognizes that at the current rate of usage, our fossil-fuel-based economy is unsustainable, both economically and environmentally. However, his solution--that we build 2,000 new nuclear reactors over the next 20 years--can't work in practice and creates additional nightmares. In the past 50 years, the average reactor has been 400 percent over budget and four years late in starting up. The trillions of dollars it would cost to carry out this program could be far better spent improving renewable energy technologies, expanding renewable generating capacity, and promoting energy efficiency and conservation. Aside from the costs, while a pebble bed reactor is immune to a traditional nuclear meltdown, the fuel is contained inside "pebbles" of graphite, which are highly flammable. A radioactive fire could be devastating. The major cost-saving feature of these reactors is the lack of a containment dome, making them highly susceptible to terrorist penetration. Dominion has already started down this treacherous path with its North Anna Early Site Permit application and its lead position in a consortium seeking $250 million from the government for new reactor designs. Flaws in their proposal abound. Nuclear power will mean only more problems, not solutions. Wenonah Hauter Washington Wenonah Hauter is director of Public Citizens Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. Date published: 6/15/2004 Fredericksburg.com, 605 William Street, Fredericksburg, VA 22401 Comments? Send us Feedback, Phone: 540-368-5055 To contact all other newspaper departments, please call 540-374-5000. Copyright 2004, The Free Lance-Star Publishing Co. of Fredericksburg, Va. ***************************************************************** 31 SignOnSanDiego.com: Nuclear regulators inspect Palo Verde, plant remains inoperable By Michelle Roberts Rushlo ASSOCIATED PRESS 2:28 p.m. June 15, 2004 PHOENIX  Federal nuclear regulators arrived Tuesday at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station to begin an inspection following the unexpected shutdown of all three units at the plant. The inspectors planned to look at the causes of the shutdown and the response. Nuclear regulators were concerned that diesel generators that are supposed to provide backup power did not do so, said Victor Dricks, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The units are supposed to each have two diesel generators that will operate if power is lost. Only one of the generators at Unit 2 worked properly, Dricks said. "We believe in redundant power capabilities so that's not a good thing," he said. The plant shut down as a fail-safe on Monday morning after a disruption in the western power grid. The disruption caused roughly 65,000 Arizona customers to lose power for about an hour. Customers in New Mexico and Northern California were also apparently affected. Power was restored using alternative supplies, said Jim McDonald, a spokesman for Arizona Public Service Co., the utility that operates the plant 50 miles west of Phoenix. It was expected to take several more days for Palo Verde to be operational again, McDonald said. "We have to make sure everything is ready to start." Monday's shutdown was the first time all three units at the plant, one of the nation's largest nuclear facilities, automatically shut down because of a disruption. By Tuesday, APS officials had concluded that the outage started with the failure of an insulator on a large transmission line in northwest Phoenix. The failure should have tripped breakers that are designed to isolate the problem and protect the rest of the grid. But the breakers also failed, causing Palo Verde and a nearby gas-fired plant to shut down. "What you see is the system protecting itself," said McDonald. The disruption caused about 30,000 customers in Phoenix and 35,000 customers in Tucson to briefly lose power. In Albuquerque, N.M., about 16,000 customers lost power for five to 12 minutes, and in San Jose, Calif., about 5,000 people lost power, according to the East Valley Tribune. Palo Verde supplies power to about 4 million customers in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California. On the Net: APS: [http://www.aps.com/home] the Union-Tribune | Contact the Union-Tribune © Copyright 2004 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 32 Interfax: Russia to continue building nuclear plant in Iran Updated: Jun 15 2004 Interfax.com [http://www.interfax.com] Text version MOSCOW. June 15 (Interfax) - Russia will continue constructing the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran despite IAEA criticism of Iran, a spokesman for the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency, which is in the process of being reorganized, told Interfax commenting on the IAEA Board of Governors' debate on Iran. On Monday, the IAEA accused Iran of not fully cooperating with its inspectors who are trying to find out whether Iran is developing nuclear weapons. Tehran has denied the accusations and demanded that the IAEA stop probing the issue. "The criticism of Iran in the report of IAEA Director General Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei is by no means related to the project of Russia's construction of the Bushehr nuclear plant," the spokesman said. "The IAEA has never had any complaints about Bushehr. Hence there are no reasons for anxiety about the possibility of Russia's withdrawal from the project," he said. He said that IAEA inspectors have not discovered any connection between the Iranian nuclear program and suspected attempts of developing nuclear arms. Russia is building the nuclear plant based on an over $800 million intergovernmental agreement. The spokesman said the IAEA inspectors have visited Bushehr many times but have found nothing wrong there. The IAEA Board of Governors is meeting in Vienna from June 14-18. It is expected to pass a resolution on Iran. © 1991-2004 Interfax ***************************************************************** 33 San Luis Obispo Tribune: Public tours of Diablo Canyon plant may resume | 06/15/2004 | Visits were ordered stopped after Sept. 11 terror attacks David Sneed The Tribune AVILA BEACH - Public tours of the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant, which were halted abruptly following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, may soon resume. Immediately after the attacks, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission ordered a suspension of such visits due to security concerns. The agency is working with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to find a way to restore the visits without compromising heightened security precautions at the plant, said Victor Dricks, an NRC spokesman. For their part, PG&E officials are eager to get public tours going again. Such visits are an important public-education tool, said Jeff Lewis, plant spokesman. For example, it allows the public to see firsthand the plant's armed guards and some other security measures. "We think it's very important that we have public access even if it is in a limited venue," he said. "It helps demystify what is going on out at the plant." Diablo Canyon is only visible from boats on the ocean or airplanes. The mystery of the plant, coupled with the fact that it has been in the news a lot lately because of the utility's proposal to build an above-ground storage facility for highly radioactive used reactor fuel, has created pent-up public interest in visiting Diablo Canyon. Earlier this month, the Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee took a busload of 22 people to the plant. It took only an hour for the sign-ups to fill. "We could have easily filled two or three buses," said Robert Rathie, with the safety committee office in Monterey. "The community has demonstrated a real interest in the plant." If allowed, the free tours would be similar to the safety committee's excursion, Lewis said. There would be stops at an overlook above the plant, the site of the proposed storage facility, reactor control-room simulators and the intake structure for the plant's ocean-water cooling system. Like before the Sept. 11 attacks, the tours would not go into the security area immediately surrounding the reactor containment domes. They would be canceled during times of heightened national security risk. PG&E officials hope to have an agreement soon. ***************************************************************** 34 NRC: NRC Sends Augmented Inspection Team to Palo Verde News Release - Region IV - 2004-02 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV No. IV-04-024 June 15, 2004 CONTACT: Victor Dricks Phone: 817-860-8128 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov [opa4@nrc.gov] The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has dispatched a team from its Region IV office in Arlington, Texas, to the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station to look into the causes of, and the plant response to, the shutdown of its three reactors at the site on June 14. An electrical grid disturbance has been identified as the initiating cause of the shutdowns. Known as an Augmented Inspection Team (AIT), it will be charged with learning the facts surrounding the event at Palo Verde, which is located near Wintersburg, Arizona and operated by Arizona Public Service Co. Like all nuclear plants, Palo Verde uses off-site power. If that power source is interrupted, the plant is designed to shut down safely, which is exactly what occurred without any danger to public health or safety, said Region IV Deputy Regional Administrator Thomas P. Gwynn. However, because of some complications associated with the event, we want to take a detailed look at what occurred. Team members will arrive at the facility today. The teams findings will be made public in an inspection report to be issued within 30 days of completion of on-site reviews. At about 7:45 a.m. MST on June 14, all three Palo Verde reactors shut down automatically following a loss of off-site power. As they are designed to, four emergency diesel generators started up at Units 1 and 3 upon the interruption of off-site power. Those generators are designed to provide power to key safety systems and assist with the safe shutdown of the reactors. The loss of off-site power prompted the declaration of an Unusual Event at Units 1 and 3, the lowest level of emergency classification used by the NRC. However, one of two emergency diesel generators at Unit 2 failed to start. Operators were able to safely shut down the reactor and cool it using power provided by the diesel generator that did start. However because only a single power source was available, the licensee declared an Alert at Unit 2. This is the second lowest of four levels of emergency classification used by the NRC. Shortly before 10 a.m. MST, off-site power was restored and the Alert was downgraded to an Unusual Event. The Unusual Event for all three units was terminated shortly after noon. Last revised Tuesday, June 15, 2004 ***************************************************************** 35 John Blair: Nukes Are No Solution to Global Warming home [http://www.counterpunch.org/] / subscribe June 15, 2004 James Lovelock's Misquided Call By JOHN BLAIR A recent call by respected environmental leader, Professor James Lovelock, to combat global climate change by building nuclear plants may seem logical on the surface. Afterall, we don't hear much about nukes these days-just the occasional story of a forced shut down or the ongoing story about the controversy surrounding Bush's decision to move forward with the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump in Nevada-opposed, incidentally, by nearly everyone in Nevada. But, nukes problems are many-waste, security, lack of political support and most ominous for the proponents themselves, the enormous cost and doubt about dealing with the other issues. When Indiana's Marble Hill plant was forced to shut down construction in 1984, more than $2.8 billion had been squandered by an arrogant Public Service Indiana and it was only 20% complete. That compares with an original cost estimate of $700 million when the plants were announced. Capital markets found that money could not be spent fast enough to finish a nuke. It was so bad that PST's sister utility in Cinergy, Cincinnati Gas & Electric canceled their Zimmer nuke when it was more than 90% complete and converted it to coal. Across the US, nuclear investors saw their investments wither in the foul wind that followed Three Mile Island. It was not only construction costs that ran uncontrolled. Nukes require "enriched uranium" to form their fuel pellets. The record of enrichments plants around the country is a legacy of waste, disease and fraud. Since the nuclear industry has failed to grow, we have not had a community seeking to build an enrichment facility for a very long time. Enrichment is just the second phase of the nuclear fuel cycle. First comes mining of the precious uranium which, by itself, leaves huge volumes of contaminated waste that mainly stays piled up on mining company land. No solution for that is even discussed. Nuclear's third phase is transporting the commercial grade fuel. It is usually transported quietly by either rail or truck through unsuspecting communities. So far the record is good but we only operate slightly more than 100 nuclear plants in the US today. Will that record remain if we increase the number to, say, 300 plants across Central America and the US? Opposition to nukes in the past has mainly been locally based. Marble Hill was just one of many nukes that were either forced to cease construction by democratic action or stockholder revolt. Marble Hill caused PSI stock to fall from $28 per share during the height of construction to only $7 per share and should have caused PSI to go belly up, and it would have if it had not been bailed out by then Indiana Governor Orr's administration. Other nukes were either canceled or drastically reduced in size. Resistance grew strong after the meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979 and the disaster at Chernobyl in Ukraine in 1986. There has not been a nuclear facility to break ground since. It is academic to wonder how such a proposal would be met today in a community desperate for "jobs" at any cost. We are likely to find out in the near future since Bush is busy promoting more nukes and the huge taxpayer subsidies to make it happen. Trade issues come to bear as well. It used to be that corporations that owned U.S. based nukes had to be owned by Americans only. Free trade rules are likely to render that moot. Perhaps some angry Saudis could build a nuke in our midst in deference to the World Trade Organization. Or maybe, since political opposition is strong in the US, we will just build the nukes in Honduras or another Central American Free Trade Association country to promote economic development in that region. Yes, there are safety problems with nuclear plants. Since they are built by humans and operated by humans, they are subject to error all along the way. What would be a minor error at a coal plant could turn into a major disaster at a nuke. They must operate perfectly but yet they usually do not. Nukes in the private sector are built and operated by people who are trying to cut as many costs as possible so they can brag to their bosses about their profitability. News that major expense will be required to make something right while the plant is shut down for extensive repairs will not gain the plant manager favor in a multinational corporation hierarchy. That results in less than adequate oversight at any level of operation. Then, too, the regulatory feature of nukes has been severely compromised in ways that appear to allow nearly self regulation. A good example is First Energy's Davis-Besse plant in Ohio which had boron rusting away the steel dome of one of the units for years before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission acted. Numerous inspections failed to reveal the flaw. Most nukes are now owned by energy merchants, it is almost certain that the voluntary approach to inspection will be lacking. But it is not just the possibility of accidents that make nukes scary for neighbors, near and far. In today's world, terrorism is a far greater threat to the sanguine prospect of nuclear energy. Many of today's nukes are within a few feet of roads or highways that are accessible to the public. It may be that concrete containment buildings may be impervious to a rocket propelled grenade or a tornado, but they have never really been tested against a larger, tank type of weapon or a 747 piloted by a terrorist. But, the greatest threat from terrorists is probably a well-planned plant takeover by armed insurgents who would face only locally trained pretend-a-cops who stand in their way. Taking over a plant could result not only in holding an entire country hostage, but the right person at the controls could cause a disaster way beyond that experienced at either TMI or Chernobyl. Should that happen, the radiation unleashed could have devastating impacts on regional and global mortality and morbidity as well as severely impacting the genetics of several future generations. And, then there is nuclear waste. Each 1000 megawatt reactor yields enough plutonium each year to produce as many as forty nuclear bombs. Plutonium has a half-life of 24,000 years, meaning that in 24,000 years, half of its potency is gone. It takes at least ten half-lifes for it to become moderately inert-that is nearly a quarter million years. It seems logical to assume that in a quarter million years, there may be some despot emerge who would have the ability to process ever increasing volumes of nuclear waste into military use, at least creating a crude but highly lethal weapon. If we increase the volume of nuclear waste, there will be a corresponding volume of dirty bomb grade plutonium. It is impossible to avoid. But that is just one aspect of the nuclear waste issue. With such extraordinary long potency, nuclear waste must be kept from our physical environment forever. That is a task that has never been accomplished. What right do we have, as 21st Century humans whose species has existed for just about a quarter of the time it will take for today's plutonium to decay, to condemn future generations to protecting themselves from our greed for energy? What makes us think that we even need additional energy when our power plants operate at levels barely above 30% efficient so we can use it in appliances that operate at even less efficient levels? There is only one reason to build new power plants, nuclear, or coal-so we can continue to needlessly consume as if there is no tomorrow and create waste that will end up burying us in our own filth. And, they say that man has dominion over the Earth and all its beings-indeed! A massive public and private program to rebuild our energy infrastructure with more efficient appliances and generators is a tremendous economic growth opportunity. Efficiency gains could be our new export industry. Lovelock is right to recognize the immediate need to respond to global warming, but nuclear power carries too heavy a price for our grandkids to pay. John Blair runs Valley Watch, an environmental group in Evansville, Indiana that battles against big coal and the nuclear industry. In 1979, he won the Pulitzer Prize for news photography. He can be reached at: ecoserve1@aol.com [ecoserve1@aol.com] Weekend Edition Features for June 12 / 13, 2004 WWW http://www.counterpunch.org ***************************************************************** 36 foxreno.com: Glitch Shuts Down Nuke Plant; Triggers SJ Blackout [foxreno.com] [News] UPDATED: 10:42 am PDT June 15, 2004 PHOENIX -- The Palo Verde nuclear power plant may remain out of service for days after a glitch in the region's electrical grid triggered an automatic shutdown. A disturbance in the power grid system Monday morning temporarily cut off power to about 65,000 Arizona residents. Outages were also reported in Albuquerque, N.M., and San Jose, Calif. All three 1,300-megawatt generator units at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station were shut down as they were designed to do when the disturbance hit, said Jim McDonald, a spokesman for Arizona Public Service Co., which operates the plant located 50 miles west of Phoenix. It was the first time all three units have shut down at the same time. McDonald said he didn't know what caused the disturbance. However, there were no evacuations or safety issues connected to the shutdown. It was not immediately clear when the plant -- one of the nation's largest nuclear facilities -- would restart production, McDonald said. Power was cut at 7:41 a.m. for about 30,000 customers in the west and northwest Phoenix area. Power returned to almost all customers by 9:30 a.m. In Tucson, power was down for less than an hour Monday morning for about 35,000 customers because of the power grid disturbance. In Albuquerque, about 16,000 customers lost power for five to 12 minutes, Fred Bermudez, spokesman for Public Service Company of New Mexico told the East Valley Tribune. And in San Jose, Calif., about 5,000 people lost power when the anomaly in the power grid was detected. Palo Verde supplies power to about 4 million customers in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California. A natural gas plant five miles southeast of the Palo Verde plant also lost power and shut down for the same disturbance in the grid, McDonald said. Rolling blackouts were not expected and APS expected to have enough power to serve its customers, McDonald said. Meanwhile, Palo Verde owners APS and the Salt River Project have to find other sources of electricity to replace the lost supply. SRP spokesman Scott Harelson said the utility company pressed seldom-used older generators into service and was buying electricity on the open market to cover its shortfall. APS owns 29.1 percent of Palo Verde and is entitled to about 1,130 megawatts while SRP owns 17.5 percent of Palo Verde, which entitles it to about 683 megawatts. One megawatt can supply power to 250 to 1,000 homes, depending on use. Copyright 2004 by [renonews@foxreno.com] . The Associated Press ***************************************************************** 37 BNN: Thyroid cancer high since Chernobyl [http://www.bignewsnetwork.com/] Big News Network.com Tuesday 15th June, 2004 Researchers found a 12-fold increase in thyroid cancer in women in Belarus since the April 1986 Chernobyl nuclear power plant explosion in neighboring Ukraine. The Nuclear Policy Research Institute, which did the study, wants the Bush administration to abandon any attempt to expand nuclear power based on the finding. The magnitude of increase in cases of thyroid cancer are remarkable, given the relatively limited time that has passed since the Chernobyl accident, the study authors said. They found children ages 2 years and younger at the time of the accident tended to have more invasive cancer that expanded beyond the thyroid gland, which is located in the neck. Given the disastrous consequences of a major nuclear accident as demonstrated by this new study, we call on the Bush administration to halt its push for funds to subsidize the nuclear power industry, and shift those funds into safe and renewable energy sources such as solar and wind, said Charles Sheehan-Miles, NPRI's executive director. ***************************************************************** 38 NRC: NRC Seeks Topics for Upcoming 17th Annual Regulatory Information Conference News Release - 2004-07 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 04-075 June 15, 2004 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking suggestions on what topics should be discussed at the next Regulatory Information Conference, to be held March 8-10, 2005, at the Marriott Bethesda North, 5701 Marinelli Road, Rockville, Maryland. Conference topic ideas can be submitted electronically until September 5 on the NRCs web site at this address: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/conference-symposia/ric/. Stakeholders can select from a list of topics for the upcoming conference or make their own suggestions. NRC staff will use this input in developing the RIC 2005 program agenda. Persons interested in attending the conference will be able to register via the web address above, beginning in December 2004. For additional information contact Sharon Bell at 301-415-1217, Mary Glenn Crutchley at 301-415-2338, or e-mail RICHelpDesk@nrc.gov [RICHelpDesk@nrc.gov] . Last revised Tuesday, June 15, 2004 ***************************************************************** 39 Arizona Daily Sun: Power grid disturbance shuts down nuke plant [http://www.azdailysun.com] Tuesday, June 15, 2004 PHOENIX (AP) -- A disturbance in the power grid caused a nuclear plant to shut down and temporarily cut off power to about 65,000 Arizona residents on Monday. All three units of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station were shut down as they were designed to do when the disturbance hit, said Jim McDonald, a spokesman for Arizona Public Service Co., which operates the plant located 50 miles west of Phoenix. He said he didn't know what type of disturbance occurred or its cause. However, there were no evacuations or safety issues connected to the shutdown. It was not immediately clear when the plant -- one of the nation's largest nuclear facilities -- would restart production, McDonald said. Power was cut at 7:41 a.m. for about 30,000 customers in the west and northwest Phoenix area for about two hours. In Tucson, power was down for less than an hour Monday morning for about 35,000 customers. A natural gas plant five miles southeast of the Palo Verde plant also shut down, McDonald said. Further blackouts were not expected, McDonald said. Palo Verde supplies power to about 4 million customers in Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and California Site last updated: 06/15/2004, 05:43 AM © 2000-2004 Arizona Daily Sun ***************************************************************** 40 PRN: Americans Need New Nuclear Energy, Taylor Says [http://www.prnewswire.com/] [http://www.entergy-nuclear.com] PALM BEACH, Fla., June 15 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- America cannot afford to continue to turn its back on a source of electric energy that is low cost, dependable, safe, domestically fueled and can protect our air -- nuclear energy -- an executive of one of the nation's leading nuclear power operating companies said Tuesday. "Thirty nuclear plants are being built today in 12 countries around the world -- most using American nuclear power technology as their foundation -- and not a single one of those new plants is in the United States," said Gary J. Taylor, president and chief executive officer of Entergy Nuclear. "In America, we have a de facto moratorium on nuclear energy, intended or not." Entergy Nuclear, a unit of New Orleans-based Entergy Corporation, is the second largest U.S. nuclear operator with 10 units and the largest operator in the Northeast. "Our national economy and our national energy security would benefit from the federal government and the U.S. Congress deciding on and acting to support policies that promote more nuclear energy," he told an Executive Forum on Emerging Challenges and Trends, organized by Framatome ANP, a French power reactor service vendor. "The most important issues are how we can maintain our quality of life and protect our environment," Taylor said. "Nuclear energy must be a greater part of our generation mix. Nuclear generates about 20 percent of America's power. "France, by comparison, generates about 75 percent of its power with nuclear energy. As a result, France has no significant carbon dioxide emissions from power plants -- that's the greenhouse gas -- and the Kyoto Protocol is a non-issue there." Taylor said China, coping with the world's fastest growing power demand because of its rapidly growing economy, is well under way with the world's largest nuclear power plant construction program. China plans to construct 34 new nuclear plants, and about half of them are already being built. Nuclear power now supplies more than half the power in six U.S. states -- Connecticut, Illinois, New Hampshire, New Jersey, South Carolina and Vermont. As a result of deregulation of power markets and other market- and policy-based uncertainties, no nuclear power company can afford to take the financial risk of building new nuclear plants. Taylor said the American people are ready for their government to get serious about nuclear energy -- and want the U.S. Congress to agree on an energy bill that would kick start new nuclear plants. A national survey of 1,000 Americans in April by Bisconti Research showed 65 percent thought nuclear energy "should be one of the ways" to provide electricity. After the California power shortage in 2000, positive sentiment jumped to 65 percent. After the 9-11 terrorist attack, favorable attitudes dropped to 63 percent but in April were back to California power shortage levels, the highest since the question has been asked going back to 1995. Taylor said the federal government has underfunded nuclear energy research for over a decade. For the past 10 years, Congress has appropriated less than $60 million a year for research in nuclear energy while fossil energy and energy efficiency each has received $600 million a year. Solar and renewables like wind energy have received $320 million a year. The nuclear businesses of Entergy Corporation (NYSE: ETR [http://studio.financialcontent.com/Engine?Account=prnewswire&Pag eName=QUOTE&Ticker=ETR] ) are headquartered in Jackson, Miss. Entergy Nuclear is the second largest and fastest growing operator of nuclear power plants in the nation. It operates five reactors at four locations in Arkansas, Mississippi and Louisiana under regulatory jurisdictions and five reactors at four sites in Massachusetts, New York and Vermont. Entergy Nuclear also provides management services to the Cooper nuclear station in Nebraska and is the nation's largest provider of license renewal and decommissioning services to the nuclear power industry. Entergy Nuclear's online address is http://www.entergy-nuclear.com [http://www.entergy-nuclear.com] SOURCE Entergy Nuclear Web Site: http://www.entergy-nuclear.com [http://www.entergy-nuclear.com] Copyright © 1996-2004 PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 41 The Courier: Arkansas Nuclear One's Unit 1 taken off line 201 East Second St P.O. Box 887 Russellville, AR 72811-0887 Tuesday, June 15, 2004 Unit 1 at Arkansas Nuclear One was taken off line Friday morning for a planned outage to repair a steam leak associated with one of the unit’s two low pressure turbines. The small leak, representing 1 to 2 percent of the unit’s total steam flow, is between the outer and inner turbine casings, causing the diversion of leaking steam from the “B” low pressure turbine to the condenser. The problem is not nuclear in nature and has no impact on public safety. Repair work amounts to replacement of a leaking gasket. Due to the gasket’s location, this is an activity that can only be accomplished with the unit off line. Downtime is expected to be no more than a few days. The other ANO unit, Unit 2, is not impacted by the Unit 1 outage and continues to operate. Copyright © 2004, Russellville Newspapers, Inc. ***************************************************************** 42 NRC: Southern California Edison Company, San Onofre Nuclear FR Doc 04-13367 [Federal Register: June 15, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 114)] [Notices] [Page 33426-33427] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr15jn04-98] Generating Station; Exemption From Certain Low-Level Waste Shipment Tracking Requirements in 10 CFR Part 20 Appendix G 1.0 Background The Southern California Edison Company (SCE) is the licensee and holder of Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-13, NPF-10, and NPF-15 issued for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively, located in San Diego County, California. SONGS Unit 1 is a permanently shutdown nuclear reactor facility while Units 2 and 3 are operating reactors. Beginning around 1999, the amount of radioactive waste shipped from the site significantly increased. The majority of the radioactive waste generated by the site is related to Unit 1 decommissioning activities. Inherent to the decommissioning process, large volumes of slightly contaminated concrete rubble and debris are generated that require shipment for disposal in offsite low- level radioactive waste burial sites. Due primarily to the volume of radioactive waste, SCE has encountered an increase in the number of routine shipments that take longer than 20 days from transfer to the shipper to receipt acknowledgment from the burial site. Each shipment with receipt notifications greater than 20 days requires a special investigation and report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) which the licensee believes to be burdensome and unnecessary to meet the intent of the regulation. 2.0 Request/Action In a letter to the Commission dated January 26, 2004, SCE requested an exemption from the requirements in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix G, Section III.E, to investigate and file a report to the NRC if shipments of low-level radioactive waste are not acknowledged by the intended recipient within 20 days after transfer to the shipper. This exemption would extend the time period that can elapse during shipments of low- level radioactive waste before SCE is required to investigate and file a report to the NRC from 20 days to 35 days. The exemption would be limited to rail and combination truck/rail shipping methods. The exemption request is based on a statistical analysis of the historical data of low-level radioactive waste shipment times from the licensee's site to the disposal site. 3.0 Discussion The proposed action would grant an exemption to extend the 20-day investigation and reporting requirements for shipments of low-level radioactive waste to 35 days. Since 1999, SCE has made over 150 shipments of low-level radioactive waste as part of the decommissioning efforts at the facility. MHF Logistical Solutions is the rail broker company used by SCE to perform these shipments. MHF Logistical Solutions has a tracking system that monitors the progress of the shipments from their originating point at SONGS to their final destination at Envirocare of Utah, Inc. The shipments are made by either rail or combination truck/rail and, according to SCE, the transportation time alone takes over 16 days on average, with one shipment taking 57 days. In addition, administrative procedures at Envirocare and mail delivery can add up to 11 additional days. Based on historical data and estimates of the remaining waste at SONGS Unit 1, SCE could have to perform over 100 investigations and reports to the NRC during the next five years if the 20-day notification criteria is maintained. The licensee affirms that the low-level radioactive waste shipments will always be tracked throughout transportation until they arrive at their intended destination. SCE believes that the need to investigate, trace, and report to the NRC on the shipment of low-level radioactive waste packages not reaching their destination within 20 days does not serve the underlying purpose of the rule and is not necessary. As a result, SCE states that granting this exemption will not result in an undue hazard to life or property. Pursuant to 10 CFR 20.2301, the Commission may, upon application by a licensee or upon its own initiative, grant an exemption from the requirements of regulations in 10 CFR Part 20 if it determines the exemption is authorized by law and would not result in undue hazard to life or property. There are no provisions in the Atomic Energy Act (or in any other Federal statute) that impose a requirement to investigate and report on low-level radioactive waste shipments that have not been acknowledged by the recipient within 20 days of transfer. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there is no statutory prohibition on the issuance of the requested exemption and the Commission is authorized to grant the exemption by law. The Commission acknowledges that based on the statistical analysis of low-level radioactive waste shipments from the SONGS site, the need to investigate and report on shipments that take longer than 20 days could result in an excessive administrative burden on the licensee. The Commission asserts that the underlying purpose of the rule is to investigate a late shipment that may be lost, misdirected, or diverted. Because of the oversight and monitoring of radioactive waste shipments throughout the entire journey from SONGS to the disposal site, it is unlikely that a shipment could be lost, misdirected, or diverted without the knowledge of the carrier or SCE. Furthermore, by extending the elapsed time for receipt acknowledgment to 35 days before requiring investigations and reporting, a reasonable upper limit on shipment duration (based on historical analysis) is still maintained if a breakdown of normal tracking systems were to occur. Consequently, the Commission finds that there is no hazard to life or property by extending the investigation and reporting time for low-level radioactive waste shipments from 20 days to 35 days for rail and combination truck/rail shipments. Therefore, the Commission concludes that the underlying purpose of 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix G, Section III.E will be met. [[Page 33427]] 4.0 Conclusion Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 20.2301, the exemption requested by SCE in its January 26, 2004, letter is authorized by law and will not result in undue hazards to life or property. Therefore, the Commission hereby grants SCE an exemption to extend the 20-day investigation and reporting requirements for shipments of low-level radioactive waste, as required by 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix G, Section III.E, to 35 days. Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31, the Commission has determined that the granting of this exemption will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment as documented in Federal Register notice 69 FR 23229 (April 28, 2004). This exemption is effective upon issuance. Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 2nd day of June, 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Daniel M. Gillen, Acting Director, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 04-13367 Filed 6-14-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 43 AZR: Feds to probe failure of Palo Verde's backup generator [http://www.azcentral.com] Max Jarman The Arizona Republic Jun. 15, 2004 04:45 PM Federal regulators raised safety concerns Tuesday about the emergency shutdown of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station and sent a team to Arizona to investigate the event. The shutdown of the nation's largest nuclear power plant Monday morning threatened the stability of the power grid and cut electricity to about 65,000 customers in Pima and Maricopa counties. "Because of some complications, we want to take a detailed look at what occurred," said Thomas P. Gwynn, deputy regional administrator for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Region IV based in Arlington, Texas. Meanwhile, Palo Verde, which can light three million average homes, remained shut for the second day prompting utilities that rely on its electricity to restart seldom used generators and buy electricity on the open market to make up the shortfall. The price of wholesale electricity at the Palo Verde Switchyard surged $11.13, or 20 percent, Tuesday to $66.59 per megawatt hour. The price rose 16 percent on Monday. Arizona Public Service Co. and Salt River Project believe they have enough power to get through the week, but acknowledge the loss of another plant or major transmission line could cause shortages. California utilities that own 26 percent of the power from Palo Verde also are affected. Plant operator Arizona Public Service said Tuesday that Monday's outage was caused by a sequence of events that included a faulty insulator on a high voltage transmission tower in the northeast Valley and the failure of several safety systems designed to isolate such problems. "It should have been stopped at a number of points on the system," said Arizona Public Service spokesman Jim McDonald. The cause of the system failures is under investigation. But what concerns the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was the failure of one of two backup electrical systems inside one of the plant's three reactors. The emergency power is needed to safely shutdown and cool the reactors. All three units were shut down safely, but the failed backup system could have jeopardized the process if the one operating system also failed. The generator failure at Unit Two triggered an "alert," the second lowest of four levels of emergency classification used by the commission. It was the third such declaration at Palo Verde in the past decade. Other "alerts" involved a ruptured steam generator tube in 1993 and a jammed reactor fuel rod in 1996. "Site emergency" and "general emergency" describe more serious events. Victor Dricks, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Region IV was unable to say how long the inspectors would be in Arizona, but added their presence would not hinder restarting the plant. McDonald said crews were evaluating the plant's three generators to determine when they can be restarted. He was unable to say when that may be. The three generators need to be started one at a time and then slowly brought up to full power over a period of days. Reach the reporter at [max.jarman@arizonarepublic.com] or (602) 444-7351. The Arizona Republic - Front Page • Local • Sports • Business Copyright 2004, azcentral.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 44 [du-list] BCC: confirming evidence of DU weapons from spent Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:49:03 -0700 Hi all The quote below provides confirming evidence that DU weapons have been manufactured from spent nuclear fuel. As if "pure" DU weren't enough of an indiscriminate weapon. The transuranic contamination is indelible proof of its origin. I have commented further, below the context. Kindly use, pass on or get back to me if you want on/off my bcc list. Cheers, Robert = = = = = = = = = http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/lab_assessment/lab_assessment_s02.htm#IIA3aurinary : "Enriched uranium has more 235U than natural uranium and depleted uranium has less 235U. The depleted uranium commonly used in US armor-penetrating munitions and armor plate contains about 0.001% 234U, 0.20% 235U, and 99.8% 238U.[2] It also contains small amounts of 236U and traces of the transuranium elements neptunium, plutonium, and americium." In context, below, is the ABOVE ADMISSION THAT DU WEAPONS HAVE BEEN MANUFACTURED FROM SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "1. Depleted Uranium Properties "Uranium, a naturally occurring element with radioactive isotopes, contains about 0.0057% 234U, 0.72% 235U, and 99.28% 238U by mass. Scientists refer to uranium with this composition obtained directly from nature as natural uranium. "Isotopes of an element have the same number of protons in their nuclei (and, therefore, the same atomic number), but a different number of neutrons (and, therefore, a different mass number). Enriched uranium has more 235U than natural uranium and depleted uranium has less 235U. "The depleted uranium commonly used in US armor-penetrating munitions and armor plate contains about 0.001% 234U, 0.20% 235U, and 99.8% 238U.[2] It also contains small amounts of 236U and traces of the transuranium elements neptunium, plutonium, and americium. "Depleted uranium has the same chemical properties as natural uranium, but is about 40% less radioactive. Following impact with combat vehicles, DU munitions can produce oxide particles in the air and residues on surfaces. Soldiers can inhale the airborne DU particles or transfer the surface contaminants to the mouth or open wounds. Once in the body, these uranium compounds move into the blood (dissolve) at differing rates, depending on each compound's properties." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The above item is taken from the paper whose title is below. I would heartily recommend reading it thoroughly before contacting the information officer listed thereon, William Winkenwerder, Jr., MD. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/lab_assessment/ "Information Paper Impact of Laboratory Performance of Urine Uranium Analyses on Exposure Evaluations for Gulf War Veterans Information Papers are reports of what the Department of Defense knows today about issues potentially impacting the health of deployed military personnel. This particular information paper presents an assessment of the impact of laboratory performance for urine uranium analyses. It is not an investigative report, but is a report of an independent laboratory assessment program. If you have any information that would help better explain urine uranium analysis, please call: 1-800-497-6261 William Winkenwerder, Jr., MD Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) and Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) for Gulf War Illnesses, Medical Readiness, and Military Deployments Department of Defense 2002024-0000003 Ver. 1.0 Last Update: October 18, 2002 Many veterans of the Gulf War have expressed concern that their unexplained illnesses may have resulted from their experiences in that war. In response to veterans' concerns, the Department of Defense established a task force in June 1995 to investigate incidents and circumstances relating to possible causes. The Special Assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense for Gulf War Illnesses took over responsibility for these investigations on November 12, 1996. Effective April 5, 2001, the Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) for Gulf War Illnesses, Medical Readiness, and Military Deployments assumed continued responsibility for Gulf War issues. To inform the public about the progress of its efforts, the Department of Defense publishes on the Internet and elsewhere accounts that may contribute to the discussion of the health of deployed personnel, along with documentary evidence or personal testimony used in compiling the accounts. This information paper will aid in understanding the capabilities and limitations of certain methods of measuring uranium and depleted uranium in urine, and their impact on evaluating exposures. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SUMMARY II. BACKGROUND A. Evaluation of Depleted Uranium Exposure 1. Depleted Uranium Properties 2. Uranium in the Environment 3. Urinary Excretion a. Urinary Excretion from Normal Air, Food and Water b. Urinary Excretion from Exposures B. Analytical Methods Available for Uranium C. Interpretation of Laboratory Results D. Laboratory Certification Processes III. EVALUATION PROCESS A. How It Was Done B. Participating Laboratories C. Evaluation Methodology (or Standards) 1. American National Standards Institute Guidelines 2. Regression Analysis IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. Evaluation of the Preparation Blank B. Results by Laboratory 1. Evaluation Against American National Standard HPS N13.30-1996 Criteria 2. Evaluation by Regression Analysis C. Results by Method D. Assessing Exposure to Uranium E. Impact on Identifying Depleted Uranium Exposures V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TAB A - Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Glossary TAB B - Bibliography END NOTES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End Note 2: "[2] US Army Environmental Policy Institute, Health and Environmental Consequences of Depleted Uranium Use in the US Army: Technical Report, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, June 1995, p. 24." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - p24 is a .gif image of the page, rather than a link to the document, which is not available at: http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/reports/medical_us.shtml , but rather through the Federation of American Scientists, via an automatic link from the above site. Here is what you get if you persevere; basically the same as above, with no table, but with a bit of shuck-and-jive about how DoD DU is not as radioactive as natural uranium metal. True enough, but WHY IS SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL BEING USED AS A FEEDSTOCK FOR RADIOACTIVE WEAPONS and inevitably, radioactive remnants of war? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/chapter2.html 2.2.3 Characteristics of DU Used by DoD NRC defines DU as uranium in which the weight percentage of the 235U isotope is less than 0.711. This is slightly less than the concentration of 235U in uranium ore, which is approximately 0.72 percent (10 CFR 40.4). Military Specification MIL-U-70457 stipulates that DU used by DoD must have a 235U concentration of less than 0.3 percentóless than half of the fissionable 235U allowed by the NRC definition of DU. DoD actually uses DU containing approximately 0.2 percent 235U (Vumbaco, 1993b; Price 1980). As an artifact of the enrichment process, 234U is removed from the natural isotopic mix by approximately the same percentage as 235U. Although the chemical and physical properties of natural uranium and DU are essentially identical, their radiological properties differ, as shown in Table 2-4. Three points should be noted here: DU may have trace amounts (about 0.003 weight percent) of 236U.Ý The 236U is not a naturally occurring uranium isotope, but is sometimes present as a byproduct of nuclear fission in uranium derived from nuclear fuel (Price, 1990). The radioactivity of depleted uranium is roughly 60 percent that of natural uranium. The reduction in the 234U and 235U isotopes substantially lowers specific activity. The presence of trace amounts of 236U does not significantly increase DUís radioactivity because the specific activity of 236U (63.6Ý Ci/g) is only about 1 percent of the specific activity of 234U (6,200Ý Ci/g). DU cannot sustain a nuclear chain reaction in conventional reactors or be used as the fuel for nuclear weapons because of the reducedÝ concentration of 235U. The concentration of 235U in naturally occurring uranium is high enough to sustain a nuclear chain reaction in heavy water nuclear reactors. Table 2-4.Ý Naturally Occurring Uranium Compared with the Depleted Uranium Used by DoD * The weight percentages quoted for naturally occurring uranium vary slightly from source to source. ** Reported values for the radioactivity (specific activity) of depleted uranium vary depending primarily on the weight percentages of 234U and 235U (10 CFR 20). While the exact ratio will vary, the radioactivity of depleted uranium will always be less than that of naturally occurring uranium. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70 http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 45 [du-list] RE: BCC: confirming evidence of DU weapons from Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:49:54 -0700 Hi Robert, In 1999, MTP contacted the US Department of Energy about this, see letter to DOE pasted below and their response attached as a PDF file. If you have trouble viewing either, you can find them on MTP's Website at http://www.miltoxproj.org/DU/DU_Titlepage/DU_Titlepage.htm In Solidarity, Tara August 30, 1999 Secretary Bill Richardson Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 Dear Secretary Richardson, We are writing in regards to the recent disclosures about plutonium found at the gaseous diffusion plants in Oak Ridge, TN, Paducah, KY and Piketon, Ohio. The Military Toxics Project (MTP) is a national non- profit organization, which works with communities around the country to address pollution caused by the US military. Since 1992, MTP has worked on depleted uranium issues. MTP works with people adversely impacted by the mining of uranium, enrichment, manufacturing, production, testing and use of DU weaponry. The Military Toxics Project supports the efforts of local groups around all of these facilities. A member group of MTP, the Portsmouth/ Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety and Security (PRESS), has been very concerned with the health and environmental impacts from the gaseous diffusion plant in Piketon. Recently, they requested that you come to their community to address these concerns in person. I think it is imperative to the workers and the community members to get the facts about the former DOE facility directly from you. We understand that uranium contaminated with plutonium was processed and enriched at Portsmouth, Paducah, and Oak Ridge. Depleted uranium from these enrichment plants has been used in ammunition, tank shielding, counter weights in planes and ballast in ships. The Department of Energy has most recently come out with the Record of Decision (RoD) regarding the remaining inventory of depleted uranium hexaflouride (1.1 billion pounds) at the three gaseous diffusion sites. The RoD states the DU should be turned into depleted uranium metal and depleted uranium oxide. The DOE has been courting the commercial industry to come up with new uses for the DU. In view of these facts, the possibility that the DU might contain some plutonium is very troubling. We would therefore appreciate your answers to the following questions: 1. Do any of the current depleted uranium stocks at any of these three sites contain plutonium? If so, what portion and how was this fraction determined? If not, what has been done to ensure the reliability of that conclusion? 2. Did any of the depleted uranium used in the past to manufacture DU munitions contain plutonium? Did the DOE measure plutonium in its final metal products in its DU metal processing operations, such as those at its Fernald Ohio plant to ensure there was no plutonium in them? We are very concerned that plutonium may have entered into the depleted uranium weapons used in the Gulf War, Bosnia and most recently, Yugoslavia. We are also concerned that it might have contaminated DU munitions testing sites right here in the United States. 3. What official investigations have there been in regard to plutonium contamination of DU? 4. What measures are in place now to assure that DU metal does not contain plutonium? Thank you in advance for your assistance. I look forward to your response. Respectfully, Tara Thornton International Coordinator on Depleted Uranium Tara Thornton Executive Director Military Toxics Project P.O. Box 558 Lewiston, ME 04243 (207)783-5091 phone www.miltoxproj.org ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\DOE.pdf" ***************************************************************** 46 [du-list] DU in the news 15th June 04 - Oakridge and Warsaw Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:49:07 -0700 WASTE takes long way home Oak Ridger - Oak Ridge,TN,USA ... Oliver Springs Mayor Ed Kelley confirmed that shipments of depleted uranium hexafluoride cylinders have been coming through his town, hitting Highway 61 to ... <http://www.oakridger.com/stories/061404/new_20040614016.shtml> NEXT time, it could be you Warsaw Business Journal - Warszawa,Morocco,Poland ... In both wars, facing an enemy without an air force, the USA has used depleted uranium, as well as ever-improving cluster bombs and highly destructive tonne-or ... <http://www.wbj.pl/?command=article&id=22839&> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT 83b02.jpg 83b37.jpg ---------- Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: * http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ * * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: * du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. Attachment Converted: 83b02.jpg: 00000001,56fa1f9e,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: 83b37.jpg: 00000001,56fa1f9f,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 47 U.S. Trucks Carrying Radioactive Materials Intercepted In Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 06:16:19 -0500 (CDT) U.S. Trucks Carrying Radioactive Materials Intercepted In Iraq-Kuwait Border TEHRAN (MNA) - The UAE-based daily Al-Khaleej reported on Monday that Kuwaiti tariff officials have intercepted a truck loaded with radioactive materials in the Iraq-Kuwait border. The daily quoted informed sources as saying that the radioactive control team from Kuwaits Health Ministry discovered that one of the trucks belonging to the U.S.-led coalition forces was carrying heavy radioactive materials trucks. The trucks were headed for Iraq. The daily said that such materials could only enter a country when there is permission from related bodies while the materials were secretly being carried to Iraq. Security forces stressed that no contamination had been caused by the material. The MNA reported for the first time the coalition forces suspicious transfer of WMD parts from Kuwait to Southern Iraq by trucks. The possible presence of WMD in Iraq and its likely nuclear programs were the main U.S. pretext for attacking the country. However, their failure to find weapons of mass destruction in the country and the continuing turmoil in Iraq questioned the legitimacy of the U.S. war against Iraq and their presence in the country. http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=6/15/2004&Cat=4&Num=020 ***************************************************************** 48 AP Wire: Officials practice 'what-if' incident involving nuclear fuel | 06/15/2004 | JOHN MILBURN Associated Press TOPEKA, Kan. - Two people driving a stolen 2 1/2-ton truck sideswipe a sedan stopped at a railroad crossing, then strike a Union Pacific train carrying a container of spent nuclear fuel bound for Idaho. Soon, emergency personnel arrive, treating victims and searching for the drunken truck occupants. The scene Tuesday was a drill, the scenario was a traffic accident and the nuclear fuel from Navy ships was simulated. But officials conducting the exercise said the event heightens awareness of the pains taken to protect against intentional attack on shipments crossing the country. Spent nuclear fuel is transported by rail from Naval shipyards on the East and West coasts to the Naval Reactors Facility at the Idaho National Energy and Environmental Laboratory west of Idaho Falls. The fuel is transported in a rail container with 14-inch thick steel, sandwiched between flatcars. Two U.S. Marshalls in the caboose guard the shipment. Kevin Davis, of the Naval Reactors Program, said between three and 20 rail shipments of spent fuel are made each year. "It's simply a matter of efficiency and safety," he said. Training exercises occur every two years, but Tuesday's was the first not on federal property. It was held near a grain elevator in Topeka. Over the past decade, railroads have been strengthening their security, said Union Pacific spokesman Mark Davis. Union Pacific has 2,500 trains operating daily, including 125 a day through Kansas. "For all the hazardous materials that we carry, a person is 10 times more likely to be struck by lightning than be injured by a hazardous material accident," Davis said. "But we don't rest on our laurels." Although training exercises help test response and allow officials to address any shortfalls, much of the burden for maintaining safety still falls on the railroads' employees and their own police forces. "If you look at our day-to-day operations, our own employees are the best eyes and ears," Davis said. Railroads receive an average of 75 calls each day from the public about suspicious activity, he said, down from a high of 300 a day after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The railroads hold daily meetings to discuss security and safety issues and to share information, Davis said. Beyond their own surveillance, railroads must bear the costs of much of the ongoing infrastructure upgrades. Ed McKechnie, executive vice president for Watco Cos., a shortline railroad company in Pittsburg, said response to a security threat has to be quick to protect cargo and the public. Watco, which owns 2,800 miles of track throughout the United States, activates a 24-hour operation center when alerted of a potential treat. McKechnie said that when that happens, officials find all hazardous materials on the rails and make sure it's secure. The goal is to balance safety with the free flow of commerce, he said. "It has to be done in a way that makes sense," he said, adding that the biggest hole in safety is where automobiles and trains intersect. Kansas' investment in railroad infrastructure includes about $9 million annually in upgrades to the 6,000 highway railroad crossings, and a $75 million program to improve crossings on non-state highways, said Al Cathcart, coordinating engineer in the bureau of design for the state Department of Transportation. Joy Moser, spokeswoman for the Kansas Department of Emergency Management, said rail accidents occur frequently in the state, such as train-car accidents and accidental derailments. But in the past three years, accidents are viewed warily. "You always think of this happening on the East Coast or West Coast, but the potential is here," Moser said. "I think everybody takes is more seriously." ---_ On the Net: Navy: [http://www.navy.mil] Union Pacific: [http://www.up.com] Watco Cos.: [http://www.watcocompanies.com] Kansas Department of Emergency Management: [http://www.accesskansas.org/kdem] ***************************************************************** 49 House of Rep.: House Debate on Workers Compensation Representatives Speeches Listed by Speaking Order: Rep. Wamp; Rep. Tauscher; Rep. Wilson; Rep. Wamp; Rep. Strickland; Rep. Udall; Rep. Whitfield Amendment: Amendment No. 11 Voting on Amendment No. 11 URL: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r108:1:./temp/~r108Gyq3xH:e 121276 The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 printed in House Report 108-499. AMENDMENT NO. 11 OFFERED BY MR. WAMP Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. The Chairman pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Amendment No. 11 offered by Mr. Wamp: At the end of title XXXI of the bill (page 556, after line 10), add the following new section: SECTION 3134. IMPROVEMENTS TO ENERGY EMPLOYEES OCCUPATIONAL ILLNESS COMPENSATION PROGRAM. (a) State Agreements.--Section 3661 of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 7385o) is amended-- (1) in subsection (b) by striking ``Pursuant to agreements under subsection (a), the'' and inserting ``The''; (2) in subsection (c) by striking ``provided in an agreement under subsection (a), and if''; and (3) in subsection (e) by striking ``If provided in an agreement under subsection (a)'' and inserting ``If a panel reports a determination under subsection (d)(5)''. (b) Selection of Panel Members.--Section 3661 of that Act (42 U.S.C. 7385o) is further amended in subsection (d) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows: ``(2) The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall select individuals to serve as panel members based on experience and competency in diagnosing occupational illnesses. For each individual so selected, the Secretary shall appoint that individual as a panel member or obtain by contract the services of that individual as a panel member.''. The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 648, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp). Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the Defense Authorization Act of 2001, which was actually signed into law in the fall of 2000 by President Clinton, included the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, EEOICPA, which we wrote and passed to compensate workers who became ill as a result of their work in the Department of Energy facilities across the country. There are nine major sites affected, and I represent Oak Ridge, Tennessee, which handles the largest number of affected workers in the country. This is a critical issue for many of us, and we have been very involved for a number of years. The Department of Energy has had definite problems administering the program, and some of those programs are brought about by statutory issues that need to be remedied. Part B of this program is actually administered by the Department of Labor, and people affected qualify for $150,000 lump-sum payments. That has gone relatively smooth. But part D of this program is the DOE portion, and we have had numerous problems identified under subtitle B relative to the claims process, a lack of communication, long delays, et cetera. Now, the GAO, which we need to listen to in this case, has made recommendations for changes to the Department of Energy. The Department of Energy has made rules changes, but we now need statutory changes. And that is what this amendment actually addresses, three issues that cannot be done by rules. They need to be done by statute here in an amendment, and we have the full support of the Department of Energy; and the administration is asking that these three changes be adopted. Number one, this amendment eliminates the pay cap for physicians and lets the market set the rate. One of our problems today is that the statute sets physician pay at $69 an hour when, indeed, occupational medicine physicians are paid in the market $130 to $150 an hour. We do not have enough physicians to meet this caseload; and, therefore, we have a backlog. This will help us alleviate the backlog. Number two, this amendment eliminates restrictions on hiring authority. Today, the Department of Energy can only hire temporary or intermittent experts when, indeed, we need Federal and contract employees full time on the job to move this program forward. This has severely impaired DOE's ability to staff this necessary program and to move it smoothly. Thirdly, this amendment will eliminate the requirements that an application for a benefit can go forward if, indeed, the State has an agreement in place. Not all States do. Based on the feedback for the advocates of the program and the States at the local level, DOE is moving away from this requirement, and we need to statutorily change the legislation. This will affect 80 percent of the workers. With all due respect to a few people in this body that may be opposed to this, I know it does not do everything; but we shopped these issues around to the committees of jurisdiction, and this is all we could get. I would like to do more. There were amendments offered to the Committee on Rules that I said I would be happy to support. They were not ruled in order, and you do have some committees of jurisdiction weighing in. This is what we can do. And I hope that even though people will express their discontent today on the floor with the Department of Energy which we all have experienced because it is a very frustrating, very complicated program and there was great bipartisan cooperation in bringing it about, I hope that they can support this amendment in the final analysis because this clearly will help immediately many workers who are waiting in line. That is the bottom line. While it does not get to everyone, there are States that do not have agreements in place. They may not have a willing payer in their State or whatever the issue is. Eighty percent of the workers affected will be expedited if this amendment is adopted and allows DOE to move forward, getting the physicians, hitting the panels on time, and making this program more effective. It is very complicated, but we need to make these changes today. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Tauscher) is recognized for 5 minutes. Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp) for trying to fix the Sick Worker Compensation program at the Department of Energy. His State of Tennessee has 3,000 claims from sick workers pending, and I have two facilities in my district where workers are waiting for their claims to be processed. This amendment primarily increases the rate of pay for DOE to attract more doctors to review claims in the physicians panel, which is useful but does not fix structural flaws in this program. The GAO panel has found that even after claims go through a physicians panel, there is no willing payer and that by order from DOE, that is no one to pay these claims for at least 20 to 33 percent of valid claims. When there is no willing payer, as we have in States like Alaska, Colorado, Ohio, Iowa, Missouri and Kentucky, and we have workers in Nevada, construction workers in New Mexico, Idaho, California and in most other States that DOE cannot find willing payers, without a willing payer, workers who get a finding from the physicians panel will have a piece of paper from DOE saying their illness was caused by exposure to radiation at DOE sites, but they will not get paid. I support an amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland) that fixed this problem, but it was rejected by the Committee on Rules. DOE also does not have a clear mechanism to value claims, inviting additional litigation when the goal of Congress was to take DOE out of the business of fighting sick workers who have served our Nation by building our Cold War deterrent. This amendment does not fix that either. The Department of Energy's record is catastrophic. Two and a half years into the program, of the 23,000 people who have applied for compensation, the Department of Energy has rejected 5 percent of them and completely processed about 6 percent of them. In other words, 94 percent of applicants are still waiting for their cases to be addressed. Sick workers were told help was on the way. Four years later, DOE is projecting its caseload will not be completed for at least another 3 1/2 years. I reluctantly oppose this amendment, as it offers a minor technical fix to a program that remains structurally flawed. Throwing more money at DOE only rewards it for failing to compensate sick workers and will make it harder in the future to make real improvements to the program. There is a bipartisan amendment on the Senate side that I hope many of our colleagues will be able to support in conference. In the meantime, I reluctantly call on my colleagues to oppose the Wamp amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of time. Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining? The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Upton). The gentleman has 1 minute remaining. Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson). (Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I am supporting this amendment even though I know that it does not do all the things that we all want it to do, but because there is not sufficient jurisdiction here to take care of all the things in this bill. I look forward to working with the gentleman and my other colleagues who have constituents deeply affected by this for a real comprehensive solution. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by my colleague Representative WAMP, to modify the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA). The modifications offered in this amendment will address current obstacles in addressing the backlog of cases needing review by physician panels under this program. The report for this bill notes, with bipartisan support, that such remedies were needed to allow timely physician review panel determinations. This amendment is a step forward toward assuring that workers receive the speedy assistance and, where found appropriate, compensation that we in Congress intended. therefore, I strongly support it. Yet I have to observe that this vote, while an important and positive step, is not by itself enough. I have had the fortune of knowing some of these workers personally and have become familiar with their frustration at the glacial pace of processing of their claims through the Department of Energy. One was Raymond Ruiz, a former worker at Los Alamos and a respected 2-term legislator in the State of New Mexico. His case was finally taken up by a physician panel, but he did not live long enough to receive compensation for his asbestos-related disease. Before his death his colleagues in the State legislature passed a joint memorial requesting reforms in this program. Other New Mexicans have applied under Part D of EEOICPA and most have been backlogged. In addition to this amendment we need to address three things in the implementation on this part of EEOICPA. First, we need to ensure that the management of the program is sound and effective. The Department of Energy has not created an acceptable track record. It is now working to improve its practices, but it is possible we may need to consider moving the program out of DOE, if that will speed up the appropriate resolution of claims. Second, we need to assure that medical determinations are speedy as well as proper. This amendment is a step in that direction, as are recent adjustments DOE has made to its procedures, but we may need to make other improvements to eliminate the backlog in a timely way. Third, we will need to address solutions to the cases in which ``willing payers'' are not available. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. But we still have work to do to ensure EEOICPA provides the help we in Congress intended for these workers. I look forward to considering additional idea, including insights from the General Accounting Office report currently in preparation, and ideas that may be discussed in the other body. Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield? Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee. Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, this issue is not about moving the program to the Department of Labor. That is another issue for another day. That may come up at a later time. This is about making the program as it is currently written work much better. That is why I really hope that everybody that has a dog in this hunt will help us do this today. It is just one step forward, but it needs to be made short of sweeping reforms, which I know are pending before the Senate, but that is a whole different issue, and a lot of people have to get back in line and start over if that does happen. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), the author of the amendment that I wish I could have supported. Mr. STRICKLAND. Mr. Chairman, why do we not just do the right thing when it comes to this issue, just do the right thing, help all the workers who need help? I appreciate the effort of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp) to improve this program, but I cannot support his amendment. Unfortunately, DOE's management of this program has been a miserable failure. After spending millions of dollars, they can only point to one claim having been paid through March of 2004. Not only is DOE's claims processing moving at a snail's pace, but by the Department's own admission, as many as 50 percent of the claimants may not have a willing payer. This means that regardless of how quickly DOE processes a claim, many sick workers will get nothing but an IOU. The gentleman from Tennessee's (Mr. Wamp) amendment does nothing to address this larger problem of a willing payer, which affects my constituents in Ohio and other nuclear workers in Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Nevada, and New Mexico, and we do not fully understand the magnitude of this problem as GAO acknowledges that it is not possible to effectively audit DOE's databases. Meanwhile, I have a June 7, 2002, DOE letter saying that the Department is compiling a list of sites which would not have a willing payer. Nearly 2 years later, DOE's Under Secretary testified in the Senate, and I am quoting, ``DOE has proposed a study by the National Academies that would commence when sufficient cases have been through the State program to provide meaningful data regarding the finding of willing payers.'' How long can DOE study this obvious problem? Enough is enough. If DOE will not face the problem, then it is our responsibility to take action because DOE apparently thinks that conducting a study is going to help sick workers. The Senate has been noted as working on an amendment in a bipartisan fashion. I went to the Committee on Rules with a simple amendment that would have made significant progress in resolving the willing payer issue. My amendment was not made in order. Processing claims more quickly falls far short of addressing the glaring flaws in this program. The intent of this program is not to compensate our Cold War veterans based on geography. We should be paying comprehensive reform of this program so that all meritorious claims can be paid in a timely manner. Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, my colleague from Tennessee who is proposing this amendment has been very involved in Energy Employees Compensation issues and I thank him for that. Surely, in proposing this amendment, he has good intentions. However, because the amendment fails to accomplish real reform of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program, I must rise in opposition to the amendment. It has been almost 3 1/2 years since Congress passed the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. This bill was passed in an attempt to bring justice to the thousands of energy workers who incurred illnesses--in many cases deadly--as a result of their work at Department of Energy facilities. In my state of New Mexico, there are over 1,200 workers who have filed such claims. Yet after 3 1/2 years, less than 3 percent of the cases filed with the Department of Energy have been processed. This means that the vast majority of the men and women who have filed claims through this program--many of whom will die before they ever see a compensation check--are being denied justice. Conversely, the Department of Labor has processed over 95 percent of the claims in its area of responsibility. DOE recognizes that it has failed yet now it wants more money. Surely I am not the only member on this floor who shudders at the prospect of throwing millions more at a department that has failed this program and these people for almost 4 years. Unfortunately, this amendment does not include crucial components that are necessary for real reform. By real reform, I mean identifying a willing payer for all claims submitted by energy employees, taking a hard look at how DOE has spent money on the program so far with so few results, and addressing the reasons for the stark difference in progress on claims between the Department of Energy and the Department of Labor. If this amendment were part of a larger reform package, I may have looked upon it more favorably. I joined Representatives STRICKLAND of Ohio, UDALL of Colorado, TAUSCHER of California, and COOPER of Tennessee, in submitting an amendment to the Rules Committee that would have called upon the President to send legislation to Congress proposing a willing payer. Unfortunately, the Rules Committee did not make this amendment in order. Because this amendment falls so far short to real reform, I cannot vote for it. Passing this amendment without other crucial reform components rewards the Department of Energy for its failure. The 1,200 people in New Mexico who have filed claims simply cannot afford the status quo. I recommend a ``no'' vote on the amendment. Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I support efforts to streamline the claims process for DOE workers seeking compensation for illnesses resulting from exposure to toxic substances and other hazardous materials, and I will vote in favor of the amendment. The changes in this amendment will not insure payments to claimants in states like Kentucky where there is no willing payor to cover compensation costs. DOE lacks the authority to direct the DOE contractors or their insurors who employed these workers at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant to pay compensation claims even if the claims are approved by DOE physicians panels. More important, the Paducah uranium enrichment plant is no longer a DOE-run facility. Plant operations were privatized in 1998 and DOE cannot direct that private operator, USEC, to pay claims approved by DOE physician panels. Only the current DOE contractor employees at Paducah will have a willing payor. So, depending on what state you live in, even if you prove that your illness is work-related, you may never receive a dime in compensation. Of the 23,000 claims filed with DOE, 2,874 were filed by my constituents because of illnesses they contracted while working at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. Those workers and thousands like them across the country deserve more. I do support the amendment because if Congress takes no other action this session repairing this program, this will at least help expedite the DOE claims process. But I think all former and current workers in the DOE complex would be much better served if we fixed the willing payor problem once and for all and moved the administration of the entire DOE program to the Department of Labor. That is still my goal as we look to the future. The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Upton). All time has expired. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp). The amendment was agreed to ***************************************************************** 50 Salt Lake Tribune: On the Stump: Stop demonizing N-waste, says Tooele June 15, 2004 County Commissioners and state legislators representing Tooele County publicly released a letter to Republican gubernatorial candidate Jon Huntsman Jr. urging him to stop demonizing low-level radioactive waste, because it could hurt the local economy. Envirocare of Utah, the state's only commercial radioactive waste disposal facility, is based in Tooele County. The local officials say Huntsman's desire to permanently ban higher levels of waste would be "anti-business, anti-Tooele County and anti-Utah." Huntsman said through a spokesman he would be happy to meet with Tooele County representatives. But, he added, "Not accepting hotter nuclear waste is important for the state." Rival Republican Nolan Karras, who has close personal and business ties to Envirocare owner Khosrow Semnani, also opposes hotter waste coming into the state. When Salt Lake County Mayor Nancy Workman announced her blue-ribbon panel to look into county vehicle policies, she said the group would be independent and impartial. Panel members declined to state their political affiliations, noting it was not a political group. What went unsaid, though, is that Republican Workman's campaign helped establish the panel and even named one of its members. The mayor's re-election campaign has hired the Summit Group to help with damage control in the midst of the vehicle-abuse scandal that has toppled three high-ranking officials. The Summit Group's Dave Owen was three floors up at the law offices of Jones, Waldo, Holbrook &McDonough when Workman announced the panel, and he acknowledges he suggested adding strategy consultant Vern Della-Piana to the group. Even so, panel member Glen Watkins, a registered Democrat, told the mayor she may not like the panel's recommendations. Two-term representative Darin Peterson, R-Nephi, has announced the endorsements in his race for the state Senate from Juab County Commissioner Bob Steele and Utah Peace Officers Association President Ken Wallentine. "Darin Peterson is the clear choice to be our next state senator," Steele said in a statement. "We need his conservative ideals in the Utah State Senate." Although initially seen as a long-shot candidate, Peterson came away with 51% of delegate votes at the state Republican convention. His opponent, long-time Moroni senator Leonard Blackham, Senate chair of the powerful state budget committee, had 49% of the vote. Peter Corroon, the Democratic nominee for Salt Lake County mayor, likes to chastise incumbent Republican Nancy Workman on the number of staffers she has making more than $100,000 a year. She has 10, Corroon routinely says in speeches. But that's no longer accurate. Workman has lost three staffers in that category. Legal counsel Greg Curtis -- also the House majority leader -- and Chief Financial Officer Randy Allen have resigned in the wake of the vehicle-abuse scandal. In April, former Economic Development Director John Rosenthal left to take a job with Sahara Inc. And Corroon is counting Workman herself, whose salary of $107,000 is set by ordinance. Corroon spokesman Josh Ewing says his boss plans to change his speeches to say that there are "too many people" making more than $100,000. Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff has endorsed congressional candidate John Swallow. Shurtleff, who is running for re-election, broke with Republican tradition and endorsed one of the conservative candidates in the 2nd Congressional District race before the GOP primary June 22. In a replay of the 2002 campaign, Swallow and businessman Tim Bridgewater are vying for the chance to challenge Democratic U.S. Rep. Jim Matheson. Swallow beat Bridgewater in the primary election two years ago, but lost to Matheson by just 1,600 votes. Last week, House Speaker Marty Stephens interpreted those 2002 results differently and endorsed Bridgewater. The two candidates have split legislative endorsements. Copyright Salt Lake City Tribune ***************************************************************** 51 Salt Lake Tribune: Bridgewater faults Swallow on N-waste June 15, 2004 By Rebecca Walsh Storing nuclear waste is a hot political potato in Utah. And congressional candidate John Swallow is being accused of changing his position on the issue depending on his location. That's what his opponent, Tim Bridgewater, says is happening in his Republican 2nd District primary race against Swallow. The two men are locked in a fight to see who will face U.S. Rep. Jim Matheson in November. At the San Juan County Republican Convention in April, Bridgewater and Swallow fielded a question about the so-called "Plan B" alternative to deposit spent nuclear reactor rods on state land in southern Utah rather than on the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians' Reservation southwest of Salt Lake City. Bridgewater and other witnesses say Swallow told the rural Utahns gathered in Monticello that he was willing to consider the plan. But at a debate last week at Salt Lake City public television station KUED and again Monday, Swallow said he is opposed to dumping that waste in Utah and denied Bridgewater's version of events. He suspects he might be a victim of mistaken identity. "My position on nuclear waste is very clear," Swallow said. "I don't want it stored in the state. I don't want it coming through the state. I don't even want it stored in Yucca Mountain [Nev.]." That answer is different from the one participants say he gave in San Juan County. San Juan County Commissioner Lynn Stevens said it was clear to him that Swallow is more open to the idea than Bridgewater. The proposal calls for storing the rods on state trust lands in the Lisbon Valley just north of Monticello. County leaders figure the depository could produce hundreds of jobs and $900 million in revenue. At the convention, Stevens said, Swallow advocated studying the health risks of storing the depleted fuel rods collected from a consortium of eight utility companies and then letting voters decide. Bridgewater, whose stepfather earlier this year died of cancer -- which the family blames on radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons tests -- was more reticent to pursue Plan B. He also opposes the resumption of nuclear testing in Nevada. "Utah has paid an inordinate price [for America's nuclear legacy] in terms of lives," Bridgewater said last week. "I much favored John Swallow's answer," the commissioner said. Apparently, so did the crowd: In an unofficial vote of county delegates, the vast majority, 31 to 5, favored Swallow for the nomination to face Matheson. Sam Cantrell, a Bridgewater supporter who also was at the convention, believes the nuclear waste question benefited Swallow. "I knew it was because of that question," Cantrell said. "That's where the votes go." Still, Swallow rejects Bridgewater's memory of his comments. He says Bridgewater is "running a negative campaign. "Unless I was asleep when I said it, I have not said anything like that. I know what I didn't say." Copyright Salt Lake City Tribune ***************************************************************** 52 Las Vegas RJ: Reid expands hold on nominees (to NRC) Tuesday, June 15, 2004 Move seeks to force GOP to advance nuclear waste adviser By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., is increasing pressure to have one of his aides confirmed to a top post at the federal agency that will decide the Yucca Mountain Project. Reid confirmed Monday that he will put a blanket hold on all of President Bush's nominees for executive branch positions except for judges and defense appointees. He said he will hold up nominees and selected bills until his nuclear waste adviser, Gregory Jaczko, can be confirmed to join the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "He'll get that job," Reid said. "It's just a question of when, now or six months from now. Maybe it will be after Bush is defeated. Whether Bush is re-elected or not, Jaczko will get that job." Reid's move could delay nominees awaiting Senate confirmation for executive jobs in the Agriculture, Education, Commerce, Interior, Justice, Labor and Energy departments, and at the Environmental Protection Agency. Senate records as of Monday show 48 nominees pending for those departments and for government advisory boards that require confirmation. The move expands a Reid blockade that had been limited to nominees at environmental agencies and bills originating from the Senate's environment committee. Reid said he decided to increase pressure after learning that nuclear industry representatives have been lobbying against Jaczko with the blessing of the White House. He said he exempted judicial nominees because the Senate has a separate agreement on how those are handled. As for allowing defense nominations to go through, he said he did not want to hamper military operations. Senators have the ability under the chamber's rules to place holds on bills and nominees, a tactic that is used for leverage. Some of the nominees Reid is blocking already face holds by other senators. Reid employed the same strategy last year, blocking Bush nominees for more than a month last fall until the White House agreed to put forward Jaczko, a physicist, to become one of five NRC commissioners. The agency regulates the nuclear power industry and the handling of nuclear materials and nuclear waste. Jaczko, 33, has been nominated for a five-year term that would give him a voice on whether the Department of Energy is allowed to develop a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. But Reid's deal with the White House over Jaczko may have had its limits. Jaczko was nominated in February, but the Republican-led Environment and Public Works Committee has not scheduled a confirmation hearing. "It appears the White House sent (Jaczko's nomination) down here just to get by the original hurdle, and they've told anyone not to let him move forward," Reid said. "So I'm not going to let them move anything forward." A White House spokesman could not be reached Monday evening. Nuclear industry officials do not want Jaczko at the NRC, believing he cannot be an impartial arbiter after working for Reid, who has worked for years to frustrate the Yucca Mountain Project. Senate sources confirmed Monday that John Pemberton, a lobbyist for the Southern Co., a utility that operates nuclear plants, urged Republican Senate staffers in a recent meeting to oppose Jaczko's nomination. The meeting was first reported by Roll Call, a Capitol Hill newspaper. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 53 BBC: Radioactive waste train derailed Last Updated: Tuesday, 15 June, 2004 An investigation is under way after a train carrying radioactive waste was derailed in Devon on Monday. The derailment occurred at Devonport Dockyard in Plymouth. A spokesman for DML, which runs the yard, said the locomotive was partially derailed, although the trailer carrying the waste module was not. It said there was no safety risk and the Health and Safety Executive's Nuclear Installations Inspectorate had been informed. [http://www.bbc.co.uk] ***************************************************************** 54 Las Vegas SUN: State keeps close watch on Yucca data By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada will be closely watching how the Nuclear Regulatory Commission handles the Energy Department's posting of documentation -- or lack thereof -- into the Yucca Mountain project's database. Under federal law, the department must turn in all relevant documents on the nuclear waste storage project six months before it turns in the license application to the commission. The department aims to get the application in by Dec. 23, making June 23 the cut-off for the six-month requirement. "DOE (the Energy Department) still thinks it can get away with a piecemeal effort," wrote Bob Loux, executive director of the state's Agency for Nuclear Projects in a letter to commission Chairman Nils Diaz. "Your upcoming decision on the adequacy of DOE's June 23 document submission will be a commanding indicator, to DOE, to other hearing participants, and to outside observers, on whether this is to be a fair hearing," Loux wrote. Nevada asked the commission earlier this month for the appointment of a pre-license application presiding officer as soon as possible rather than two weeks after the department submits documents to the databse, as outlined in the commission's regulations. Loux said he received a letter from the commission saying that it would appoint the presiding officer as required by law, but not sooner. The state is concerned about a 24-million-page discrepancy between the department's estimates in February and then in May regarding how much documentation it plans to submit. "It is essential for the integrity of the Yucca Mountain hearing that NRC makes clear from the outset that it will enforce its rules, and that it will do so even if that means delaying the licensing process," Loux said. "If, out of fear of being blamed for delay, the Commission eases the DOE document requirements at this first formal stage of the Yucca Mountain proceeding on June 23, you will encourage DOE in its view that is can bully its way through the licensing proceeding." Energy Department officials have repeatedly said they will meet the June 23 deadline and the December deadline with a a high-quality license application. The department still plans to open the site in 2010 if Congress fully funds the project. ***************************************************************** 55 Las Vegas SUN: Reid pushes to get aide on nuclear panel By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., is raising the stakes in his fight to get one of his aides onto the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Reid now promises to block all the administration's nominees from going through the Senate until Greg Jaczko, a physicist on Reid's staff, gets a confirmation hearing for one of the two vacant seats on the commission. Reid said he expanded the hold since "nothing was happening." The deal he reached with the White House was only for the nomination, Reid said, so now he is working toward the confirmation. The hold will not apply to judicial or military nominees, but will affect President Bush's appointments of Steve Johnson to be deputy administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and Ben Grumbles to be the agency's assistant administrator for water, as well as about three dozen other nominees, according to Reid's office. Reid announced last month that he would block any Environment and Public Works Committee business from moving forward until Jaczko gets his hearing. The White House nominated Jaczko in February, based on a deal made with Reid to lift his hold on Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Mike Leavitt. Reid had placed the hold on Leavitt and other nominees after the White House rejected Jaczko's nomination recommendation but offered no explanation. Jaczko, who now handles appropriations matters for the senator, was involved with Reid's fight against the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage project, planned for 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The commission will ultimately decide if the project can move forward. Jaczko says he can objectively evaluate the site, but the nuclear energy industry would rather see someone less obviously anti-Yucca serve on the five-member commission. The White House has not made another nomination to fill the other vacant seat. Its original nominee, Navy Vice Adm. John J. Grossenbacher, withdrew his nomination in February. The plan is still to consider both nominees together, a Republican aide to the Environment and Public Works Committee said, noting that nothing has changed on the committee's schedule. But Reid says the White House has not even offered a nominee yet for the two to be questioned at once. "I'm not going to wait for their delay, that's their problem, not mine," Reid said. ***************************************************************** 56 Tri-City Herald: State: Shipments to Hanford may violate court order This story was published Tuesday, June 15th, 2004 By Annette Cary Herald staff writer The Department of Energy imported at least 83 drums of radioactive waste to Hanford without Washington state's knowledge and in violation of an agreement between DOE and Gov. Gary Locke, state officials charged Monday. Some of the shipments also may violate a court order halting shipment of transuranic waste to Hanford, said Sheryl Hutchison, spokeswoman for Washington's Department of Ecology. The state sent a letter to DOE on Monday cautioning it not to accept any more of the waste and warning that the state plans further action. That could mean an order saying how the waste must be handled or a fine. "No shipments are in process or are planned until we can get to the bottom of the state's concern and get this resolved," said Erik Olds, a DOE spokesman in Richland. Samples from Hanford's huge tanks of highly radioactive waste have been sent to the Savannah River Technical Center in South Carolina for studies on how to treat waste at the vitrification plant under construction at Hanford. An exclusion in state and federal law allows waste and any liquid waste residues remaining after a test is completed to be shipped back to Hanford. The waste is not subject to state requirements for tracking or hazardous-waste handling. Once returned to Hanford, the waste goes back into Hanford's new double-shelled tanks to await treatment at the vitrification plant. The tank waste, left over from the production of plutonium at Hanford during World War II and the Cold War, will be turned into glasslike logs for permanent disposal, likely at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. But the state discovered recently that more than tank waste and test residues were being shipped back from Savannah River. DOE also has been sending back drums of contaminated debris from the treatability studies. "We sent a little bit of waste out and got a lot of waste back," Hutchison said. "That's not how it's supposed to work." The waste includes radioactively contaminated gloves, other clothing, equipment and lab supplies used in testing and analyzing the waste samples. The state believes the debris is not covered by the exemption. "Ecology is extremely troubled by this abuse of the treatability study sample exclusion in state and federal regulations," wrote Bob Wilson, a state compliance specialist, and Michelle Anderson-Moore, a state compliance inspector, in the letter to DOE. The shipments have been coming to Hanford since 1997. But state officials did not know they were being sent to Washington until a state inspector spotted a drum in late April at Hanford and learned it contained debris from Savannah River. Because DOE apparently had considered the shipments as exempt, manifests and other tracking information had not been routinely available to state regulators. The state is unsure of where most of the drums are or if more than 83 have been sent. It's also not sure how the waste in the drums should be classified, although eight appear to be transuranic waste, which typically is contaminated with plutonium 239 and americium 241. The drums of transuranic waste are being stored at Hanford for eventual shipment to an underground repository near Carlsbad, N.M. Ten of the drums have been treated at PEcoS, a Tri-City company, and disposed of at Hanford. The waste that contaminated that equipment was shipped to Savannah River for testing as high-level waste, Hutchison said. In 2000, DOE told Locke it would not ship radioactive waste mixed with chemicals from other DOE sites to Hanford until a solid-waste environmental study was completed and a record of decision issued. The state believes that agreement bars shipment of the drums from Savannah River. The study is completed, but a record of decision has not been issued. The shipment of the eight drums of transuranic waste to Hanford also may have violated a federal court order that stopped shipment of such waste to Hanford after April 2003 until litigation is resolved. The state has not determined when the transuranic shipments were made, but at least some were sent before the injunction was issued. The state did agree in its letter to DOE that the treatability studies are an important part of work to empty and treat waste in underground tanks. "We should work together to guarantee that these studies continue," the letter said. DOE is reviewing the letter, Olds said. It was sent to Keith Klein, manager of the Richland Operations Office, and Roy Schepens, manager of the Office of River Protection. © 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 57 AP Wire: Nelson introduces bill to make all nuclear waste compact states liable | 06/15/2004 | MARGERY BECK Associated Press OMAHA, Neb. - As speculation swirls about whether Nebraska will consent to have a low-level radioactive waste dump built within its borders, Sen. Ben Nelson has introduced a bill to make all member states of nuclear waste compacts share the liability of such dumps. The Nebraska Democrat's measure is intended to protect states that host dump sites from carrying liability alone if there was a leak, accident or other problem at a dump site leading to lawsuits or legal judgments. "It's important that if the state of Nebraska is required by the court or agrees as a result of a settlement ... to host a radioactive facility, that they're not left holding the bill when and if problems arise," Nelson said. A federal appeals court has upheld a 2002 ruling by U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf that Nebraska acted in bad faith in blocking construction of a nuclear waste dump in northeast Nebraska. The state has been ordered to pay $151 million in damages. The state recently has been trying to negotiate a settlement with other members of the Central Interstate State Low-level Radioactive Waste Compact - Kansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Arkansas. If that settlement includes agreeing to have the nuclear waste dump built in Nebraska, the state should at least be protected from carrying the full weight of liability for the dump, Nelson said Tuesday. "I think it's a matter of fairness," Nelson said. "It's simply not fair to the host states to assume all future liability for the radioactive waste generated by other states." Gov. Mike Johanns, who is on a trade mission to China, would need more information about the legislation and an opportunity to review it before he could comment, said his spokeswoman, Terri Teuber. A message seeking comment from Attorney General Jon Bruning was not immediately returned. Alan Peterson, an attorney for the compact suing Nebraska, said Tuesday the Central Interstate compact does provide for shared liability, but said he did not have time to detail what that shared liability entails. Nelson, who was cited by a federal judge as having engaged in a politically motivated and orchestrated plot while governor to keep the dump from being built in Nebraska, said he is not inclined to distance himself from the nuclear waste issue. "I don't shirk leadership," he said. "I didn't shirk it when I was governor, and I'm not going to do it here. "I still care about what's best for Nebraska; that hasn't changed," Nelson added. "And criticism by a court or by others isn't going to change my view. I will not be intimidated by that kind of activity." Nelson said he signed a similar liability measure passed by the Nebraska Legislature while he was governor. Legislation for share liability also was enacted by three of the four other member states of the Central Interstate Low Level Radioactive Waste Compact. That included Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana. However, Kansas did not enact the legislation. As a result, the compact did not adopt the shared liability agreement, potentially leaving Nebraska with the assumed liability if it hosts a dump, Nelson said. Before drafting the bill, Nelson asked the Congressional Research Service to study shared liability agreements among the nation's 10 radioactive waste compacts. It found that eight of the regional compacts - including the one to which Nebraska belongs - do not extend commission liability to party states, Nelson said. The two other regional compacts have no liability provisions at all. Nelson said he has not yet approached other members of Nebraska's congressional delegation about co-sponsoring the legislation or introducing a sister bill in the House. ***************************************************************** 58 PRN: LES Reaffirms Commitment to State Participation in Licensing Process [http://www.prnewswire.com/] Hobbs, N.M., June 15 /PRNewswire/ -- Louisiana Energy Services (LES) today reaffirmed its support for the State of New Mexico to have status as interveners before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) impaneled by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The ASLB held a Pre-hearing Conference in Hobbs, New Mexico today. "We continue to believe that the state of New Mexico, through the Attorney General and New Mexico Environment Department (NMED), should be the representative of the people of this state throughout this process. Today's discussions, enabled the Licensing Board to proceed to their final decision on what issues they allow into the formal proceedings," said Marshall Cohen, LES Vice President of Communications and Government Relations. "Notwithstanding that decision, we also look forward to discussions with the State either in or outside of the NRC hearing process on the various issues raised," added Cohen. The Pre-hearing Conference allowed the ASLB that has been impaneled by the NRC for the National Enrichment Facility (NEF), to hear from attorneys representing the interveners regarding the contentions they have raised, and allowed lawyers for the NRC staff and LES to comment. The ASLB proceedings did not have substantive discussions or arguments about the project; only procedural issues will be considered. "While LES has opposed the inclusion of some contentions that were already resolved in the NRC Order of February 6, 2003 or fall outside the scope of the licensing process, we have committed, since day one, to have an open discussion about this facility and to answer questions raised by the state and the public," Cohen stated. Final decisions on all contentions that will be admitted by the ASLB are anticipated by July 19, 2004. The NEF will provide more than 200 permanent jobs and 400 to 800 multi- year construction jobs in Southeast New Mexico. It will use a proven technology that has operated safely in Europe for 30 years. NEF expects that the facility by product will be treated by a new privately operated deconversion facility, and be safely disposed of following that treatment. LES is now in discussions with three companies possessing deconversion technology, looking to have an agreement with one of those companies by the time the NEF is licensed. LES is a partnership of major nuclear energy companies. Partners include Urenco, Westinghouse and U.S. energy companies Duke Power, Entergy and Exelon. SOURCE Louisiana Energy Services Copyright © 1996-2004 PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights ***************************************************************** 59 IPS-English DISARMAMENT:U.S. Nuclear Policy Bombarded by Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 14:46:06 -0700 ROMAIPS NA IP EN=20 DISARMAMENT:U.S. Nuclear Policy Bombarded by Environmentalists By Haider Rizvi* - Tierram=E9rica NEW YORK, Jun 15 (IPS) - The George W. Bush administration is under fire = =66rom a number of U.S. lawmakers and environmental groups for pursuing e= fforts to produce another generation of nuclear weapons while government = fails to take responsibility for cleaning up existing radioactive waste. The U.S. Senate recently approved a provision promoted by Bush, included = in the 2005 Department of Defence Budget, that loosens the clean-up requi= rements for millions of litres of dangerous liquid radioactive waste.=20 According to the Jun. 4 wording of the bill, the Department of Energy can= reclassify the waste as =94incidental''. It can cut back its clean-up efforts, and abandon 51 underground tanks of= radioactive waste at the Savannah River nuclear site in the U.S. state o= f South Carolina, instead of moving it to the Nevada desert, in the west,= as stipulated in current legislation. Although the provision applies only to South Carolina, lawmakers and envi= ronmentalists in the states of Idaho and Washington, with similar radioac= tive waste storage tanks, charge that the decision sets a clear precedent= that could force them to reclassify the toxic waste also. =94It's an effort by the Department of Energy to do less clean-up... It w= ants to save money by leaving more waste behind and putting future genera= tions at risk,=94 Bob Schaeffer, of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountabili= ty, a network of more than 30 communities living near nuclear sites, told= Tierram=E9rica. The initiative =94will have serious detrimental consequences for vital wa= ter resources around the country,=94 the Alliance told U.S. senators in a= recent letter. =94It will undermine the rights of states and tribes to p= rotect their residents.=94 To enter into effect, the provision must be included in the Senate and Ho= use of Representatives' conference committee final report at the end of t= he month.=20 The Savannah River nuclear site, a federal complex established in 1950 an= d covering more than 777 square km, employs more than 12,000 people, most= of whom are involved in managing the toxic legacy.=20 The site is believed to hold about 130 million litres of radioactive wast= e, and some of its tanks are reportedly leaking. The Department of Energy argues that it could reduce clean-up costs by te= ns of billions of dollars if it left substantial amounts of waste in unde= rground tanks and covered them with grout -- an approach strongly endorse= d by some senators. =94That plan saves our taxpayers money,=94 Republican Party Senator James= Inhofe, told his colleagues recently. =94It shortens the amount of time = the waste remains in the tanks. It is a safe way=94 to handle the issue. But critics say the nuclear authorities' suggestion is just an excuse for= plans to build a plutonium fuel factory at the Savannah site, with the i= ntent to produce new nuclear warheads. A report titled, =94Managing the Nation's Nuclear Materials: The 2025 Vis= ion for the Department of Energy=94, reveals the intention to produce new= arms. According to the document, =94Dormant elements of the nuclear forces must= be reconstituted... There is an opportunity to use the Savannah River si= te canyons to process surplus residual plutonium that is considered separ= able into weapons-grade plutonium.=94 That complex =94 is the most contaminated site on the face of the earth,=94= says Louis Zeller of the Blue Ridge Environmental Defence League in an i= nterview with Tierram=E9rica. =94It's a horrible legacy of the Cold War m= ade more horrible by the U.S. pursuing more weapons.=94 The budget for the next fiscal year, which begins in October, includes mo= re than six billion dollars for nuclear weapons research and development.= That figure is similar to sums earmarked for this purpose during the Col= d War. In contrast, funding for this area in 1995 was three billion dolla= rs. Federal funding for plutonium fuel would support new weapons capability, = and the fuel operation would include a new plant to purify plutonium by l= iquid acid processing which is also essential for production of nuclear w= eapons, said Zeller. Experts say a new nuclear warhead plant proposed by the National Nuclear = Security Agency could produce up to 450 new plutonium triggers every year= for both existing weapons and those in development.=20 The United States currently possesses a stockpile of more than 10,000 act= ive nuclear weapons, nearly 4,000 pits in =94strategic reserve=94 and ove= r 12,000 in =94surplus.=94 The 2002 Moscow Treaty mandates that the United States and Russia would e= ach reduce their nuclear arsenals to 2,200 or fewer deployed warheads by = 2013. However, the Bush administration has refused to state how many warheads t= aken out of deployment will be held in reserve or destroyed. Disarmament advocates say the plans to produce a new generation of nuclea= r weapons, known as =94earth penetrators=94 as well as =94mini-nukes=94, = undermine global non-proliferation efforts. The Bush government expresses concerns regarding Iran and North Korea's a= ttempts to acquire nuclear weapons, but does not meet its own obligations= under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which requires the original = nuclear weapons states to negotiate the elimination of all nuclear arsena= ls, said Ralph Hutchison, an activist with the U.S.-based Oak Ridge Envir= onmental Peace Alliance, Despite repeated attempts, the Department of Energy did not return Tierra= m=E9rica's telephone calls for comments. (* Haider Rizvi is a Tierram=E9rica contributor. Originally published Jun= . 12 by Latin American newspapers that are part of the Tierram=E9rica net= work. Tierram=E9rica is a specialised news service produced by IPS with t= he backing of the United Nations Development Programme and the United Nat= ions Environment Programme.) ***** +Tierram=E9rica (http://www.tierramerica.net/english) +Tierram=E9rica: Mini-Nukes, the New Threat (http://www.tierramerica.net/= 2004/0119/iarticulo.shtml) + Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (http://www.ananuclear.org) (END/IPS/NA/EN-IP/HR/MP-LD/04) =20 =3D 06151817 ORP013 NNNN ***************************************************************** 60 IC: Time to Bring Back the Nuclear Freeze [http://www.intellectualconservative.com by David T. Pyne 15 June 2004 The Bush Administrations decision to destroy thousands of nuclear warheads represents unilateral nuclear disarmament on a scale unprecedented in American history. For some years now conservative pundits like talk radio host Sean Hannity have reviled those who supported the nuclear freeze movement during the 1980s as members of the radical leftwing fringe, and declared that the US could not have won the Cold War had their views been implemented. Yet many if not most of these same conservatives now support the implementation of far more drastic plans now being implemented by President Bush to unilaterally dismantle the size of our nuclear arsenal to below minimal deterrence levels advocated by even the most extreme unilateral disarmers on the left during the 1970s and 1980s. It is a little known fact that President Bush, who has long campaigned as a President committed to keeping the U.S. strong militarily, has in fact joined longtime leftwing critics of Reagans military buildup of the 1980s as an ardent champion of unilateral nuclear disarmament. As a case in point, when he took office in January 2001, President Bush inherited a U.S. nuclear arsenal of about 11,000 nuclear warheads, of which 7,200 were strategic. On May 24, 2002, President Bush signed the US-Russian Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty, also known as the Treaty of Moscow at the Kremlin. In this treaty, Bush committed the U.S. to disarm itself of up to 75% of its then-existing strategic nuclear deterrent in furtherance of its longtime Russian foreign policy objective. Since then, the Administration has slashed the U.S. nuclear arsenal to 7,000 total warheads, of which fewer than 5,000 are strategic. The New York Times, in its June 4th edition, quoted Mr. Linton Brooks, who serves as National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Administrator and nuclear weapons czar for the Bush Administration, as stating that the U.S. will cut its remaining nuclear arsenal almost in half. Mr. Brooks declaration last week means that by the time the Moscow Treaty goes into effect on December 31, 2002, the U.S. will have slashed its remaining nuclear stockpile from 7,000 warheads today to about 3,700 warheads, of which less than half -- about 1,700 -- will be strategic. This not only represents a reduction of nearly half of the current U.S. nuclear arsenal, it heralds an over two-thirds reduction in the overall size of the nuclear arsenal the Bush administration inherited from the Clinton administration in January 2001 -- making for, according to Mr. Brooks, "the smallest nuclear-weapons stockpile we've had in several decades." So while the United States buries acclaimed conservative President Ronald Reagan, the Bush administration is in the process of burying the Reagan legacy of peace through strength by disarming the country of its strategic nuclear deterrent. The Bush administration has also set at naught Reagans motto of trust, but verify by neglecting to include a rigorous verification regime in the Moscow Treaty. The U.S. has been unable to confirm the actual size of the Russian nuclear arsenal, believed to consist of between 21,000-40,000 warheads. Even using the lowest estimates of the Russian nuclear arsenal, the Russians currently possess an arsenal consisting of at least three times as many nuclear warheads as the United States. Such a large imbalance in the U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals could enable Russia to employ nuclear blackmail against the U.S. in the not-so-distant future, as disarming to Bush Administration proposed levels would leave the U.S. dangerously vulnerable to a hypothetical Russian nuclear first strike. The PRC and the Russian Federation signed a defensive alliance treaty aimed against the U.S. in July 2001 and have since formed the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, consisting of the two great powers and four former Soviet Central Asian republics, as a potential new military alliance to counter U.S. global hegemony. Only last year, the two countries held joint mock nuclear war exercises, including simulated nuclear attacks against U.S. targets. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in what represented perhaps the most shining moment of his tenure, fought hard behind the scenes to sabotage the signing of this risky nuclear disarmament treaty before being ordered by the President himself to desist in his efforts. On July 25th, 2002, Rumsfeld, at a Senate Armed Services Committee confirmation hearing for the Treaty of Moscow, announced that in his view it would be irresponsible to destroy any US strategic nuclear warheads decommissioned under the Treaty. Because the Moscow Treaty does not require either the U.S. or the Russian Federation to destroy one single nuclear warhead, the Bush Administrations decision to destroy thousands of additional warheads represents unilateral nuclear disarmament on a scale unprecedented in American history. The Russians, on the other hand, have not committed to significant reductions in their nuclear stockpile. Russia today possesses an operational national missile defense system consisting of 100 dedicated ABMs around Moscow plus an additional 8,500 SA-10 Grumble and SA-20 Triumph dual-purpose SAM/ABMs deployed throughout the Russian Federation. The United States, on the other hand, has not had an operational national missile defense system, since a liberal Democrat-controlled US Congress dismantled the Safeguard system in 1975. Indeed, if Senator Kerry is elected President in November as seems increasingly likely, it may not have one again for a decade or more to come. Kerry has expressed his full support for the Moscow Treaty and has expressed his openness to implementing slightly larger nuclear warhead cuts than those planned by the Bush administration. President Bush needs to re-apply Reagans motto of peace through strength to his stewardship over the U.S. nuclear stockpile, scrap the dangerously naive Treaty of Moscow, and freeze the U.S. nuclear stockpile at present levels. In order to counter the Russian nuclear threat, the U.S. also needs to build a much more robust national missile defense system, similar to what President Reagan envisioned to protect the country, that would be based on the sea and in space. We live in far too dangerous a world to be any less vigilant in preserving and safeguarding Americas strategic nuclear deterrent, whose retention at a relatively robust level is all but indispensable to Americas continued status as a military superpower. David T. Pyne, Esq. is President of the Center for the National Security Interest [http://www.national-security.org/] , a national security think-tank based in Arlington, VA. ***************************************************************** 61 asahi.com: U.S. should set an example by changing its stance. EDITORIAL:Nuclear nonproliferation Opinion,Editorial North Korea poses a threat to Japan and the world while nuclear development continues. Iran is still suspected of developing nuclear weapons. Pakistan's nuclear technology was sold en masse on the black market. And Iraq and Libya were once developing nuclear arms by pretending they were seeking peaceful uses of nuclear energy. The nuclear nonproliferation regime, an effort to prevent spread of nuclear weapons based on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that took effect in 1970, has been seriously frayed. The leaders of the Group of Eight major countries who got together in Sea Island, Georgia, announced an action program to put the regime on the right track. Such a decision at the G-8 summit is without precedent. The leaders probably felt that they could no longer leave the danger of nuclear proliferation unattended. The world leaders, expressing grave concern over North Korea's nuclear development and missiles exports, stressed their hopes that the six-way talks would resolve the matter. They also united in calling for North Korea to scrap its nuclear program ``in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner.'' Their announcement will put pressure on Pyongyang. The centerpiece of the action program is that a new standard for exporting nuclear materials and technology, such as the one for extracting highly enriched uranium, would be worked out so that they would be unavailable to dangerous countries. The G-8 countries will draft a plan and try to win agreement from the 44 countries that export parts and components to be used for nuclear power generators by the end of next year. The G-8 countries will try to set an example by refraining from exporting new equipment for a year from now. The eight leaders also proposed enhancing the function of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the watchdog body for the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and taking stronger action in concert to prevent the smuggling of nuclear materials on the seas. We pin our hope on such action. If the agreement by the G-8 leaders is to rehabilitate the nonproliferation regime, however, there are many challenging tasks that must be completed. One is related to the additional protocol, which empowers the IAEA to make forcible inspections it considers necessary. The action program proposed that the export of nuclear technology and materials should be allowed only to those countries that are signatories to the protocol. But non-nuclear powers, especially developing countries, are dissatisfied with this proposal. They complain that the nuclear powers have not carried out nuclear disarmament, which they are obliged to do under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and that it is unfair to talk only about keeping an eye on non-nuclear powers while no issue is made of nuclear powers' failure to perform their duty. Such criticism is directed at U.S. President George W. Bush, who proposed the latest action program. The United States turned its back on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and is now trying to develop small nuclear warheads. It also turned a blind eye to Israel's nuclear armament, which provoked nuclear development by Iraq and other countries. The review conference of the nuclear nonproliferation regime, held every five years, will take place next year. Almost all the countries, except for Israel, India and Pakistan that refuse to be parties to the regime, will take part in the conference. The most important agenda item will be how to put nuclear technology and materials under control. The G-8's action program has important meaning as a basis for discussion on the issue at the conference. It is very doubtful, however, if it will have wide support, including that of developing countries, unless the United States changes its position. It is the nuclear superpower's responsibility to modestly listen to various voices of the international community. --The Asahi Shimbun, June 13(IHT/Asahi: June 15,2004) (06/15) ***************************************************************** 62 Guardian Unlimited: DOE Official in Charge of Cleanup Resigns From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday June 16, 2004 1:31 AM By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - Assistant Energy Secretary Jessie Roberson, who headed the environmental cleanup program at the department's nuclear weapons sites, resigned Tuesday, citing a desire to spend more time with her family. Roberson has been at the center of an aggressive plan by Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to speed up the massive environmental cleanup the government faces from waste left over from years of nuclear bomb making. The accelerated cleanup agenda, crafted by Roberson, has been criticized by some state officials and environmentalists as an attempt by the Energy Department to scale back cleanup standards and saddle states with more of the highly radioactive waste. DOE spokesman Joe Davis said that Roberson's departure would be effective July 15. ``She wanted to spend more time with her family,'' said Davis. ``She wanted to move on. She's done a great job.'' Davis said that Abraham told Roberson that in three years at the job she had ``fundamentally changed the management'' of the waste cleanup effort. Roberson came to the post after working for the Energy Department's office overseeing the cleanup of the Rocky Flats nuclear site in Colorado. The resignation is the third of a senior Energy Department official closely involved in nuclear waste cleanup or environmental management in just over two months. Undersecretary Robert Card, the department's No. 3 official who was closely involved in nuclear waste issues, and Assistant Secretary Beverly Cook, who reported to Card and was in charge of environmental and health management at nuclear complex sites, resigned in early April after tangling with members of Congress over a worker health issue. They, too, cited a desire to spend more time with family. Davis said ``it would be wrong to draw any conclusion'' that Roberson's resignation was related to those departures or that her decision to leave the department involved an issue of policy. However, Roberson has been criticized by some lawmakers for threatening to withhold as much as $350 million in nuclear waste cleanup funds unless states with tanks of high-level radioactive waste agree to a reclassification of the waste so it would not have to be transported to Nevada for disposal. Senators and other officials from Washington, where many of the waste tanks are located, accused the department of trying to ``blackmail'' the states into agreeing to the cleanup changes. Tank waste also is located at facilities in Idaho and South Carolina. Officials of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, an advocacy group opposed to the DOE accelerated cleanup program, said they welcomed Roberson's departure. Susan Gordon, the group's executive director, said Roberson ``failed to adequately involve the public and local stockholders in the planning around accelerated cleanup and consequently put forward plans that continue to face significant opposition.'' But other skeptics of the DOE cleanup program, nevertheless, had praise for Roberson. ``We may have had some differences...but I firmly believe she made a positive difference in the difficult and complicated task of cleanup up our nation's nuclear waste sites,'' said Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash. ``There is no question that real cleanup progress has been made in the years (she) has served.'' Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 63 KIFI: Detecting Destruction at the INEEL www.localnews8.com The Post Company June 15, 2004 Nearly every day we hear of some bombing or explosion, whether it’s in the United States or in a third-world country. Living here in Eastern Idaho we aren't exempt from the terrorism and engineers at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory are inventing new things every day to protect us. Nearly 400 pounds of explosives detected at the INEEL would normally cause great panic. But this time the detection received applause. For the past two years local engineers have been working on a portable device that detects explosives in vehicles. “Just in four years, over 1200 people have died as a result of car bombing explosives hidden in vehicles or trucks," says Project Manager Jeff Klinger, National Security. This machine will allow for tighter security at the Olympics, government sites and other high target areas. The INEEL is constantly working on new technology to improve our safety. “It’s a win-win situation where we help these guys out by providing unique infrastructure in a real world situation, INEEL in technology, training," says Yvette Leppert, Project Lead Incident Response. This is training that could one day protect us from a huge disaster. The Mass Destruction Civil Support Team is training in a full-scale scenario, working with dirty bomb sand radioactive materials that we could one day experience. “I think we are a very real target and we need to be prepared for that," says Leppert. Working in the field on what could happen if we are attacked and looking for ways to prevent the attacks are part of what goes on at the site every day. “If it saves one life, it's worthwhile, they anticipate saving thousands of lives and property," says Klinger. Lives they will never know if they saved because the prevented the attack from ever happening. The INEEL is always working on new devices and is the most recognized engineering department in the Department of Energy. ***************************************************************** 64 U.S. Newswire: DOE Sec. Abraham Announces Community Service Awards for Employee Volunteer Service; Supports Pres. Bush's USA Freedom Corps Initiative 6/15/2004 6:29:00 PM To: National Desk, Energy Reporter Contact: Jacqueline Johnson of U.S. Department of Energy, 202-586-5806 WASHINGTON, June 15 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Department of Energy today recognized 109 headquarters employees for their volunteer service. A total of 205 DOE employees nationwide will receive awards. Employees honored today gave 25 hours or more to volunteer activities within the past year. "This is the second year we are giving these awards, and I am very pleased to be making these presentations again. I think it is very important that we honor those who have devoted so much of their spare time to giving something back... to helping their neighbors, and making their communities a better place," Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham said. Secretary Abraham presented the Volunteer Service Award Plaques to the organizations with highest volunteer participation rate. They are: -- Office of Hearings and Appeals George Breznay, Director; -- Office of the Inspector General, Greg Friedman, Inspector General; and -- Bonneville Power Administration, Jeff Stier, Vice President. "I know that many of you in this room have been involved in volunteer work that you have been doing for years. Your efforts bring credit to the Energy Department, and make our Nation a better place. I appreciate all that you do, and I hope your example will inspire others in the department to follow your lead." C.S. Tyler Przybylek, acting chief operating officer of National Nuclear Security Administration, made special remarks relating to community service. He and Theresa Alvillar-Speake, director of the Office of Economic Impact, presented certificates to all the DOE employee volunteer service awardees during the ceremony. Employees honored today volunteered as tutors, mentors, counselors and coaches. Also, many of the DOE employees read to children at the department's adopted school, Amidon Elementary School. On April 19, 2002, Secretary Abraham launched the Secretary of Energy Community Service Program at the department aimed at encouraging employee involvement in their communities and participation in volunteer activities. During his January 2002 State of the Union address, President Bush called upon every American to get involved in strengthening America's communities and sharing America's compassion around the world. He challenged each of us to make a lifetime commitment of at least two years to the service of others, and he created the USA Freedom Corps to help all Americans answer that call. For more information on how to volunteer, visit: [http://releases.usnewswire.com/redir.asp?ReleaseID=31963&Link=ht tp://www.usafreedomcorp.gov] [http://www.usnewswire.com/] ***************************************************************** 65 Times-News: INEEL ready to hire for expanded research mission www.magicvalley.com The Times-News | AG Weekly | Tuesday, June 15, 2004 • Twin Falls, Idaho The Associated Press IDAHO FALLS -- After a dozen years of reducing the payroll by nearly half, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory is finally ready to begin hiring again. Both the INEEL and associated Argonne National Laboratory-West have begun looking for new workers to handle the expanded role the site has been given in nuclear energy research and homeland security. The two laboratories will merge next February under the new name of the Idaho National Laboratory when the new operating contracts for the site take effect. While personnel managers are going over the resumes of employees laid off in the past, the targets of the new hiring initiative are young people in targeted specialties. "We need workers with a whole different educational background than before," said Bernie Sikorski, director of human resources at INEEL. Less than a year ago, Bechtel BWXT, which is running the site for the government, laid off or offered early retirement to 200 workers. That brought the work force at the site down to around 6,000 from 8,500 when Bechtel took over in 1999. Still eastern Idaho's biggest employer and the driving force of the regional economy, INEEL is significantly smaller than it was in 1992 when the payroll was nearly 1,300. Officials are unsure just how many new workers they will hire in the next year, but 88 openings have already been posted on the INEEL Web site. Mid-career workers are being considered for some jobs, but managers are focusing on young people beginning their careers, who can learn from older workers before they retire while bringing in new skills. "We have to be able to maintain a core of significant expertise, and I'm getting anxious about that because our core is about to retire," said John Sackett at Argonne-West. Copyright © 2004, Lee Publications Inc. Magicvalley.com is an on-line division of The Times-News, published daily at 132 W. Fairfield St., Twin Falls, Idaho 83301 by Lee Publications, Inc., a subsidiary of Lee Enterprises. ***************************************************************** 66 Hawk Eye: Plant alums listen, question [http://archive.thehawkeye.com] Tuesday, June 15, 2004, Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST Former Army plant employees dissatisfied with official answers on slow compensation. By MATTHEW LeBLANC mleblanc@thehawkeye.com [mleblanc@thehawkeye.com] Helen Josephson, who worked at the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant in Middletown for 2 1/2 years in the 1970s, wanted to know why she has stomach problems that can't be explained. Doug Ruby wondered if groundwater flowing beneath the 19,000–acre plant could have killed his father. Merle Snider just wanted someone to listen. None of them seemed to get the answers they wanted. For more than two hours Tuesday night, former IAAP workers and their relatives quizzed a panel of federal officials who run a compensation program to pay former employees sickened while working at the plant. The officials scheduled the meeting, they said, to explain recent changes to the nearly 4–year–old Energy Employees Illness Compensation Program, but the four–hour meeting at Pzazz quickly became a forum for former plant workers angry that they and loved ones have not received compensation payments. "I have talked, but I don't know if I'm going to get anything," said Josephson, who said before the meeting that her once–brunette hair was turned "an orangey blond" by work at the ordnance plant. She now walks with a cane and has white, curly hair. Seated at the back of a conference room at the motel, a panel of federal officials that included EEOICP Director Pete Turcic and a doctor who co–wrote a document detailing radiation at IAAP fielded questions from former workers and their family members. Aides to Sen. Tom Harkin, D–Iowa, and Sen. Charles Grassley, R–Iowa, also were present. The discussion was the first dialogue among federal officials, the workers and Harkin and Grassley staffers since legislation was introduced in the U.S. Senate last week that would alter the compensation program to make it easier for the injured workers to receive payments. After short opening statements from each of the federal officials, some of the more than 200 in attendance rose to question the panel. Answers to several questions were met with quiet jeers. At least twice, panelists asked audience members — some clutching envelopes containing packets of information detailing work at IAAP — to quiet down while fielding further questions. By 8:30 p.m. — about an hour after workers began with questions — several audience members left the room, saying they were unsatisfied with answers they had received. Numbers dwindled to about 100 around 9 p.m. "I've got cancer in my spine. I've got cancer in my hip. I've got a lot of cancer in me," said Snider, who lives in Fort Madison. "I wish the people would go back and let me know something." "We didn't believe we were going to get anywhere here," said Carroll May, standing with his wife, Connie, in the hotel lobby. Connie's father, Harold Schubert, died after a short battle with cancer they believe was caused by work at the plant. IAAP workers built, test–fired and disassembled components of nuclear weapons at the plant from the 1940s to the 1970s. Some of the work has been linked to cancers and other illnesses. Congress passed EEOICP in 2000 after Harkin pushed through the Senate a bill to compensate former nuclear weapons workers nationwide who were injured while working at Department of Energy facilities. Under a portion of EEOICP administered by the Department of Labor, former workers or their surviving family members are eligible to receive a $150,000 payment if government doctors determine the person's illness is work–related. But only 40 payments have been made to more than 1,000 former workers who have filed claims since 2001, according to Labor Department statistics. Harkin and Grassley have cited a lagging claims process as reasons for the delay. DOL has not yet begun work on claims filed by workers employed at IAAP before 1958 because, officials say, they are unable to locate information on the amount of radiation to which workers were exposed. James Neton, a doctor who helped write an IAAP "site profile" designed to outline years of radiation exposure at the plant, said information related to employment at the plant could be compiled some time in the future. Officials could not provide a timeline for the report. "This is not the be–all, end–all product," Neton said. EEOICP administrators rely on site profiles to help determine the amount of radiation or chemicals to which a worker was exposed. Federal panels of doctors then determine if a worker's claim is valid. Without the profile, no determination of a claim can be made. Harkin submitted separate amendments to a bill that will be debated this week in the Senate that would guarantee payments for certain IAAP workers. Under that plan, some of the workers will be placed in a "special exposure cohort," in which they would skip a "dose reconstruction" procedure that uses the site profile to assess the threat to the worker's health. The claimant would proceed directly to payment. But even that could be a longshot, said Harkin aide Beth Stein. Currently, there is no way to fund the cohort. Also, even if a funding mechanism is found, the measure also must be approved by the U.S. House. Former workers leaving the meeting Monday expressed skepticism that they would ever see a payment. "We send billions of dollars overseas, and these people here that protected our country just as much as they were soldiers have to go through all this red tape," said Delores Underwood, who received a letter last Tuesday from the Labor Department denying her claim. Her husband, Leroy, was a carpenter at IAAP. Gina Goulden, whose father, Stanley Wood, died before he could file a claim, agreed. "The government doesn't give a damn about these people," she said. Turcic assured audience members, however, that officials would be back in Burlington in the near future to hear from former workers. He did not say when. The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 Front Desk · 319-754-6824 FAX · 1-800-397-1708 Toll Free ***************************************************************** 67 KATU 2: Hanford reactor named to endangered historic property list - Portland, Oregon 6/15/2004 [http://www.katu.com YAKIMA, WASH. - Efforts to preserve the world's first large-scale nuclear reactor at the Hanford nuclear reservation in south-central Washington are expected to get a boost today. The Washington Trust for Historic Preservation plans to put the so-called "B Reactor" on its Most Endangered Historic Properties list. Supporters want to make it a museum. The B Reactor was the world's first full-scale plutonium production nuclear reactor. It produced the plutonium for the first man-made nuclear blast, the Trinity test in New Mexico on July 16th of 1945. The reactor also produced the plutonium for the bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki, Japan, in World War Two just a month later. It was built as part of the top-secret Manhattan Project, and decommissioned in 1968. The reactor has been placed on the National Register of Historic Places, but its future has remained in doubt as cleanup progresses at the Hanford site. A final decision on its future isn't due until 2006. (Copyright 2004 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.) ***************************************************************** 68 Google News Alert - nuclear Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 12:31:05 -0700 (PDT) EUROPEANS urge swift conclusion of Iran nuclear probe Channel News Asia - Singapore VIENNA : Britain, France and Germany proposed a draft resolution to the UN atomic agency calling for a probe into Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program to ... See all stories on this topic: AMERICANS Need New Nuclear Energy, Taylor Says Yahoo News (press release) - USA ... to turn its back on a source of electric energy that is low cost, dependable, safe, domestically fueled and can protect our air -- nuclear energy -- an ... SENATE Backs Bush on New Nuclear Weapons Wired News - USA ... The US Senate on Tuesday backed the Bush administration's plan to study a new generation of low-yield and earth-penetrating nuclear weapons, rejecting concerns ... See all stories on this topic: NORTH Korea nuclear talks News 24 Houston - Houston,TX,USA Seoul, South Korea-(AP) -- North Korea is warning that new talks on its nuclear program will go nowhere if the US sticks to its current demands. ... See all stories on this topic: PRESERVATION efforts for Hanford nuclear reactor KING5.com (subscription) - Seattle,WA,USA - Efforts to preserve the world's first large-scale nuclear reactor - at ... The B Reactor was the world's first full-scale plutonium production nuclear reactor. ... See all stories on this topic: ROH Promises North Korea Massive Aid if Nuclear Issue is Resolved Voice of America - Washington,DC,USA South Korea's president has promised massive aid to North Korea if the dispute over Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program is peacefully ended. ... See all stories on this topic: NUCLEAR shutdown dims parts of West East Valley Tribune - Mesa,AZ,USA All three units of the Palo Verde nuclear plant and another conventional power plant west of Phoenix shut down early Monday, causing electrical blackouts from ... See all stories on this topic: RUSSIA to continue building nuclear plant in Iran Interfax - Moscow,Russia June 15 (Interfax) - Russia will continue constructing the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran despite IAEA criticism of Iran, a spokesman for the Russian ... See all stories on this topic: IRANIAN parliament head threatens not to back tougher UN nuclear ... IranMania News - Iran ... speaker of Iran's parliament threatened on Tuesday not to ratify the Islamic republic's signature of the additional protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation ... See all stories on this topic: IRAN denies any wrongdoing in its nuclear program Team 4 News - Rio Grande Valley,CA,USA Undated-AP -- The Iranian foreign minister says his country has no plans to produce nuclear weapons, and that any nuclear activities there are for peaceful ... 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/ ***************************************************************** 69 Salt Lake Tribune: Confirmation hearings coach now in the hot seat June 15, 2004 By Christopher Smith WASHINGTON -- Utah native and longtime Republican lobbyist Tom Korologos has coached an estimated 400 presidential nominees through Senate confirmation hearings. "There will be hearsay questions, irrelevant questions and even some stupid questions," he tells them. "Be ready for all of them." Wednesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will see if Korologos heeds his own advice when the panel holds a hearing on his nomination to become the new U.S. ambassador to Belgium. It was widely anticipated Korologos would easily coast to confirmation, but the outlook clouded Monday when Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced he would put a blanket hold on all of President Bush's pending nominees until a former Reid staffer nominated to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is confirmed by the Senate. Reid's desire to have his former aide, Greg Jaczko, on the panel that will oversee licensing of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump also stalled former Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt's confirmation to head the Environmental Protection Agency last year. Reid lifted his hold on Leavitt after Bush agreed to nominate Jaczko, but the Senate Environment Committee has yet to report Jaczko's nomination to the floor for a full Senate vote. Fearful Jaczko will be an agent of Reid's opposition to Yucca Mountain on the commission, nuclear power industry officials have urged senators to defeat his confirmation. No stranger to political gamesmanship, Korologos, 71, has thus far been following another of his cardinal rules during the run-up to his confirmation hearing Wednesday. "Model yourself after a bridegroom at a wedding," he said in his confirmation "commandments" collected by the Presidential Appointee Initiative of the Brookings Institution. "Be on time, stay out of the way and keep your mouth shut." Due to federal ethics rules, Korologos was forced to relinquish his interest in the small but influential lobby firm Timmons and Co. last year when he was named by Bush as a public relations adviser to L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator for postwar Iraq reconstruction. Korologos left the position in September and was nominated as ambassador to Belgium on May 13. Korologos will be introduced at Wednesday's confirmation hearing by Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, who briefly served as chief of staff to his father, the late Sen. Wallace Bennett of Utah, when Korologos was the elder Bennett's press secretary. A former Salt Lake Tribune sportswriter, Korologos eventually served in a variety of positions in the Nixon, Ford, Reagan and first Bush administrations, and has helped Beltway celebrities such as Henry Kissinger, Donald Rumsfeld, William Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia navigate Senate confirmation. Copyright Salt Lake City Tribune ***************************************************************** 70 EnergyPulse: Renewable Fraud [http://www.energypulse.net/default.cfm] > Supposedly, renewable energy is a clean way to produce electricity. Supposedly, renewable energy will make the United States less dependent on imported fossil fuels. It sounds wonderful. In actual fact though, these statements are complete lies. In most circumstances, renewable energy is the filthiest way to generate electricity that there is. Renewable energy is the biggest con job ever perpetuated on the American public. The most popular form of renewable energy by far is wind generation. Supposedly, wind generation is competitive with other forms of power generation. However, wind generation does not really substitute for other power sources at all. This is due to its miserably low capacity factor. According to information supplied by the Energy Information Administration, the capacity factor of wind generated electricity in the state of California during 1999 was 23.7% and 26.0% in 2000. It seems totally appropriate to use these figures from California as being typical of wind generation in general, since California has the largest installed wind generated capacity of any state, and has operated its wind generation facilities for many years. Indeed, one could justly claim that California pioneered large-scale electricity generation from wind. Now, it is true that some wind generators, at ideal windy sites, have capacity factors as high as 40%. However, if presidential candidate John Kerry’s proposal were adopted to require 20% of U. S. electricity to be generated by renewable resources, then so many less than ideal sites would need to be pressed into service, that to achieve an average capacity factor of 26% by wind generation would be a remarkable achievement. The problem with these low capacity factors is that some other form of electrical energy generation must usually supply the missing generation, and in the United States that supply is most likely to come from a fossil fuel fired power plant. That was certainly the case in California during the California electricity crisis. Due to the Western drought, California had to replace inexpensive hydroelectric generation with expensive fossil fuel generation because renewable energy could not cover the shortfall. However, it is not generally realized that California’s investment in wind generation actually made the California electricity crisis far worse than it needed to be. Electrical production from wind generation is highly variable. It varies with the cube of the speed of the wind. Indeed, below a certain wind speed, called the cut-in speed, the wind generator does not produce any electricity at all. Typically, the cut-in speed is approximately 10 mph. Consequently, wind generators spend a great deal of time producing no power. In addition, they only produce their rated capacity when the wind speed is well above the average speed of the wind at the site. This is why their overall capacity factors are so low. For this reason, other electrical generators must extensively cycle their power output to compensate for the variation in the output of the wind generation. Operating a fossil fuel fired power plant in the cyclic mode, instead of operating at a constant power, has two very detrimental effects. First of all, cycling makes the power plant much less efficient. It must consume more fossil fuel to produce the same electrical output. Second, cycling produces thermal stresses that over time will cause material failures that will force the power plant to shut down to make repairs. The failures produced by cycling is one of the reasons that has influenced most power plant operators to choose a power plant design that is relatively inefficient when they need to operate the plant in the cyclic mode. A simple combustion turbine is typically 40% efficient. A combined cycle power plant that includes a combustion turbine, a heat recovery steam generator, and a steam turbine, is typically 58% efficient. However, the combustion turbine is less likely to fail due to the thermal stresses induced by cycling. The other major reason that a power plant operator would choose the inefficient combustion turbine over the efficient combined cycle is that the combustion turbine costs less to install. The power plant operator must operate his combined cycle generator longer than the combustion turbine to recover his investment. If he is forced to shut down or reduce power to make room on the electrical grid for a wind generator, he may never recover his investment. Consequently, there are very compelling technical and financial reasons to choose a simple combustion turbine that is only 40% efficient if the power plant is forced to cycle because of the operation of a wind generator on the same electrical grid. Using the 26.0% wind capacity factor from California in 2000, one can calculate the amount of fossil fuel required to operate a combustion turbine for 74.0% of the time in order to replace the missing power from the wind generator, and compare it to the amount of fossil fuel required to operate a 58% efficient combined cycle power plant 100% of the time. The more efficient combined cycle can now be used since it does not have to vary its output to accommodate the wind generator. The result is that the combination of wind generator and combustion turbine uses 7.2% more fossil fuel than the combined cycle. That’s right. The introduction of the wind generator causes more fossil fuel to be burned not less. That means more pollution, not less. That means more carbon dioxide emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere, not less. That means more dependence on imported fossil fuels, not less. That means that wind generation is a fraud. That means that renewable energy is a fraud. That means that the taxpayers of the United States, who are currently subsidizing wind generation to the tune of 18$ per megawatt hour of generation, are being ripped off. That means that John Kerry’s proposal is totally detrimental. It is an extremely expensive means to create more pollution and burn more fossil fuel. The detrimental effect of wind generation can be even worse, if the threat of being forced to vary their output causes additional power producers to select simple combustion turbines, instead of the more efficient combined cycles. This certainly was the case in California during the 1990s. Not a single large-scale combined cycle power plant was constructed in California in the decade before its electricity crisis. What this means is, that during its electricity crisis, California consumed huge amounts of natural gas in order to supply its consumers with electricity. Since the price of natural gas was outrageously high at the time, the inefficiency of its gas fired power plants cost California consumers billions of dollars. California would have been much better off if it had never built any wind generators, and invested its money in combined cycle generators. To make matters even worse, California failed to install the required pollution control equipment on many of its fossil fuel fired power plants before it sold them to independent operators during the restructuring of its electricity market. The only way that these plants could operate, beyond a very limited number of hours, was to pay very expensive environmental fines. However, these plants were required to operate in order to avoid electrical blackouts, and the ratepayers ended up paying these fines. This also cost California ratepayers billions of dollars. California would have been better off if it had taken the money it had invested in wind generation, and invested it in pollution control equipment of its fossil fuel fired power plants. The experience of California clearly shows that investment in wind generation is a very foolish investment. The money would be much better spent on improving power plant efficiency, or on advanced pollution controls. However, the most foolish thing that California did to its electricity supply was to shut down two nuclear power plants, Rancho Seco and San Onofre Unit 1. The average capacity factor of the nuclear power plants in the United States in 2002 was 92%, and the average has been consistently close to 90% in recent years. Note that the capacity factors of nuclear power plants are much greater than for wind generation. If these two nuclear power plants would have been available during the California electricity crisis, and if their capacity factors were at least 90%, then California ratepayers would have saved at least three billion dollars. Also, nuclear power plants emit virtually no air pollution, so California’s air would have been cleaner, since unlike wind generation, nuclear power’s high capacity factor means that it needs significantly less support from fossil fuel fired power plants. However, what would make the decision to close the Rancho Seco plant so extraordinarily foolish is that the city of Sacramento, which owned Rancho Seco, spent over four hundred million dollars in today’s dollars to make improvements to Rancho Seco just before it decided to decommission the plant. That’s right. The city of Sacramento threw away over four hundred million dollars in order not to have the capacity of a reliable and clean electrical power source available. As events were to show, that was a most unfortunate decision. Of course, the usual argument against operating nuclear power plants is that they produce “deadly” nuclear waste. In actual fact, waste from nuclear power plants in the United States has never killed any member of the general public. The nuclear waste is isolated from the environment and the probability is extremely low that it will ever escape. The fact that is consistently overlooked by anti-nuclear advocates is that the uranium fuel that the nuclear power plants use is dangerously radioactive in its own right, and using the uranium in nuclear reactors removes this radioactive danger from the environment. The main radioactive danger of uranium is that it is at the start of a radioactive decay chain that includes radioactive nuclides that are extremely dangerous. Radium-226 is one of uranium’s radioactive daughters. It is a well-known carcinogen. It is interesting to compare radium-226 with plutonium-239, which is almost always cited by anti-nuclear activists as being such a dangerous component of spent reactor fuel. Radium-226 is at least one million times more dangerous than plutonium-239. This is due to the fact that the most likely pathway into the human body of either nuclide is via the alimentary canal, and that plutoniun-239 is likely to be excreted long before it decays. However, radium is chemically similar to calcium and a major fraction of it is retained within the body. Consequently, it is much more likely that the radium will release its cancer causing alpha particle where it will do the most harm. Radium decays to radon gas whose health dangers have been widely reported. Radon-222 decays to polonium-218. Polonium-218 decays to lead-214. Lead-214 decays to bismuth-214. Bismuth-214 decays to polonium-214. Polunium-214 decays to lead-210. Lead-210 decays to polonium-210. Every one of these nuclides is radioactive. Every one of these nuclides can release a cancer causing radioactive dose to human cells. Polonium is typically referred to as being 250 billion times more toxic that hydrocyanic acid. Hydrocyanic acid is one of the most lethal chemical poisons. Obviously, polonium is so toxic that it would only be common sense to keep it away from human beings. However, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration stand idly by while massive amounts of uranium and all of its radioactive daughters are introduced into human beings. Phosphate is used in massive amounts as a fertilizer and an animal feed supplement. Unfortunately, all commercial phosphate deposits are contaminated with uranium and its radioactive daughters. Consequently, agricultural practices are introducing naturally occurring radioactivity into virtually the entire population of the United States. The radioactive dose to smokers caused by natural radioactivity is well documented. The Fredericksburg Free-Lance Star reported in its July 14, 2002 issue that a smoker, smoking 30 cigarettes a day, receives a dose of 16,000 millirems a year. A worker in a nuclear power plant is limited by federal regulation to less than 5000 millirems a year and very few workers ever get close to the dose limit. Consequently, smokers are receiving very large cancer causing doses from natural radioactivity. The theory is that radium in the soil decays to radon gas, which drifts upward underneath the canopy of tobacco leaves. When the radon decays, its radioactive daughters stick to the waxy tobacco leaves. Much of the radium in soil comes from the application of contaminated phosphate fertilizer. To illustrate just how much greater this naturally occurring radioactive dose is than any dose expected from the operation of nuclear power plants, a smoker in a Las Vegas casino will get a greater radioactive dose in two days, than a resident of Las Vegas will get in a lifetime from the operation of the Yucca Mountain radioactive waste depository. Approximately 150,000 smoking related cancer deaths occur each year in the United States. Removing uranium and its radioactive daughters from phosphate fertilizer and animal feed supplements would certainly reduce this number of deaths. Some writers have speculated that 90% of all smoking related cancers are due to the radioactivity in the tobacco smoke. If removing uranium and its radioactive daughters from phosphates prevented only one-third of these cancers, that would save 50,000 lives a year. That seems to be a very worthwhile goal and it could be done. Indeed, on a limited scale in the recent past it was done. From 1950 to 2000, some phosphate producers did remove uranium and its radioactive daughters from their products to supply uranium to power nuclear reactors and to provide uranium for nuclear weapons. However, after Three Mile Island, the demand for uranium plunged and uranium prices fell. Phosphate producers could no longer make a profit extracting uranium from phosphate ore so they left it in their products. If phosphate producers were encouraged to remove the uranium and its daughters from their products, not only would that save some smokers’ lives, but also the uranium could be used to fuel nuclear reactors. This would require a substantial expansion of the use of nuclear power to make this economical. However, such an expansion could save tens of thousands of additional lives by preventing millions of tons of pollution from fossil fuel fired power plants. Nuclear reactors, due to their high capacity factors, can actually replace fossil fuel fired power plants, unlike renewable energy, which actually requires greater dependence on fossil fuels. However, the greatest benefit of removing uranium and its radioactive daughters from phosphate containing products could very well be the reduction of radioactivity from food. Radium is very similar chemically to calcium. Any plant that absorbs calcium from the soil will also absorb radium. Animals and humans will then absorb the radium for their bones, teeth, and brains. Lead is also chemically similar to calcium. Consequently, uranium’s radioactive lead daughters will also be concentrated in animals and humans. However, the Environmental Protection Agency thoroughly discounts the danger from radioactivity in food. I think that the EPA has seriously underestimated the danger. Since 1980, the breast cancer rate in American women has more than doubled. There is every reason to believe that this is due to an environmental cause. However, the Environmental Protection Agency has not been able to identify the cause. Perhaps, the agency has overlooked the obvious. The skyrocketing increase in breast cancers correlates very well with the increasing use of phosphates in fertilizer and in animal feed. Also, it was during this time period that some phosphate producers stopped removing uranium and its radioactive daughters from their products. The higher rate of breast cancer in American women when compared to the rest of the world could be explained by the fact that phosphates are more extensively used in the United States than anywhere else in the world. If radioactivity in food is a serious threat, then it is responsible not only for the increase in breast cancer but also the increase in many other cancer rates. There are approximately 400,000 non-smoking related cancer deaths each year in the United States. If removing the radioactivity from phosphate products prevented just one-fourth of these deaths, that would save approximately 100,000 lives a year. There are only two attitudes preventing the United States from adopting a pro-nuclear electricity production strategy. One is anti-nuclear hysteria. Anti-nuclear hysteria has exaggerated the fear of nuclear power to outlandish proportions while completely ignoring the threat of natural radioactivity. The adoption of nuclear power could substantially lower that threat by promoting the removal of naturally occurring radioactivity from phosphate containing products. The other attitude preventing the adoption of a pro-nuclear stance is renewable energy. However, renewable energy is a complete fraud that actually harms the environment and leads to the consumption of more fossil fuel than if “renewable” energy had never been invented. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************