***************************************************************** 07/12/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.165 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject line and first line of body NUCLEAR POLICY 1 Guardian Unlimited: Blair Faces Judgment on Iraq Intelligence 2 Las Vegas SUN: Bush Defends Decision to Invade Iraq 3 WorldNetDaily: Déjà vu, ElBaradei? 4 US: SF Chronicle: EDITORIAL: War by folly 5 US: TomPaine.com: Corrupted Intelligence 6 UK Independent: Brian Jones: What weapons dossier should have said, 7 UK Independent: He is mired in leadership speculation (again), 8 Guardian Unlimited: Q: The Butler report 9 AFP: Iran tells UN watchdog to hunt for nuclear weapons elsewhere 10 TCS: Tech Central Station: Iran is determined to build a nuclear bom 11 AFP: NKorean defense chief arrives in China, praises ties with giant 12 Korea Herald: Cautious optimism on easing nuclear standoff 13 Korea Herald: Ports, shippers on alert against terror threat 14 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL]U.S. intelligence mayhem 15 KoreaTimes : Confusing US Messages 16 US: DallasNews.com: Whistleblower: Electric company hid violations 17 US: AP Wire: Pentagon Papers whistleblower calls for national securi 18 Vanunu's Appeal of Restrictions Heard in High Court 19 Interfax: Russia to stage exercise in defending nuclear installation 20 BBC: Protesters in note of disapproval 21 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Gets Look at Nuke Parts From Libya NUCLEAR REACTORS 22 US: NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to Hold Hearing on Use of 23 US: NRC: Duke Energy Corporation, et al., Catawba Nuclear Station, U 24 US: NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request To Decommissio 25 US: NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request to Decommissio 26 US: NRC: Meeting on Planning and Procedures; Notice of Meeting 27 Toronto Star: Lessons have been learned 28 US: SouthofBoston.com: Nuclear plant becomes pawn 29 US: SVBI: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Selects Autonomy to Power NUCLEAR SAFETY 30 [du-list] and so does Dan Fahey eat DU for breakfast 31 [du-list] Britian sues US giant over 'uranium poisun 32 US: PA: SB 922 Day Care Emergency planning 33 US: [du-list] DU Munitions Action Plan Update July 11, 2004 34 [du-list Landmark case on depleted uranium poisoning 35 Global Research: Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War 36 US: KUED: Shadow of Nuclear Fallout 37 BBC: Ill Gulf veterans 'feel like foe' 38 Xinhuanet: UK starts independent probe into Gulf War syndrome 39 Scotsman.com: Sub 'No Threat to Spain' - Straw 40 Scotsman.com: 'Gulf War Syndrome' Inquiry Getting under Way 41 Scotsman.com: The Festering Sore of 'Gulf War Syndrome' 42 Scotsman.com: Sick Gulf Veterans 'Made to Feel Like the Enemy' 43 India: Dispelling notions on use of radiation 44 UK Independent: Gulf syndrome victims are heard at last NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 45 [NukeNet] Washington Post Editorial on Yucca 46 US: Las Vegas SUN: Fate of repository shifts back into EPA's hands 47 Las Vegas SUN: Political impact of Yucca remains unclear 48 Guardian Unlimited: Trial Begins on U.S. Nuclear Waste Costs 49 RGJ: Nuke dump fight isn’t finished yet 50 AU ABC: South Australians suspicious of nuclear waste review 51 AU ABC: Cabinet decision on nuclear dump remains unclear 52 AU ABC: NT may be in line for nuke dump - MP 53 KVBC: Yucca Mountain Ruling Considered A Victory For Nevada 54 NEWS.com.au: N-dump appeal to milk the taxpayer 55 NEWS.com.au: Howard warned over nuclear dump 56 NEWS.com.au: Cabinet splits over nuclear dump plans NUCLEAR WEAPONS US DEPT. OF ENERGY 57 [NukeNet] Savannah River N-Waste Tanks Cracked, Rusted Or 58 Oak Ridger: Bush gets 'close look' at Oak Ridge OTHER NUCLEAR 59 Re: [du-list] Terminate DOT-E 9649 60 [du-list] DU in the news - 11th July 04 61 [du-list] DU in the news - 13th July 04 ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Guardian Unlimited: Blair Faces Judgment on Iraq Intelligence From the Associated Press [UP] Monday July 12, 2004 10:01 PM By ED JOHNSON Associated Press Writer LONDON (AP) - Prime Minister Tony Blair, no longer confident that weapons of mass destruction will be found in Iraq, now faces a potentially damning report on Britain's prewar intelligence. As it built a case for military action, Blair's government insisted Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons; could deploy them within 45 minutes; and was trying to buy uranium in Africa to develop nuclear weapons - assertions that appear to have collapsed. A scathing U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee report concluded last week that most of the CIA's claims on Saddam's alleged arsenal were overstated or unsupported. The committee chairman, noting the United States was not alone in its beliefs, called it a ``global intelligence failure.'' On Wednesday, retired civil service chief Lord Butler will return his verdict on the quality of British intelligence. A copy of the report goes to Blair on Tuesday. The government hopes the report - the fourth to delve into Britain's case for war - will end a controversy that has eroded Blair's popularity and credibility. It is also likely to have lasting implications for how intelligence is gathered, analyzed and used by Britain. Before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Blair was adamant that Saddam had stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. ``I am in no doubt that the threat is serious and current, that he has made progress on WMD, and that he has to be stopped,'' Blair wrote in the foreword to an intelligence dossier, published by the government in September 2002. However, a week ago, Blair said: ``I have to accept that we have not found them, that we may not find them.'' Three previous inquiries have cleared Blair's government of acting dishonestly or misusing the intelligence. Nevertheless, concerns of political interference linger, as do concerns about the relationship between the government and its spy agencies. Former chief of Defense Intelligence Sir John Walker said Monday that intelligence normally guided government policy. But ahead of the war, ``it seems to me that policy was driving intelligence and that is an extremely dangerous thing to do as a nation-state,'' Walker told British Broadcasting Corp. radio. Walker left the Ministry of Defense in 1995, two years before Blair's Labour Party took office. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 2 Las Vegas SUN: Bush Defends Decision to Invade Iraq By DEB RIECHMANN ASSOCIATED PRESS OAK RIDGE, Tenn. (AP) - President Bush defended his decision to invade Iraq even as he conceded on Monday that investigators had not found the weapons of mass destruction that he had warned the country possessed. Allowing Iraq to possibly transfer weapons capability to terrorists was not a risk he was willing to take, Bush said. "Although we have not found stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, we were right to go into Iraq," Bush said after inspecting a display of nuclear weapons parts and equipment, including assembled gas centrifuges for uranium enrichment, from Libya. The hardware was shipped here in March as part of an agreement with Moammar Gadhafi to end his country's nuclear weapons program. "We removed a declared enemy of America who had the capability of producing weapons of mass murder and could have passed that capability to terrorists bent on acquiring them. In the world after September 11th, that was a risk we could not afford to take," Bush said. The president offered a broad new defense of the March 2003 invasion of Iraq three days after the release of a Senate report that harshly criticized unsubstantiated intelligence cited in the run-up to the war in Iraq, a crucial battle in the war on terrorism. The key U.S. assertions leading to the 2003 invasion of Iraq - that Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons and was working to make nuclear weapons - were wrong and based on false or overstated CIA analyses, a scathing Senate Intelligence Committee report asserted Friday. Intelligence analysts fell victim to "group think" assumptions that Iraq had weapons when it did not, the bipartisan report concluded. Many factors contributing to those failures are ongoing problems within the U.S. intelligence community, which cannot be fixed with more money alone, it said. Without directly acknowledging the intelligence was flawed, Bush said a wide array of government leaders, from members of the Clinton administration to lawmakers to the U.N. Security Council, had studied the same intelligence and "saw a threat." During the Clinton administration, official U.S. policy toward Iraq became "regime change" - a stance that sought the ouster of Saddam Hussein, he noted. But Saddam refused to open his country to inspections, Bush said. "So I had a choice to make: either take the word of a madman or defend America. Given that choice I will defend America." Bush has used similar rhetoric in speeches for months, but the words took on added significance in light of the latest report condemning the Iraq intelligence. Bush's trip to Tennessee was designed to showcase a victory in his administration's campaign against weapons of mass destruction. Bush was shown nuclear weapons parts and equipment from Libya, and called them "sobering evidence of a great danger." It was the White House's second effort to shine a spotlight on the Libyan victory. Several months ago, the White House arranged a tour for journalists of the equipment. Bush said Libya's decision to scrap its nuclear ambitions and do away with its long-range missiles was the result of "quiet diplomacy" by the United States, Great Britain and the Libyan government. But it also was the result of outspoken public denunciations of nations that seek to threaten the world with nuclear and other weapons, he said. He said the world knows that doing so carries serious consequences and that the "wise course is to abandon those pursuits." And Bush said his administration was doing everything possible to avert the attacks he said terrorists are now plotting. -- ***************************************************************** 3 WorldNetDaily: Déjà vu, ElBaradei? JULY 10 2004 © 2004 WorldNetDaily.com Mohamed ElBaradei – director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency – was in Israel last week pursuing a nuke-free Middle East. Now, ElBaradei has already certified Iraq to be nuke-free. And Iran. So, isn't the Middle East already nuke-free? Well, not according to Mordechai Vanunu. Vanunu was a technician at the Israeli nuclear facilities at Dimona for eight years. He fled to England, taking with him documents and photographs, including a photo of a plutonium "pit" for a thermo-nuke "primary" and a photo of a facility producing lithium-6 – a critical material in a thermo-nuke's "secondary." The London Sunday Times had Vanunu's photos and documents "vetted" by British nuke scientists and published Vanunu's story on Oct. 5, 1986. But even before publication, Vanunu had been kidnapped and taken back to Israel. He was held captive – and incommunicado – until this April, when he was semi-released. He is not allowed to leave Israel, and his movements and communications are severely restricted. Nevertheless, Vanunu heard about ElBaradei's visit and managed to make public a suggestion that ElBaradei "should demand that the Israeli government let him go inside Dimona, to be part of the IAEA inspection of Dimona – as the IAEA demanded from Iran, Iraq – to report to all the world what every state is doing in secret." It is extremely unlikely that Prime Minister Sharon will allow that, or that ElBaradei would even make such a "demand." You see, Israel is a charter member of the IAEA, which was established by United Nations statute in 1957 to facilitate the spread of nuclear energy. But Israel is not a "party" to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which entered into force in 1970. The IAEA is not a "party" to the treaty, either, but has been made the international "safeguards" inspectorate under Article III of the NPT. Each non-nuclear-weapon state party to the treaty undertakes to accept safeguards – as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Agency's safeguards system – for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfillment of its obligations assumed under the treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. But, if Israel is not an NPT signatory, why is ElBaradei in Israel? Well, as El-Baradei put it, "I'd like to see Israel supporting the Non-Proliferation Treaty through maybe concluding an Additional Protocol with the agency," ElBaradei would "like" Israel to agree to do what we – at the urging of the Israelis – have just forced Iran to do? Elbaradei would "like" Israel to sign an Additional Protocol to a IAEA Safeguards Agreement, authorizing IAEA inspectors unrestricted and unannounced access to all "suspicious" sites and facilities in Israel? Get outta here! Now, the IAEA can negotiate Safeguard Agreements and Additional Protocols with any nation-state – NPT signatory or not – when asked. And, if the IAEA concludes that any nation-state – NPT signatory or not – is "cheating" on its Safeguards Agreement, it may report that to the U.N. Security Council for appropriate action. In fact, we demanded that the Iranians sign an Additional Protocol because we were fairly certain the Iranians would refuse and that refusal might cause the IAEA to refer the matter to the Security Council. Either way, the Israelis would have an "excuse" to launch pre-emptive attacks on Iranian "nuclear" facilities, destroying the not-yet-operational Russian-supplied Bushehr reactor, just as they destroyed, back in 1981, the not-yet-operational French-supplied Osiraq reactor in Iraq. But the Iranians didn't refuse. They made a deal. Iran would sign an Additional Protocol if – and only if – UK-France-Germany would guarantee their "inalienable" rights under Article IV of the NPT. All the parties to the treaty undertake to facilitate – and have the right to participate in – the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. However, as ElBaradei was urging an Additional Protocol on Israel, Secretary of State Colin Powell and Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom emerged from a meeting in Washington to claim that "European foreign ministers" had concluded that Iran had reneged on their Additional Protocol deal with UK-France-Germany. It seems Israeli spies and Iranian expatriates have "intelligence" – not to be made available to the IAEA – that Iran is pursuing a "nuclear weapons program" at sites that ElBaradei can never find. Déjà vu, ElBaradei? Physicist James Gordon Prather has served as a policy implementing official for national security-related technical matters in the Federal Energy Agency, the Energy Research and Development Administration, the Department of Energy, the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Department of the Army. Dr. Prather also served as legislative assistant for national security affairs to U.S. Sen. Henry Bellmon, R-Okla. -- ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee and member of the Senate Energy Committee and Appropriations Committee. Dr. Prather had earlier worked as a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and Sandia National Laboratory in New Mexico. [gprather@worldnetdaily.com] | GO TO GORDON PRATHER'S ARCHIVE [WorldNetDaily.com] --> news@worldnetdaily.com--> Contact WND ***************************************************************** 4 SF Chronicle: EDITORIAL: War by folly [http://sfgate.com] Monday, July 12, 2004 TRY AS it might, the Bush White House cannot just shrug off the Senate Intelligence Committee's conclusion that every major pretext for the war against Iraq was seriously flawed. The buck does not stop with the Central Intelligence Agency, which delivered faulty information about Iraq's alleged nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The buck stops in the Oval Office. After all, the CIA reports on Iraq were not delivered in a vacuum. It was not exactly a secret that various key Bush appointees in the defense hierarchy were agitating for a showdown with Saddam Hussein from the moment Bush took office. The war cries intensified after Sept. 11, 2001. While the Senate Intelligence Committee report contained no earthshaking surprises -- the notion that the case for war was built on flawed information is well established by now -- it was devastating in its clear- eyed accounting of the mess. The report is also significant because of its source: The White House cannot dismiss this as "Fahrenheit 9/11" polemic; it came from the Republican-controlled Senate. President Bush's reaction was almost as disturbing as the report itself. Once again, it had an element of finger-pointing that has come to characterize a White House that cannot bring itself to admit a mistake. Bush called it a "useful report" about where the intelligence community "went short." Bush added, "We need to know ... I want to know how to make the agencies better." So for the White House, the most positive interpretation of these findings is that top administration officials were led astray by the CIA -- hardly a comforting assessment of the folks assigned to oversee this nation's security. Several committee members were frustrated that the report did not address evidence of a more insidious upshot: that the White House twisted the evidence to support its war plans. In one of the nine "alternative views," Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and two other senior lawmakers suggested that CIA analysts whose judgments did not fit the case for war were subject to extraordinary pressure and second-guessing. Rockefeller said the intelligence failings detailed in the report have diminished this nation's credibility and global standing -- to the point of hatred in the Muslim world. "As a direct consequence, our nation is more vulnerable today than ever before," he said. It was not just a failure of "the agencies." Bush needs to look within his inner circle to those who readily accepted and disseminated this flawed intelligence: Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Dick Cheney. And yes: George W. Bush. [graphical line] Page B - 6 ©2004 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback | FAQ ***************************************************************** 5 TomPaine.com: Corrupted Intelligence Ray McGovern July 12, 2004 McGovern and other veteran intelligence officers spent the weekend digesting the Senate Intelligence Committee report and ended up sick to their stomachs. Not only did the report confirm what they already knewthat the CIA skewed intelligencebut corruption ran much deeper, with analysts cooking up outright lies. In the wake of the report, McGovern worries media across the political spectrum aren't doing their job. They are buying without question the administration spin about the Senate report: that the White House led the nation to war because of bad intelligence, rather than ill-conceived policy. Ray McGovern, a CIA analyst for 27 years, is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. In our various oral and written presentations on Iraq, my veteran intelligence officer colleagues and I took no delight in sharply criticizing what we perceived to be the corruption of intelligence analysis at CIA.  Nothing would have pleased us more than to have been proven wrong.  It turns out we did not know the half of it. Several of us have just spent a painful weekend digesting the report of the Senate Intelligence Committee on prewar intelligence assessments on Iraq.  The corruption is far deeper than we suspected.  The only silver lining is that corrupter-in-chief George Tenet is now gone. When the former CIA director departed, he left behind an agency on life supportan institution staffed by sycophant managers and thoroughly demoralized analysts, who are embarrassed at their own naiveté in believing that the passage carved into the marble at the entrance to CIA HeadquartersYou will know the truth, and the truth will set you freeheld real meaning for their work. The Senate Committee report is meticulous.  Its findings are a sharp blow to those of us who took pride in working in an agency where we could speak truth to powerwith career protection from retribution from the powerful, and with leaders who would face down those policymakers who tried to exert undue influence over our analysis. Enter Joe Centrifuge Although it was clear to us that much of the intelligence on Iraq had been cooked to the recipe of policy, not until the Senate report did we know that the skewing included outright lies.  We had heard of Joe, the nuclear weapons analyst in CIAs Center for Weapons Intelligence and Arms Control, and it was abundantly clear that his agenda was to prove that the infamous aluminum tubes sought by Iraq were to be used for developing a nuclear weapon.  We did not know that he and his CIA associates deliberately falsified the dataincluding rotor testing ironically called spin tests. The Senate committee determined that Joe deliberately skewed data to fit preconceptions regarding an Iraqi nuclear threat.  Who could have believed that about our intelligence community, that the system could be so dishonest? wondered the normally soft-spoken David Albright, a widely respected veteran expert on Iraqs work toward developing a nuclear weapon. I share his wonderment.  I too am appalledand angry.  You give 27 years of your professional life to an institution whose main missionto get at the truthis essential for orderly policy making, and then you find it has been prostituted.  You realize that your former colleagues lacked the moral courage to rebuff efforts to enlist them as accomplices in deception. Deception that involved hoodwinking our elected representatives into giving their blessing to an ill-conceived, unnecessary war.  Even Republican stalwart Sen. Pat Roberts, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has conceded that, had Congress known before the vote for war what his committee has now discovered, I doubt if the votes would have been there. Catering To The Powers That Be It turns out that only one U.S. analyst had met with the Iraqi defector appropriately codenamed Curveballthe source of the scary tale about mobile biological weapons factoriesand that this analyst, in an e-mail to the deputy director of CIAs task force on weapons of mass destruction, raised strong doubt regarding Curveballs reliability before Colin Powell highlighted his claims at the United Nations on Feb. 5, 2003.  I almost became physically ill reading the cynical response from the deputy director of the task force: "As I said last night, lets keep in mind the fact that this wars going to happen regardless of what Curveball said or didnt say, and the powers that be probably arent terribly interested in whether Curveball knows what hes talking about. (Reading this brought to consciousness a painful flashback to early August 1964.  We CIA analysts knew that reports of a second attack on U.S. destroyers in the Tonkin Gulf were spurious but were prevented from reporting that. The director of current intelligence explained to us condescendingly that President Johnson had decided to use the non-incident as a pretext to escalate the war and that we do not want to wear out our welcome at the White House.  So this kind of politicization, though rare in the past, is not without precedentand not without similarly woeful consequences.)  With respect to Iraq, George Tenets rhetoric about truth and honesty in his valedictory last week has a distinctly Orwellian ring.  Worse still, apparently Joe Centrifuge, the abovementioned deputy director, and other co-conspirators will get off scot-free.  Sen. Roberts says he thinks, It is very important that we quit looking in the rearview mirror and affixing blame and, you know, pointing fingers.  And Acting Director John McLaughlin has told the press that he sees no need to dismiss anyone as a result of what he portrayed as honest, limited mistakes. Tell It To The Families I would like to hear Roberts and McLaughlin explain all this to the families of the almost 900 U.S. servicemen and women already killed and the many thousand seriously wounded in Iraq. Roberts seemed at pains to lay the blame on a flawed system, but a close reading of the committee report yields the unavoidable conclusion that CIA analysis can no longer be assumed to be honestto be aimed at getting as close to the truth as one can humanly get.  For those of you cynics about to smirk, I can only tell youbelieve it or notthat truth was in fact the currency of analysis in the CIA in which I was proud to serve. Aberrations like the Tonkin Gulf cave-in notwithstanding, the analysis directorate was widely known as the unique place in Washington where one could normally go and expect a straight answer unencumbered by any political agenda.  And we were hard into some very controversialoften criticalnational security issues.  It boggles my mind how any president, and particularly one whose father headed the CIA, could expect to be able, without that capability, to make intelligent judgments based on unbiased fact. It is said that truth is the first casualty of war.  Sadly, in the case of Iraq, even before the war, truth took a back seat to a felt need to snuggle up to powerto stay in good standing with a president and his advisers, all well known to be hell-bent on war on Iraq. Caution: Dont Be Fooled The Washington Times lead story on July 10 began: Flawed intelligence led the United States to invade Iraq was the fault of the US intelligence community&a report by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concluded yesterday.  From the other end of the political spectrum, David Corn of The Nation led his own report with,  The United States went to war on the basis of false claims. Not so.  This is precisely the spin that the Bush administration wants to give to the Senate report; i. e., that the president was misled; that his decision for war was based on spurious intelligence about non-existent weapons of mass destruction. But the presidents decision for war had little to do with intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.  It had everything to do with the administrations determination to gain control of strategic, oil-rich Iraq, implant an enduring military presence there, andnot incidentallyeliminate any possible threat from Iraq to Israels security. These, of course, are not the reasons given to justify placing U.S. troops in harm's way, but even the most circumspect senior officials have had unguarded moments of candor.  For example, when asked in May 2003 why North Korea was being treated differently from Iraq, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz responded, Lets look at it simply&The country (Iraq) swims on a sea of oil. And basking in the glory of Mission Accomplished shortly after Baghdad had been taken, Wolfowitz admitted that the focus on weapons of mass destruction to justify the attack on Iraq was for bureaucratic reasons.  It was, he added, the one reason everyone could agree onmeaning, of course, the one that could successfully sell the war to Congress and the American people. The Israel factor?  In another moment of unusual candorthis one before the warPhilip Zelikow, a member of the Presidents Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board from 2001 to 2003 (and now executive director of the 9/11 commission), pointed to the danger that Iraq posed to Israel as the unstated threata threat that dare not speak its name&because it is not a popular sell. Last, but hardly least, it was not until several months after the Bush White House decided to make war on Iraq that the weapons-of-mass-destruction-laden National Intelligence Estimate was commissioned, and then only because Congress needed to be persuaded that the threat was so immediate that war was necessary.  Vice President Dick Cheney set the main parameters in a major speech on Aug. 26, 2002, in which he declared, "We know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons."  The estimate Tenet signed dutifully endorsed that spurious judgmentwith "high confidence," no less.  Is There Hope? If hope is what was found at the bottom of Pandoras box, it can be found here too.  That there are still honest, perceptive analysts at CIA is clear from the analysis that Anonymous sets forth in his excellent book, Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror .  (Note to Condoleezza Rice: Anonymous name is Michael Scheuer; he is an overt employee; you can get his extension from the CIA operator.) As long as analysts of that caliber hang in there, there can be hope that, once the CIA is given the adult supervision it has lacked for the last 25 years, it can fulfill its critical mission for our country. © 2004 [http://www.tompaine.com/] ***************************************************************** 6 UK Independent: Brian Jones: What weapons dossier should have said, and what that would have meant for war [http://www.independent.co.uk] 'Mr Blair dismissed my concerns as "hardly earth-shattering" but they were significant' 12 July 2004 Lord Butler of Brockwell will deliver his long-awaited verdict on the intelligence as the basis for going to war in Iraq on Wednesday. It comes just after the United States Intelligence Committee delivered its report, and, according to reports in the media so far, Tony Blair faces a difficult few days. More than 16 months after the war began, we can be sure that there was, as the senate report identifies, serious intelligence failure. How else could it be when no evidence of any weapons, systems or programmes has been uncovered in that time? This article, reviewing the crucial September 2002 dossier, is not an investigation of the gap between what intelligence was available in the months leading up to the war, and what has come to pass. Rather, it examines how the known material was treated at the time, and the impact that had in boosting the case for war. The Prime Minister has made repeated assertions that everybody thought Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. This broad-brush approach - the crushing of caveated information and conditional tenses into something categoric - helped persuade the nation of the case for war and also misrepresented the bigger picture. It was writ large in the 2002 dossier, and in Mr Blair's foreword. I recall a senior foreign intelligence analyst commenting on the dossier, "We think Saddam probably has chemical and biological weapons but we cannot prove it. We are not sure." This reflected the views of the Defence Intelligence Staff (DIS) experts, and was the basis of the dissent I recorded at the time. Mr Blair dismissed my concerns as "hardly earth-shattering" - he chose to distil them into the difference between the words indicate and show - but they were much more significant than that might imply. I told Panorama last night that I was confused when Mr Blair told Lord Hutton about the "tremendous amount" of related information and evidence that had been crossing his desk in the period before the dossier was written. We had no sight of large qualities of significant intelligence of that sort. Most of our concerns were raised in comments made by DIS expert analysts over the three weeks in which the dossier was drafted. I recounted some to Lord Hutton's inquiry but was constrained by the specific questions of counsel. To offer a fuller explanation. I have revisited the executive summary of the September dossier, John Scarlett's two-page précis of the 40-odd pages of the main text. The latter is so dense and complex that the summary would inevitably achieve much greater impact. Unfortunately, it did not paint quite the same picture. What was uncertain and poorly defined suddenly became clearer and "presentationally" more acceptable. Intelligence no longer indicated what might be and suddenly, without substantiation, showed what was. And the decision to use the phrase "we judge" detached from a series of bullet points, allowed those points to stand out for the lay reader as statements of fact: * "[Iraq has] continued to produce chemical and biological agents" *"Some of these weapons are deployable within 45 minutes of a decision to use them" We now know that this "shift" came about largely as a result of the interplay between the chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) and senior members of the Prime Minister's Office. That, in turn, enabled the Prime Minister to make the positive assertions in his foreword: "I believe the assessed intelligence has established beyond doubt that Saddam has continued to produce chemical and biological weapons ..." "I am in no doubt the threat is serious and current ..." I have no doubt that such positive statements had a significant impact on many of those who were previously dubious about the campaign. If the executive summary had more closely represented the expert assessments of the day, who knows what impact that might have had on the decision to go the war? I have tried to illustrate below what I would have preferred some important parts of it to have said. This is not a case of being wise after the event or of using hindsight. It is what the dossier should have said based on the state of intelligence at that time. My revisions do not represent a wholly accurate assessment in the light of what we know now, which makes the case for war even weaker. The original or "actual" paragraphs of the dossier are also shown for ease of comparison. The words shown in italics in the "preferred" version mark my additions or changes to the words approved by the JIC. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Paragraph 1 ACTUAL: Under Saddam Hussein Iraq developed chemical and biological weapons, acquired missiles allowing it to attack neighbouring countries with these weapons, and persistently tried to develop a nuclear bomb. Saddam has used chemical weapons, both against Iran and against his own people. Following the Gulf War, Iraq had to admit to all this. And in the ceasefire of 1991 Saddam agreed unconditionally to give up his weapons of mass destruction. PREFERRED: Under Saddam Hussein Iraq developed chemical and biological weapons and acquired missiles. In the 1980s it used chemical weapons against elements of its own population in Iraq, and against Iranian forces in its war against that country. Arguably, Iraq never used chemical weapons on territory that it did not claim was its own, and is not known to have actually used biological warfare agents. Iraq responded to attacks against its cities by Iranian Scud missiles armed with conventional explosives, by delivering similar warheads using Scud-type missiles the range of which had been extended to reach significant Iranian cities. Iraq had a programme to develop nuclear weapons that was within about two or three years of success at the time of the 1990-91 conflict. Following the Gulf War, Iraq had to admit to all this. And in the ceasefire of 1991 Saddam agreed unconditionally to give up his weapons of mass destruction. PARAGRAPH 2 ACTUAL: Much information about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction is already in the public domain from UN reports and from Iraqi defectors. This points clearly to Iraq's continuing possession, after 1991, of chemical and biological agents and weapons produced before the Gulf War. It shows that Iraq has refurbished sites formerly associated with the production of chemical and biological agents. And it indicates that Iraq remains able to manufacture these agents, and to use bombs, shells, artillery rockets and ballistic missiles to deliver them. PREFERRED: Much information about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction is already in the public domain from UN reports and from Iraqi defectors. This points clearly to Iraq's continuing possession, after 1991, of chemical and biological agents and weapons produced before the Gulf War. But the current status of Iraq's offensive capability is not clear. There has been some refurbishment of sites formerly associated with the production of chemical and biological agents and, while this may improve the capability to resume such production, there is no conclusive evidence that such production has taken place, or that the refurbishment does not have a legitimate objective. There can be little doubt that Iraq retains significant potential to manufacture agents, fill them into weapons and use them to the level of capability it had developed prior to 1991. This included a demonstrated capability to deliver chemical weapons with bombs, shells and artillery rockets, but it is not clear that Iraq had a fully proven capability to deliver chemical or biological warheads by ballistic missile. It is doubtful that it had the opportunity to further develop and fully prove that capability since 1991. PARAGRAPH 4 ACTUAL: As well as the public evidence, however, significant additional information is available to the Government from secret intelligence sources, described in more detail in this paper. This intelligence cannot tell us about everything. However, it provides a fuller picture of Iraqi plans and capabilities. It shows that Saddam Hussein attaches great importance to possessing weapons of mass destruction which he regards as the basis for Iraq's regional power. It shows that he does not regard them only as weapons of last resort. He is ready to use them, including against his own population, and is determined to retain them, in breach of United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR). PREFERRED: As well as the public evidence, however, significant additional information is available to the Government from secret intelligence sources, described in more detail in this paper. This intelligence cannot tell us about everything. However, it provides more evidence about Iraqi plans and capabilities. It suggests that Saddam Hussein attaches great importance to possessing, or maintaining the impression that he possesses chemical and biological weapons. He probably regards this as the basis for enhancing Iraq's regional power in the future. It suggests that he does not regard them only as weapons of last resort. He seems to countenance using them, including against his enemies in his own population, and appears determined to retain them, in breach of United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR). PARAGRAPH 5 ACTUAL: Intelligence also shows that Iraq is preparing plans to conceal evidence of these weapons, including incriminating documents, from renewed inspections. And it confirms that despite sanctions and the policy of containment, Saddam has continued to make progress with his illicit weapons programmes." PREFERRED: Intelligence also indicates that Iraq is preparing plans to conceal evidence of these weapons, including incriminating documents, from renewed inspections. And it suggests that despite sanctions and the policy of containment, Saddam has continued to keep his ballistic missile programme alive and that some activity has been beyond that which is legal. He has at least preserved the basis for reactivating his offensive nuclear, biological and chemical warfare programmes. The extent of positive activity within the latter programmes is not clear. It cannot be discounted that weapons may have been produced but there is no firm evidence that this is the case. PARAGRAPH 6 Paragraph 6 was introduced by the phrase "As a result of the intelligence we judge that Iraq has:" and followed by a series of bullet points. The use of the word "judge" led to the argument that "judgements" could not be caveated in the way the DIS suggested. I would therefore have preferred the phrase, "We assess Iraq:" The bullet points I would have changed are: ACTUAL: [has] continued to produce chemical and biological agents; PREFERRED: has probably continued to produce chemical and biological agents, but is unlikely to have produced militarily significant quantities of CW agent or weapons; ACTUAL: [has] military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons, including against its own Shia population. Some of these weapons are deployable within 45 minutes of an order to use them; PREFERRED: possibly has specific current military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons, including against its own Shia population. A source has claimed some weapons may be deployable within 45 minutes of an order to use them, but the exact nature of the weapons, the agents involved and the context of their use is not clear; ACTUAL: [has] command and control arrangements in place to use chemical and biological weapons. Authority ultimately resides with Saddam Hussein; PREFERRED: may have command and control arrangements in place to use chemical and biological weapons. Authority will ultimately reside with Saddam Hussein; ACTUAL: [has] developed mobile laboratories for military use, corroborating earlier reports about the mobile production of biological warfare agents; PREFERRED: has developed mobile laboratories for the production of biological warfare agents, but we do not know the current status of these facilities. In the light of what we now know, it seems Iraq possessed no significant stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons. Saddam had no active major programmes or tangible plans to regenerate his chemical warfare programme, therefore there could be no meaningful command and control arrangements or plans to use them. The same is probably true of biological weapons but the nature of BW systems is such that significant capabilities are more easily concealed. Saddam appears to have been keen to maintain at least the impression that he possessed chemical and biological weapons. In a region where several neighbours possess chemical, nuclear and possibly biological weapons Saddam probably wished to maintain the ability to deter aggression. It is also the case that Saddam's reputation in parts of the Arab world derived from his defiance of the West in general and America in particular. A clear admission and demonstration that he had given up such capabilities and ambitions would undermine his authority. But if Saddam had already divested himself of the weapons and programmes, it seemed incredible that such factors would outweigh the economic and conventional military advantages to the regime of removing the yoke of sanctions. George Tenet, the outgoing director of the CIA, said last month that intelligence estimates were rarely all right, or all wrong. I would be very surprised if many of the CIA's expert analysts would have disagreed with the conclusions reflected in my "preferred" version of the dossier. Of course, knowing what we know now would have made a case for war on the basis of Saddam's weapons capabilities a non-starter, so there is indeed a real question about the quality of intelligence. But, back in September 2002, had the executive summary been written in the way I suggest, it would have been much more difficult for the Prime Minister's foreword to make the positive assertions it did about Saddam's chemical and biological warfare capabilities and the threat they represented to Britain. As for the impact of that exercise on the will of the British people, will Lord Butler address that on Wednesday? Dr Brian Jones is a former head of the nuclear, chemical and biological branch of the Ministry of Defence's Defence Intelligence Staff © 2004 Independent Digital (UK) Ltd ***************************************************************** 7 UK Independent: He is mired in leadership speculation (again), is braced for the Butler report on Iraq, and fears by-election wipe-out. Is it make-or-break time for Tony Blair? 12 July 2004 Today: THE LEADERSHIP ISSUE The Blair and Brown camps are at loggerheads over mysterious reports that the Prime Minister considered stepping down last month. The Prime Minister's camp believes the Chancellor is too impatient to grasp the reins of power; the Chancellor's people suspect some murky tricks at No 10 to get out an "I'm-still-in-charge" snub to Mr Brown. So, did Mr Blair really wobble? Were the four, five, or six cabinet ministers who went to him simply pledging support in difficult times, or pleading with him to stay on? Or were Mr Brown's supporters trying it on? One thing seems certain: at the beginning of such a make-or-break week for Mr Blair, relations between the two key players are at an all-time low. BROWN'S SPENDING REVIEW Mr Brown grabs centre stage today with his spending review, an opportunity - no doubt, to be grabbed with aplomb - to demonstrate his credentials as the prime-minister-in-waiting. Big winners are likely to be the police and security services. But there will be losers, with £20bn of cuts among civil service staff. As far as his No 10 ambitions go, will Mr Brown eventually prove to be a winner or a loser? Tuesday: MEETING AN OLD FRIEND A rare respite as Mr Blair meets one of his few unquestioning allies, the Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, for an Anglo-Italian summit in London. The pair are likely to discuss the EU and Iraq in a wide-ranging meeting. Wednesday: SEXED UP, OR NOT? Lord Butler of Brockwell, hitherto seen as an establishment figure, delivers his verdict on the British intelligence concerning Iraqi WMD. His terms of reference were limited, excluding how the Government handled the information. He is likely to go beyond his remit. It is suggested that John Scarlett, the next head of MI6, will be criticised, as well as Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General. A word of caution: in the run-up to the release of the Hutton report, all sorts of leaks were suggesting a hard-hitting report. It proved to be anything but. Thursday: BY-ELECTION BLUES? Mr Blair, battered in local and European elections last month, faces losing two safe seats in one day: Leicester South, where the majority is 13,243, and Birmingham Hodge Hill, where Labour won by 11,618. Many Muslim voters are likely to use their votes to protest against the war in Iraq. Friday: TIME OUT Mr Blair is expected to keep a low profile and will probably retire to Chequers, his country residence, to mull over the week's events with his advisers and family. Saturday: ONE YEAR ON The first anniversary of David Kelly's disappearance. There had been deep misgivings about the war in Iraq long before the MoD scientist's suicide, but the Government's handling of its campaign against the BBC reporter Andrew Gilligan and the Today programme was seen in a much more sinister light after his death. Dr Kelly was the source for Mr Gilligan's reports that the Government sexed-up the case for war. Mr Blair struggled in the immediate aftermath - while visiting Japan he was asked at a press conference if he had blood on his hands. UK Independent Ltd. ***************************************************************** 8 Guardian Unlimited: Q: The Butler report The latest inquiry to look at the Iraqi WMD dossier reports this week and may prove more difficult for the government than the last. Simon Jeffery Monday July 12, 2004 What is the inquiry for? It is an investigation, conducted in secret by a committee of five people, into the use of intelligence before the Iraq war. The inquiry is not the first along these lines (it is, in fact, the fourth) but it is the first to work on the assumption that the intelligence was wrong. Its remit states that it is to examine "discrepancies" between the intelligence evaluated by the government and the findings of the weapons inspectors in the US-led Iraq Survey Group. How will that make it different to the others? It is focusing much more directly on the quality of the intelligence, not only because of its remit but also because it enjoys some of the benefits of hindsight. For example, inquiries last year by the Commons foreign affairs select committee and the intelligence and security committee both concluded it was too soon to tell whether or not the intelligence was false as there was still the chance that WMDs would be discovered. Lord Hutton also sidestepped the failure to find Saddam Hussein's alleged chemical and biological weapons stocks. He said he had been asked to "urgently ... conduct an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of Dr Kelly" and decided that anything other than the government's row with the BBC over claims Downing Street had deliberately put false material in the dossier (the row that drew in Dr Kelly) was beyond his terms of reference; the issue of whether intelligence contained in the dossier and believed by the government to be correct was in fact unreliable, was "separate", he wrote. Why was the Butler inquiry called? Lord Hutton made no recommendations in his report for a further inquiry (he made no recommendations at all), and the government appeared to be rather pleased with his report, believing that the third of three inquiries to clear it of manipulating intelligence would be the last. The pressure for a fourth came from the US, where comments from David Kay, the former chief weapons inspector for the US in Iraq, that "we were almost all wrong" made it politically impossible for George Bush to resist Democrat calls for an inquiry by arguing that the weapons hunt was not over. Tony Blair, pressured by the Tories, found it necessary politically to follow suit. What is its remit? To investigate the state of intelligence on WMDs. There are three threads here: the first is WMD programmes in "countries of concern"; the second, the accuracy of the Iraqi WMD intelligence "gathered, evaluated and used by the government before the conflict"; and the third, to make recommendations to the prime minister for the future "gathering, evaluation and use of intelligence on WMD". Who sits on it? Two retired civil servants who worked at the highest levels of the British government (Lord Butler and Sir John Chilcot); two MPs on the Commons intelligence and security committee (Ann Taylor and Michael Mates); and Field Marshal Lord Inge, chief of defence staff between 1994 and 1997. All five are privy counsellors, are treated to confidential briefings and meet in private due to the sensitive nature of their inquiries. Will it have teeth? In the wake of Hutton, there was some feeling that Lord Butler's committee was too close to government. First the Liberal Democrats and then the Tories refused to take part. Charles Kennedy worried its remit was too narrow and Michael Howard withdrew his support because he said it would focus on the failings of spies instead of politicians. Tory MP Michael Mates remained on the inquiry in a personal capacity. Since that inauspicious start, word has leaked out of the secretive Cabinet Office sessions that Lord Butler has run a much more demanding inquiry than many commentators (still sore from Lord Hutton's refusal to agree with them) were expecting. According to reports, Mr Blair has been questioned again over the evidence he gave to Lord Hutton, and the government is bracing itself for heavy criticism. What will be in it? The findings remain confidential until publication on Wednesday, but that has not stopped speculation in the newspapers. An emerging consensus is that the intelligence services will be criticised for allowing the prime minister take the country to war on what now appear to be false premises. Sir Richard Dearlove, the outgoing MI6 chief, and his successor, John Scarlett, the outgoing head of the Joint Intelligence Committee, emerged early on as the two individuals most likely to take the blame. Since then, the quality of the intelligence has come under greater scrutiny, with the BBC's Panorama programme alleging that the intelligence services disowned large chunks of the material used in the dossiers to make the case for war. One intelligence officer said he could "almost hear the collective raspberry going up around Whitehall" when Mr Blair told parliament the threat from Iraq was "serious and current". If Lord Butler concludes something similar, Mr Blair may perhaps be forced to concede that the dossier was wrong. Reports have also suggested that the report will comment on Mr Blair's style of decision making and, perhaps, his political judgment. Other names to look out for include Downing Street's chief of staff, Jonathan Powell (the Sunday Telegraph says he will be the main victim); the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith (the Sunday Times say he will be criticised for an inconsistency in his analysis of the war's legality), and Alastair Campbell, Downing Street's director of communications at the time of the dossier's publication (the Independent on Sunday last week said he would receive a tougher ride than he did in the earlier inquiries.) [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 9 AFP: Iran tells UN watchdog to hunt for nuclear weapons elsewhere WAR.WIRE
[http://www.spacewar.com/] TEHRAN (AFP) Jul 12, 2004 Iranian President Mohammad Khatami on Monday accused the UN nuclear watchdog of double standards and told it to pay closer attention to countries that had not signed up to global anti-proliferation safeguards. In a meeting with visiting Singaporean Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, Khatami reaffirmed that nuclear weapons had "no place" in the Islamic repubcic's defence doctrine and that he was campaigning for a Middle East free of such arms. According to the IRNA news agency, Khatami "expressed regret over the double standards approach towards those countries possessing nuclear weapons", a reference to Iran's view that it is being unfairly targetted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) while Israel has escaped major pressure. "If atomic weapons are dangerous, then the world should be concerned about atomic programs of those countries that are not members of the International Atomic Energy Agency," Khatami was quoted as saying. Iran has been subject to more than a year of tough IAEA inspections related to suspicions it is seeking to develop the atomic bomb under cover of its efforts to generate nuclear power, as well as the target of a string of IAEA resolutions criticising its level of cooperation. The Islamic republic's arch-foe Israel, widely believed to possess a nuclear arsenal, is not a signatory of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and hence not subject to IAEA supervision. During a visit to Israel last week, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei made little progress on his hopes for a Middle East free of nuclear weapons, with Israel holding fast to its longstanding "strategic ambiguity" policy of secrecy about whether it has nuclear weapons and its refusal to sign the NPT. Singapore's prime minister arrived in Tehran for a five-day visit Monday for a string of talks mostly focussed on trade issues. But the nuclear issue was raised as Singapore will soon be taking a seat on the IAEA's executive, the board of governors. According to IRNA, Goh will also pay his respects to Iran's late revolutionary leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini by visiting mausoleum in southern Tehran. He will also travel to the historic city of Isfahan in central Iran. The visit is the last leg of a tour that has already taken him to Pakistan, Bangladesh and India. WAR.WIRE ***************************************************************** 10 TCS: Tech Central Station: Iran is determined to build a nuclear bomb. Ralph Kinney Bennett Contributing Editor, TCS Centrifugal Force By Ralph Kinney Bennett Published 07/12/2004 At present we must endure the familiar slow dance of warnings, denials, speculations, denials, revelations, denials, etc., etc., until the inevitable day when headlines announce the new member of the nuclear club. The key is how quickly Iran can acquire or produce the highly enriched fuel necessary to produce effective nuclear weapons. It is buying nuclear power plant fuel (enriched 3 to 5 percent with uranium-235) from Russia, but acquiring weapons grade uranium (enriched 20 to 90 percent) is a little more difficult. But Iran is also working and spending prodigiously to produce enriched uranium on its own. This enrichment program centers on how quickly Iran can build the tens of thousands of centrifuges necessary to separate the rare U-235 isotope from uranium hexafluoride gas (UF6). These centrifuges are costly, complex, precision-made devices incorporating exotic materials such as super strong maraging steel. It takes years to build them in sufficient numbers, test them adequately and marshal them into the precisely plumbed formations (called cascades) that can safely and efficiently produce significant amounts of enriched uranium. A typical "cascade hall" is a vast room, its concrete floor filled with what would appear to be thousands of gleaming new stove pipes stacked vertically side-by-side in long rows. Each of these slim metal cylinders, about six-and-a-half feet tall and the approximate girth of a telephone pole, is a vacuum chamber containing within it another cylinder called a rotor tube. At the bottom of each inner cylinder is an electric motor, which turns the rotor tube at tremendous speeds. This inner rotor tube itself is balanced on a single friction point -- a small lubricated "needle" bearing. A series of ring magnets holds the top of the tube in place. Thus, these ingenious devices rotate in an almost friction-free environment at speeds around 1500 revolutions per second. They run so fast and create such centrifugal force that they actually flex like bow strings along their axes (special joints or "bellows" on the rotor tubes control this flexing). These centrifuges, using relatively little electrical power, can run continuously for a decade with no maintenance. Vast banks of interconnected centrifuges, tens of thousands of them, run night and day slowly producing small amounts of enriched U-235. The tremendous centrifugal force pushes heavier gas molecules (U-238) out to the walls of the rotor tube, while the lighter U-235 molecules tend to collect close to the shaft at the center. This lighter stream of U-235 is drawn off, joining the streams from thousands of other centrifuges to slowly build a supply of enriched gas that can eventually be incorporated into nuclear fuel or -- at advanced stages of enrichment -- fissile material for weapons. At a secret facility near the Iranian city of Natanz, the Tehran government is building a series of vast cascade halls, designed to eventually hold 50,000 or more centrifuges. Iran is going to the trouble of building these cascade halls underground in thickly walled steel reinforced concrete buildings, an attempt to protect them from aerial attack. Even the underground entrance tunnels to these buildings have been designed with a series of baffles to protect against the direct entry of "smart bombs" or cruise missiles. The "hardening" of the Natanz facility is further evidence that Iran learned long ago the lesson of Osirak. Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor was the heart of that nation's Tuwaitha Nuclear Center, on the outskirts of Baghdad, when the Israeli Air Force destroyed it in a daring raid back in 1981. The raid set back Iraq's nuclear weapons program and forced it to begin dispersing its nuclear assets to sites throughout the country. In fact, the ambitious building project at Natanz, about 90 miles north of Isfahan, is just the latest known addition to Iran's large and sophisticated nuclear facilities. There is a large underground nuclear facility, including uranium enrichment, hidden deep in the Albroz Mountains just north of Teheran. What was once a backward mountain village, Moallen Kalayeh, near the site, is now home to hundreds of scientists, technical experts and security people. Some intelligence reports indicate that in addition to centrifuge separation work at Moallen Kalayeh, Iranian scientists are working with a more exotic but potentially safer, faster and more productive method of uranium enrichment involving AVLIS (atomic vapor laser isotope separator). AVLIS equipment was reportedly shipped to Iran by Russia a year ago. This advanced system, first developed at the U.S. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, uses a precisely tuned laser beam to search out U-235 isotopes in a stream of vaporized uranium passing through a vacuum chamber. The "optically excited" U-235 isotopes are then separated and collected. After authorizing a plant scale AVLIS system to show sustained performance, the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC), the government-created but now privatized company that oversees all U.S. uranium enrichment programs, canceled the program for economic reasons in 1999. Russia, however, continued to develop and refine its own AVLIS system -- the one reportedly sent to Iran. (It is interesting to note that the United States has never used the centrifuge method of uranium enrichment, but has relied on the old, slow, but proven method of gaseous diffusion at two large plants in Piketon, Ohio, and Paducah, Kentucky. However, the U.S. is now planning to build two pilot centrifuge cascade plants at Piketon and at Eunice, New Mexico.) In addition to the underground cascade halls at Natanz, there are other buildings in more advanced stages of construction where new centrifuges will be assembled and tested using components made at sites scattered throughout Iran. The assembly of centrifuges is an exacting and complicated process. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports that a pilot plant of 160 centrifuges in a small cascade has been in operation at Natanz for more than a year. IAEA officials reportedly saw the components for 1000 more centrifuges at the same location. Cascades of the size being built at Natanz are an immense undertaking of a sophistication difficult for the average person to grasp. Only a dozen nations have the wherewithal to undertake such a program. Japan, for instance, continues to have great difficulty in building and operating large-scale centrifuge cascades despite its renowned technological capabilities. Iran claims that it needs plants the size of Natanz to provide low-enriched fuel for the nuclear reactors it plans to build in order to supply the country with 6,000 megawatts of electricity. If the Natanz plants were operating full out with 50,000 centrifuges, say some experts, they would provide not quite half of the fuel necessary for the contemplated power reactors. Iran is buying low-enriched fuel from Russia to augment its needs, but there may well be other large cascade facilities under construction. The significance of such large centrifuge plants is this: A relatively small fraction of such a plant's centrifuges, say 5000, could be used to produce enough highly enriched uranium to build three or four weapons a year. Dr. David Albright, of the Institute for Science and International Security, notes that "if a country can make an enrichment plant of this size, it can make enough machines to outfit another secret enrichment plant" for nuclear weapons. Given the present restrictions Iran has placed on IAEA inspectors, such a plant would be impossible to detect. Perhaps one is already in operation. Any expansion of the nuclear club must give one pause. But the fact that the government of Iran is the true center of an anti-Western, Jihadist (if you will) movement of a peculiarly corrosive and hate-filled nature, makes its fixation on the acquisition of nuclear weapons all the more troubling…and dangerous. ***************************************************************** 11 AFP: NKorean defense chief arrives in China, praises ties with giant neighbor WAR.WIRE [http://www.spacewar.com/] BEIJING (AFP) Jul 12, 2004 North Korea's Defense Minister Kim Il-Chol arrived in Beijing Monday as head of a military delegation, praising ties with traditional ally China, state media reported. In a meeting with his Chinese counterpart Cao Gangchuan, Kim said North Korea "treasured" its ties with China, and had put great efforts into building a friendly relationship. "The two armed forces have conducted frequent exchanges at various levels in recent years," Kim was quoted by China's Xinhua news agency as saying. "The sound development of bilateral military ties plays a crucial role in furthering bilateral relations," he said. Cao was no less enthusiastic about the relationship, saying China hoped to continue strengthening exchanges and cooperation with North Korea, according to Xinhua. Cao said the peoples of China and North Korea had created a "precious traditional friendship in the long-term revolution and socialist construction course of the two countries." "This friendship has withstood the tests of international twists and turns," Cao said. China and North Korea, which fought on the same side in the 1950-53 Korean War, have found themselves at odds over Pyongyang's ambition to become a nuclear power. The Chinese government, eager to keep a stable environment in the region, prefers a nuclear-free Korean peninsula and has hosted three rounds of six-country talks aimed at finding a diplomatic solution to the standoff. Kim, 71, appointed defense chief two years ago, is one of the most powerful figures inside North Korea and a right-hand man of leader Kim Jong-Il. His trip comes nearly three months after Kim visited China, Pyongyang's closest ally. It also comes two weeks after a senior Chinese military official traveled to Pyongyang to sign an agreement on security and stability along the two nations' common 1,400-kilometer (868 mile) border. WAR.WIRE ***************************************************************** 12 Korea Herald: Cautious optimism on easing nuclear standoff 2004.07.13 [http://www.voiceware.co.kr] By Seo Hyun-jin With Washington seemingly more flexible in its nuclear standoff with Pyongyang, cautious optimism is rising here the two protagonists might reach a breakthrough during upcoming negotiations and ease the protracted tension. Government officials and experts said conditions are more favorable than ever for the multilateral nuclear talks to make a stride forward, but they withheld any positive predictions since North Korea and the United States still have to iron out major differences on thorny issues. "The United States has shown some changes during the third round of six-party talks, and Condoleezza Rice confirmed the country's will to settle the issue. This could work positively for future dialogue," a senior government official said on condition of anonymity. During her visit to Seoul on Friday, U.S. national security adviser Rice said the North would gain a wide range of benefits if it halts nuclear activities, accepts international inspections and eventually dismantles its nuclear weapons programs. Her unspecified inducement followed a U.S. proposal during nuclear talks last month, in which Washington offered economic and diplomatic incentives in return for the North freezing and then scrapping nuclear facilities. Pyongyang viewed the U.S. plan as positive, although it said it contained nothing new. "Through Rice, Washington was repeatedly saying to Pyongyang, 'You can count on us,'" another official said. "Rice did not make any additional initiative but was reaffirming the U.S. proposal presented last month." Some experts said the U.S. stance on the North's nuclear issue is basically the same: it cannot compensate the North for dismantling nuclear weapons programs it undertook in violation of international agreements. At the same time, it wants to see progress in its nuclear diplomacy. "The United States is trying for progress during the fourth round of talks because, otherwise, nuclear negotiations will be suspended for quite a long time in the wake of the U.S. presidential election in November," Prof. Koh Yu-hwan of Dongguk University said. Participants in the six-party nuclear talks - the Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia - promised at their last meeting in Beijing at the end of June to reconvene their dialogue before the end of September. Koh said the Bush administration wants to show positive aspects of its diplomatic efforts over Pyongyang in a bid for voter support at a time when he is suffering a backlash from his Iraq policy. "North Korea also wants to move in a direction toward settling the issue during the upcoming talks, fearing the dialogue might lose momentum and hoping the Bush government will become more active before the election," Koh said. But he said the United States and North Korea will continue disputes over the North's uranium-based nuclear program, a major bone of contention between the two. Washington has urged Pyongyang to come clean on the clandestine program which the isolationist country has denied possessing. "We will have to see how the talks' participants can work out details to resolve the issue based on proposals broached last time," the second government official said. Washington laid out during the third-round nuclear talks that it would provide heavy fuel oil, tentative multilateral security guarantees and technological and financial assistance to help Pyongyang's nuclear dismantlement. It will also embark on research projects to meet the North's energy demands, and start talks on removing Pyongyang from its list of terrorism sponsoring countries and lifting economic sanctions, the South's Foreign Ministry said yesterday. Pyongyang should declare all of its nuclear programs, promise to dismantle, halt and mothball nuclear facilities, and disable nuclear weapons and its components to get the benefits during a three-month period of nuclear freeze. The North's eventual nuclear dismantlement would lead to permanent security guarantees from Washington and normalizing diplomatic ties, according to the U.S. proposal. (shj@heraldm.com) 2004.07.13 ***************************************************************** 13 Korea Herald: Ports, shippers on alert against terror threat 2004.07.13 By Kim Sung-mi U.S. Coast Guard scheduled to visit Korea to assess port security system BUSAN - Security at Busan port, the fifth-largest in the world, is on high alert with new screening measures being counted upon just weeks after they went into effect. The alert was prompted by an Iraqi terrorist threat on Friday against international shipping companies, including Hanjin Shipping Co., Korea's largest containership operator. "We have strengthened monitoring on vessels in the Middle East, taking all possible measures. But we do not plan to scale back our shipping schedule to the region," said Hanjin's security team manager, Kim Myung-bok. The company runs two liquid-natural-gas carriers to Oman but has no direct shipping operation in Iraq or with the U.S. military there, he said. A 28-crew LNG carrier bound for Oman was due to set sail yesterday. With the impending dispatch of Korean troops to Iraq, the threat to Korean ships and harbors is expected to be indefinite. "Thorough screening of cargo trucks, freight and port visitors is costly and time-consuming but it is imperative to prevent any terrorist attack," said a port security official in Busan, which handled 10 million standard 20-foot cargo containers last year. One of the biggest fears among port authorities worldwide is a "dirty bomb," in which radioactive material is exploded with ordinary explosives. While the device may not do large-scale structural damage, it could have a severe psychological impact as well as hamper use of facilities for a long period, international terrorist experts warn. To counter the threat, the International Ship and Port Security Code, or ISPS Code, went into effect worldwide on July 1. The measures, promoted by the United States and implemented through the International Maritime Organization, took only 18 months to draft and implement. The security code requires trade ports, owners of passenger ships and cargo carriers weighing 500 tons or more to submit detailed plans for neutralizing terrorist threats. Implementation of the code was only a little more than 50 percent by the end of June, according to the 160-member nation maritime organization, a U.N. organization. But full compliance was reported among Korean ships and harbors. Implementing the security measures cost the Korean government 6.3 billion won and companies 3.7 billion won, according to official figures. Under the new requirements, an additional 241 closed circuit televisions have been installed, 30,000 meters of port safety fence was built up and 43 security agents were hired. Safety education programs were organized for crewmen, companies and government officials. Worldwide, adopting the ISPS Code is expected to cost $2.6 billion, with $1.5 billion to be spent annually for maintenance, said Choi Jae-sun, a safety specialist at the Korea Maritime Institute, citing estimates by the Australian trade department. "We could take advantage of our high-performance security system, which resulted from the military tension with North Korea," said Oh Haeng-nok, a deputy director at the port logistics division of the maritime ministry in Busan. Advanced radar search system around the peninsula to detect aliens, especially from the North, contributes to improving safety measures at ports, he noted. To inspect port security systems, United States Coast Guard has scheduled to visit Busan and other Korean ports beginning on July 19. Its assessment will decide on the smooth operation of Korean shipping companies in U.S. ports and provide a guideline for foreign shippers on whether to use the Korean ports, according to government officials. "The United States, the No. 1 global logistics destination, will likely reject the access of ISPS-incompliant ships or those that have stopped by unsafe ports," Hong Sun-bae, a maritime security officer in Busan. "Even though the average adoption rate for the ISPS Code may be low for now, the world's major ports and shippers operating U.S. lines must have finished implementation," he said. Before the new safety regulation is in full operation, however, port authorities will have to deal with a dilemma. "If port operators refuse to allow vessels not complying with the ISPS Code to enter, Korean property holders and consumers will have to bear the damage. On the other hand, ports should not compromise the safety of ports by passing the ships without security certificates," Hong said. (smkim@heraldm.com) 2004.07.13 [http://www.heraldcampus.co.kr/Premium/] ***************************************************************** 14 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL]U.S. intelligence mayhem 2004.07.13 By Kim Sung-mi [http://www.voiceware.co.kr] With the number of U.S. military deaths in Iraq having just passed the 1,000 mark and no end in sight in the losses of American lives, the distraught U.S. public psyche requires a scapegoat. The Senate Intelligence Committee picked the Central Intelligence Agency to carry all the blame for the "wrong war." The giant intelligence apparatus of the United States was wrong in most of the major judgments contained in its 2002 report about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, the Senate panel concluded in its 500-page report released last week. It said intelligence officials did not explain to policymakers the "uncertainties" behind their judgments, while intelligence agencies collectively presumed that Iraq had an active and growing WMD program without sufficient grounds. So George Tenet, who terminated his service with the CIA on Sunday, his men on the spot, and those in Langley who collected, analyzed and assessed the Iraqi intelligence have collectively made a grave mistake. But no one can say that they are responsible for the war in Iraq. That decision was made in the Oval Office. As Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry said, the buck stops at the White House when it comes to national security. President Bush himself acknowledged the shortcomings of the CIA but he made no concessions about his decision to go to war. The stockpiles have not been found but Americans knew that Saddam could make them, he opined. He observed that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power, yet the world knows that the rationale for the war was Saddam Hussein's WMD, not the dictator. We recall that U.S. intelligence became a focus of controversy in 1999 concerning another WMD program in the northern part of the Korean Peninsula. Washington strongly pressured Pyongyang for a special inspection of Kumchangni, 60 kilometers north of Yongbyon, where intelligence indicated that some nuclear-related activities were underway. After a U.S. team was allowed to visit the area, the State Department said it found no sign that North Korea had violated the 1994 U.S.-DPRK agreement on its nuclear development freeze. Earlier, in 1998, there were a series of reports in major U.S. dailies, based on intelligence leaks, that North Koreans were conducting high explosive tests which were regarded as a final stage of nuclear weapons development. After the Kumchangni fiasco, another apparent intelligence leak led to prominent Washington-datelined news articles on North Korea's alleged completion of nuclear weapons without a yield-producing test, which was reportedly made unnecessary because of technological advancement. Now there is the tug-of-war between North Korean and U.S. officials over the existence of a uranium enrichment program. Based on statements by Pakistan's nuclear expert Abdul Qadeer Kahn and other supporting intelligence, the United States believes that the North is developing uranium-based nuclear weapons in addition to plutonium bombs, while Pyongyang vehemently denies it. The apparent failure of the U.S. intelligence on Iraq reminds us of the need for a thorough review of all information that has so far surfaced concerning the North Korean WMD. The United States is known to have contemplated a preemptive strike on the North in 1994 on the basis of its intelligence about nuclear-related activities in the secretive country. At this moment, there is no way of telling the accuracy of the information that led Washington to seek a military option at that time. We believe we know many things about North Korea and its nuclear programs, but still there are many other things we do not know. The North has made a few admissions about its nuclear program but is hiding much of it, and even its acknowledgements can be doubted in this game of extreme secrecy which could also involve much bluffing. South Korea's intelligence capabilities on the North are not insignificant, especially considering the human resources it can utilize. Close cooperation between intelligence agencies of the two allies can help prevent inaccuracy about facts and deter wrong judgments and wrong decisions. [http://www.heraldcampus.co.kr/Premium/] ***************************************************************** 15 KoreaTimes : Confusing US Messages Seoul's Mediating Role Growing More Than Ever Hankooki.com > Korea Times > Opinion U.S. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, during her half-day stay in Seoul last Friday, said, ``North Korea will be surprised to see how much would be possible,'' if it completely dismantles its nuclear program. Reemphasizing President Bush's resolve to settle the nuclear issue through dialogue and diplomacy, Rice indirectly advised Pyongyang to follow the lead of Libya, which is improving ties with Washington and the international community following its decision to renounce weapons of mass destruction. Korean officials said they never expected such remarks by Rice, speculating that the ``surprising rewards'' could include a package to improve the bilateral relationship, such as lifting economic sanctions, delisting the North from terrorism-sponsoring countries and eventual diplomatic normalization. Rice's words, which followed the flexible U.S. stance in recent six-nation talks, are noteworthy as they reconfirm Washington's policy shift from stick to carrot, and came from one of the central figures of the hawkish ``neocons.'' Looking closely, her remarks are nothing new. Rice stressed the example of Libya that voluntarily gave up its nuclear program first, and called for the North's acknowledgment of highly enriched uranium programs, both of which do not deviate from the previous U.S. position at all. The Bush administration, which is losing public support in the November presidential election due to Iraqi military campaigns, might be making a temporary tactical retreat to seek some progress in the nuclear issue. In this regard, one cannot help but wonder why the United States reemphasizes the Agreed Framework accord, which has long become a scrap of paper because of its nonobservance by both Washington and Pyongyang. Rice's words might be little more than a diplomatic volley. Just days ago, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell told visiting chairman of the ruling Uri Party Shin Ki-nam that there would be no U.S. compensation for the North's dismantlement of its nuclear programs. Still, North Korea needs to take the latest U.S. offer. Two main reasons for the stalemate in the six-party talks to solve the nuclear crisis were the hard-line U.S. stance and Pyongyang's extreme distrust of Washington. Now that the Bush administration is showing some signs of change, it is the North's turn to give a positive response to the signals from Washington. Once Pyongyang accepts the U.S. proposal, then Washington will be forced to modify its strategy toward North Korea. South Korea's role as a mediator will become more important than ever. Seoul ought to call on Washington to keep specifying its proposals and deliver the real U.S. intention to Pyongyang exactly as it is, while persuading the North to accept Washington's overture and go shoulder to shoulder with the international community. Kim Jong-il would be wrong if he thinks his hardball tactics has begun to pay off. Kim should positively respond to Washington because any more brinkmanship could backfire. 07-12-2004 19:46 ***************************************************************** 16 DallasNews.com: Whistleblower: Electric company hid violations American Electric Power denies charges 09:15 PM CDT on Monday, July 12, 2004 By RANDY LEE LOFTIS / The Dallas Morning News One of the nation's biggest electric companies hid environmental violations at some northeast Texas plants for years, according to complaints filed by a former company engineer. Despite American Electric Power's corporate statements about ethics and the environment, engineer Bill Wilson says in formal complaints that his attempts to clean up the company's Texas practices only got him fired. Mr. Wilson, 51, of Dallas handled environmental permits and pollution controls for the power company from 1999 until May 6, when he says he refused to prepare a misleading report to state regulators. His boss in the company's Dallas office later handed him a letter booting him from the company. American Electric says it did nothing wrong and didn't fire Mr. Wilson for speaking out. Since his firing, Mr. Wilson has filed complaints detailing what he called "a pattern of willful and knowing violation of state and federal law" with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Labor Department and the Texas Board of Professional Engineers. None has acted on his allegations. Complaints to regulators He also provided The Dallas Morning News with the same internal company documents that he gave to government regulators. The documents show that: An American Electric Power plant in Gregg County bought and burned industrial waste along with regular fuel oil in late December and early January in apparent violation of the plant's state permit. Mr. Wilson's e-mails to colleagues at the time said plant employees told him the practice had gone on for years. [map] American Electric did not report to the state some emissions from a plant in Titus County despite state officials' instructions to report the emissions or face enforcement. Company officials knew as far back as 1999 that the Titus County plant routinely exceeded some limits in its state permit. The company apparently did not notify state regulators of the problem until this spring. Environment concerns Mr. Wilson said in an interview that American Electric's actions and regulators' lack of response jeopardize the environment. He plans to repeat those allegations today in a news conference with former EPA enforcement chief Eric Schaeffer, who is calling for a federal criminal investigation. "These are important matters for public health and for the integrity of environmental regulation," Mr. Wilson said. "The system has got to be based on trust." A power company spokesman said the incidents didn't mean the firm had violated environmental rules. He said the company's internal investigation found no wrongdoing. "We strongly believe that the plant has operated and continues to operate within the terms of the permits that we have," said Pat D. Hemlepp, the power company's director of corporate media relations. "We do not retaliate against employees who file complaints." Officials in the Tyler regional office of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality investigated the firm's operations at the northeast Texas plants. They concluded that some violations had occurred, but details of their findings have not been released. State enforcement hasn't moved forward, however. In early June, the company's Texas environmental affairs manager, Gary Gibbs, and an outside lawyer for the company met in Austin with the Tyler office's superiors, including Brent Wade, a special assistant to the deputy director over enforcement. More than a month later, the agency has not issued a violation notice or an all-clear letter. Agency spokeswoman Adria Dawidczik said the case is still open. "AEP [power company] ... has thought that they had a stronger case and didn't think that enforcement should be issued," Ms. Dawidczik said. "So they came to Austin to visit." The meeting did not result in any orders from headquarters to stop enforcement, she said. Neither Charles Murray, manager of the air section at the commission's Tyler office, nor investigator Celeste Lane responded to requests to discuss the case, which involves American Electric plants in Titus, Harrison and Gregg counties. Enforcement criticized The American Electric case arises as the environmental commission, the public's guardian on air and water quality and hazardous waste, struggles with accusations that its enforcement is weak, inconsistent and overly friendly to the industries it is supposed to regulate. Last year, an Austin-based environmental group analyzed commission enforcement records and issued a scathing report. A state audit followed with similar conclusions. Agency officials defended their efforts, but they also launched an internal review and held meetings to hear the public's views on enforcement. They also set up a new section on the agency's Web site, www.tceq.state.tx.us, dealing with the ongoing enforcement review. A final draft report is due next month. When the Legislature convenes in January, environmental group lobbyists are expected to use the recent findings to press for a much tougher state attitude toward pollution violators. However, regulated industries maintain a strong presence in the Capitol, with top elected officials and the heads of key legislative committees collecting campaign donations from corporate executives, lobbyists, lawyers and industry groups. The matter of Bill Wilson vs. one of the nation's industrial giants shows how environmental enforcement can sometimes be a contest of unequals. American Electric Power, based in Columbus, Ohio, describes itself as the nation's biggest generator of electricity. With about 80 coal, natural gas, oil or nuclear power plants serving 5 million customers in 11 states, and revenues of $14.5 billion in 2003, the utility is a major factor in forming national and state environmental policies. Political ties In February, Gov. Rick Perry named the company's Texas group president, longtime utility lobbyist Charles R. Patton, to the Texas Energy Planning Council, charged with writing the state's first comprehensive energy plan in 20 years. Other large companies on the 22-member panel include Dow Chemical, Reliant Energy and Waste Management. American Electric's chairman and CEO, Michael G. Morris, serves on Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's Electricity Advisory Board, as did Mr. Morris' predecessor, E. Linn Draper Jr. After Mr. Morris joined American Electric in January, he called on all employees to be the corporation's eyes and ears on ethical and environmental concerns. Down in Texas, Mr. Wilson was doing exactly that, he says. From January until May this year, Mr. Wilson told his company supervisors and corporate executives, as well as state officials, about practices that he said skirted or violated the law and possibly endangered public health: In late December, workers at American Electric's Knox Lee plant in Gregg County accepted a nearly 7,000 gallons of waste containing butyl butyrate, a chemical normally used in making circuit boards or as a food additive. The material was destined for use as fuel for the plant, and records indicated that some was burned. The plant's permit prohibits the burning of waste oil as fuel to protect plant workers and the public from toxic emissions or other problems. Mr. Wilson notified company supervisors, including a vice president, and Texas environmental enforcers. The company later sent the state a formal notification of the problem. Mr. Hemlepp, the American Electric spokesman, said the shipment was an unintentional, one-time mishap and that new procedures will keep it from happening. In an e-mail to supervisors on Feb. 16, Mr. Wilson wrote that plant workers told him "this has been a routine practice for many years." This spring, the company decided not to report emissions from a mobile pollution-control device attached to the Welsh plant. Each Texas industrial plant must report its emissions to the state every year. False reporting can lead to enforcement. Company lawyers advised the company not to report the emissions from the mobile equipment at Welsh. They said that the state's formal rules didn't require it, although informal guidelines did. Mr. Wilson argued strongly for reporting the emissions, refusing orders to leave them out of a state report and even clashing with his boss during a staff meeting. Mr. Hemlepp, the company spokesman, confirmed American Electric filed the report without the disputed emissions. The conflict "comes down to an honest difference of opinion between AEP and the agency," he said. In an e-mail to company lawyers, Mr. Wilson said the decision to omit the emissions was "disappointing." Three state officials, he said, told him they would initiate enforcement if the company did not report them. Hours after he sent that e-mail, the power company suspended Mr. Wilson. For years, the company apparently took no action to correct heat input problems at the Welsh plant in Titus County. Heat input, a measure of the energy value in the coal that the plant burns, is part of the plant's permit. Engineers knew since 1999 that the heat input problem was leading to high carbon monoxide and particulate matter emissions, company documents indicate. "We are breaking these limits today!!!" a manager wrote on April 13, 2000. "I did bring this fact up last year, and we decided to do nothing about it." American Electric apparently did not tell state regulators about the heat input problem until March 31, when Mr. Wilson discussed it with them. Mr. Wilson sent the state an official disclosure the next week. Violation denied Mr. Hemlepp, the company spokesman, said the heat input problem was not a violation and could be fixed with a permit amendment. Tests indicate that the plant is meeting its particulate limits, he said. He discounted the importance of the April 2000 e-mail warning of violations. Mr. Wilson raised other allegations as well, including questions on the way state officials wrote a permit for the Pirkey plant in Harrison County. On March 24, he filed an internal ethics complaint. Five days later, he received a poor performance review based in part on his bad relationship with one of the departments he named in the complaint. On May 6, after another clash over emissions reporting, his boss suspended him. Mr. Wilson was fired the next day. His Labor Department complaint seeks whistle-blower protection. E-mail rloftis@dallasnews.com [rloftis@dallasnews.com] home [http://subscribe.dallasnews.com] © 2004 Belo Interactive Inc. ***************************************************************** 17 AP Wire: Pentagon Papers whistleblower calls for national security leaks | 07/12/2004 | MARTHA MENDOZA Associated Press KENSINGTON, Calif. - On an evening 35 years ago, a high-level Pentagon analyst named Daniel Ellsberg carried a briefcase filled with documents stamped "Top Secret" out of his office with one clear plan: Leak them to Congress, leak them to the media, and get the truth out about the Vietnam War. On a recent sunny afternoon, sipping green tea and eating organic salad in a hilltop cafe overlooking the San Francisco Bay, Ellsberg said his only regret is that it took him so long - two years - to copy and leak the 7,000-page study of U.S. decision-making in Vietnam to Congress and the press. Now Ellsberg is launching "The Truth-Telling Project, a call to patriotic whistleblowing," encouraging Pentagon, White House and other national security insiders to reveal secrets that involve alleged government cover-ups and lies. "My message to people in the Pentagon, the State Department and the administration is this: If you have information, especially documents, that the public is being lied to about war or other matters of life and death, then I urge you to consider doing what I wish I had done much earlier than I did," said Ellsberg. "We need to delegitimize silence that costs lives." The call is not without risk, including the potential of dishonor, prosecution and shame. Critics say national security leaks can be illegal and put soldiers' and civilians' lives in danger. Ellsberg concedes the risks are great, and that whistleblowers need to weigh both the public benefits and risks of disclosure. And he warns that there are also personal risks. Ellsberg was indicted for espionage and at one point faced 115 years in jail. Charges were dropped when it was revealed that President Nixon's operatives burglarized the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist in order to discredit him. "Leakers have to think long and hard about this, but it can be worth it if a lot of lives are at stake," he said. Ellsberg, 73, is a slender, energetic man who bodysurfs for fun and walks with long, strong strides reminiscent of the three years he spent as a Marine rifle platoon leader. In recent months, he has drawn cheers during speeches around the country at college campuses and anti-war rallies, and he says he's been arrested more than 60 times at protests and demonstrations during the past two decades. He is also reviled - former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once called Ellsberg a drug-using pervert, "the most dangerous man in America." "Dan is way beyond a megalomaniac, he has a weird attitude toward himself, an unbounded ego," said Anthony J. Russo, who worked with Ellsberg to copy the Pentagon Papers and said they still run into each other at occasional conferences. Author Tom Wells, who in 2001 published "Wild Man: The Life and Times of Daniel Ellsberg," said he began the project as "sympathetic politically" to his subject, but the two broke off during the project and the resulting book portrays a brilliant narcissist. Despite the fallout Ellsberg faced, his actions did make whistleblowing more mainstream - if still a highly controversial path. Washington is now home to four national nonprofit, nonpartisan organizations dedicated to supporting government and corporate whistleblowers - the National Whistleblower Center, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, the Project on Government Oversight and the Government Accountability Project. "We were all inspired by what Daniel Ellsberg did, and we certainly agree with his observation that whistleblowing can be a patriotic act," said Government Accountability Project president Louis Clark. "But for every whistleblower out there, there are groups of people waiting to call them traitors, finks and tattletales. There is always opposition." Recent months have brought almost daily leaks of documents and information. There was the investigative report by Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba that brought wide attention to Iraqi prison abuse scandal in April. There was a leak earlier this month to Court TV that pop star Michael Jackson settled a child molestation case in the 1990s for $23 million. "I think this is a precipitous time for whistleblowing," said Clark. Ellsberg, who holds a doctorate degree in economics from Harvard University, became a strategic analyst at the RAND Corporation in 1959, and was soon consulting to the Department of Defense and the White House about the problems of the command and control of nuclear weapons, nuclear war plans and crisis decision-making. He joined the Defense Department in 1964 and transferred to the State Department in 1965 to serve two years at the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, evaluating pacification on the front lines. On return to the RAND Corporation in 1967, he worked on former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara's top secret study of U.S. decision-making in Vietnam. Ellsberg leaked the study to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and later 19 newspapers. The publication added fuel to an already politically charged debate over U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia, and set legal precedents for freedom of the press. Christopher Preble, a historian and Gulf War veteran who now directs foreign policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, said that while the Pentagon Papers did broaden public understanding of the Vietnam War, he would be cautious about this new call for leaks. "There are good and just reasons for some material and information to be kept secret, good national security reasons," he said. "Leaks have a tendency to be selective and they tend to be done for political purposes, and that's why I'm reluctant to argue broadly for the release of information in a haphazard way." SanLuisObispo.com | ***************************************************************** 18 Vanunu's Appeal of Restrictions Heard in High Court Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 18:56:56 -0700 Free Mordechai Vanunu - Info & Action Alert #28 - Vanunu's Appeal of Restrictions Heard in High Court ** PLEASE FORWARD TO SYMPATHETIC LISTS ** 1. Prosecution seeks to prove Vanunu still has classified data (Ha'aretz, July 11, 2004) 2. Report and Court Notes of Fredrik Heffermehl 3. Write to Mordechai ==================== 1. Prosecution seeks to prove Vanunu still has classified data By Yuval Yoaz and Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondents Last Update: 11/07/2004 Mordechai Vanunu arrived Sunday morning at the High Court of Justice for a closed-door hearing on his petition against restrictions placed on him after his release from jail in April. The State Prosecution claims that Vanunu is still a danger to the state, following an expert's conclusions that his prison notebooks contain previously unpublished information on the Dimona nuclear reactor. Vanunu served an 18-year sentence for revealing Israel's nuclear secrets to the London-based Sunday Times newspaper. Vanunu said at the beginning of the hearing that he "hopes for justice based on democracy, human rights and freedom of speech." Right-wing activists protested at the entrance of the courthouse, calling Vanunu a "traitor." Security forces dispersed the protestors. The court's decision will be based on whether or not Vanunu has harmful information, the President of the High Court, Justice Aharon Barak, said, adding that the issue being discussed was "relatively straightforward." In its response to Vanunu's petition, the state said that shortly before Vanunu was released, authorities found notebooks in his cell that contained classified information derived from his work as a technician at the Dimona reactor. An expert who reviewed the notebooks concluded that some of the sketches and descriptions they contained were not published by The Times. Vanunu's petition, filed by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, protests the following restrictions: the obligation to notify authorities 48 hours before any change of address; the obligation to give a 24-hour advance warning before leaving any site where he resides; a ban on approaching certain areas of airports; a ban on entry to foreign embassies in Israel; a ban on conversation with foreigners; and a ban on Internet chats. Prosecutors claim that Vanunu still poses a risk to Israeli security. The notebook materials found in his cell prove that he has the wherewithal, and the motivation, to disclose additional classified information, and harm state security, claim prosecutors. The prosecutors cite as evidence passages from letters which Vanunu wrote while still in prison. In one letter written in August 2000, Vanunu wrote: "We must open up Dimona, and receive clear, precise information about what, and how much, has been produced there ... I can report on all these topics, on all the materials which were produced in the Dimona reactor." In December 2002, Vanunu wrote: "I wouldn't mind working for foreign intelligence services after I am free, or helping the CIA and the FBI, if somebody needs something from me." ==================== 2. Report and Court Notes of Fredrik Heffermehl Jerusalem July 11, 2004 Today I have been attending the oral argument in Vanunu´s petition to have the restrictions imposed on him declared null and void. This was a hearing in the Supreme Court of Israel, in Jerusalem. The language was Hebrew with no transation, so the following notes are based on what I was able to pick up in the intermissions, which were, indeed, long. The court was open 12 minutes in the beginning, and 15 minutes in the end. In the closed sessions, almost 2 1/2 hours, the state presented evidence and witnesses, which neither Vanunu nor his lawyers were permitted to follow. Vanunu noticed that one former colleague, an engineer from Dimona, was in court in this period. In a 15 minutes session with Vanunu and his lawyers only, the focus was on a notebook Vanunu wrote in prison in 1991. This book shows how precise his recollection is, the State held, and that he can reproduce it any time. The problem is that what he can reproduce is no secret and cannot harm Israeli national security. If the judges should go along with this reasoning, the consequence would be that Mordechai cannot be given his full freedom untill he has lost his mind and memory, a preposterous idea and proposition. And meaningless also because he is now seeing so many people and has such an amount of freedom that he could reveal secrets any time - if he had wished to do so - and had had any. Under the Covenant on Civil and Political rights states may make exceptions for reasons of national security - but they have to specify and explain such reasons and they cannot envoke as harmful secrets something which is already published and known. My comment - If the judges should go along with depriving Mordechai for his rights on the basis that he has a good memory, his situation will be the same in 2 weeks, 2 years, 2 decades. So, the decision now is crucial for his future. The good thing is that the high Court took a full hearing now and did not postpone its decision untill a later hearing. Fredrik S. Heffermehl COURT NOTES: Mordehai Vanunu in Supreme Court of Israel, July 11, 2004 Judges Barak, Massa, Cheshin, To deal with petition lodged to have restrictions on freedom declared null and void Lawyers representing Vanunu: Dan Yakir, Oded Feller Court set to open at 0900 - Judges appeared at 0930 Judges closed the ourt after 12 minutes, declaring that the key issue is whether Vanunu has further secrets - this will be discussed with only his lawyers present (for the most part not even they, i.e. the judges will listen to the State present witnesses and arguments without Vanunu present or represented in any way). It is not only a question of keeping the secrets, but also secrets about the secrets, since the State does not wish to reveal its sources for the information. Court closed at 0942 - proeeding to resume around 1130. This situation, that the Court is hearing the State and seeing State evidence without the defendant or defense lawyers present is very common in Israel, it happens on a regular basis also with Palestinian defendants says Oded Feller in intermission (1130 - and neither he nor anybody else knows when the Court will be open again) At 1240 Vanunu and one (just one) of his lawyers, Yakir, are called back into Court (there is discussion of a notebook Vanunu wrote in prison around 1991, with details of Dimona). The judge said that according to the newspapers the knowledge Vanunu has is dated and that he can no longer pose a threat. To this the attorney of the state, Shein Nitzan, replied: The State of Israel would not consider restrictions if Vanunu did not have secrets and was a danger to the state. So, his logic was that if the state has a position it means that it is justified. (The State is always right - so what do we need courts for??) Then at 1 pm there is a new open Court, with pleadings and summaries, whereafter the judge (Barak) declares that the Court has heard the parties and that a decision will be announced soon. Yakir says after session that he has no idea what "soon" will mean is this case. Supreme Court of Jerusalem, July 11, 2004 Fredrik S. Heffermehl Observer (Norwegian lawyer) ================ 3. Write to Mordechai Mordechai would love to hear from his friends and supporters. You can write to him at: Mordechai Vanunu c/o Cathedral Church of St. George 20 Nablus Road PO Box 19018 Jerusalem 91190 Israel and email him at ================= If you would like to receive these alerts directly, please subscribe by sending a blank e-mail to free_vanunu-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Felice Cohen-Joppa Coordinator U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu POB 43384 Tucson, AZ 85733 Phone/Fax 520-323-8697 freevanunu@mindspring.com ***************************************************************** 19 Interfax: Russia to stage exercise in defending nuclear installations Jul 12 2004 7:59PM LONDON. July 12 (Interfax) - An exercise aimed at protecting military nuclear installations will be staged in Russia in August, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said at a news conference in London on Monday. NATO officials will attend the exercise as observers, he said. "We pay a great deal of attention to protecting military nuclear installations and are prepared to demonstrate that the allegations that Russian military nuclear installations are vulnerable are myths," Ivanov said. © 1991-2004 Interfax All rights reserved News and other data on this web site are provided for information purposes only, and are not intended for republication or redistribution. Republication or redistribution of Interfax content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Interfax. ***************************************************************** 20 BBC: Protesters in note of disapproval Last Updated: Monday, 12 July, 2004 [Protest at Faslane Naval base] Faslane is a focus for protests against Trident missiles Anti-nuclear campaigners have staged an informal concert at the Court of Session in Edinburgh to protest against repeated legal rulings against them. The 16 Trident Ploughshares campaigners sang a collection of anti-war songs specially written for the event. They invited judges to listen to them in Parliament Hall but none did. Earlier this year, five judges at the appeal court refused to quash breach of the peace convictions against Ploughshares campaigners. Impromptu concert Lawyers, court clerks and members of the public clapped loudly following the 14 anti-war songs. But security guards were less impressed and complained at having been taken by surprise when the activists suddenly gathered together inside the hall and started singing at 1000 BST. At the end the campaigners filed outside and delivered an impromptu concert in Parliament Square, to the amusement of passing tourists. Veteran campaigner Jane Tallents, originally from Sheffield, said the action was part of an ongoing campaign against Britain's Trident nuclear weapons system, which is based at the Faslane naval base on the Clyde. She said the aim was to highlight the need for an "just and wise" judiciary to condemn the hoarding of massive nuclear weapons by the British Government The protesters believe th there is no greater crime than to threaten mass destruction whilst leaving all the underlying causes of conflict unresolved Jane Tallents And she said the action was in protest over the treatment of anti-nuclear activists who are regularly prosecuted in the courts. She said: "Every time this is put to the judges they just duck and we were trying to find a creative and peaceful way to express our frustration. "Let us remember that the essence of the law is to protect the innocent from wrong-doing. "The protesters believe that there is no greater crime than to threaten mass destruction whilst leaving all the underlying causes of conflict unresolved." In May five top judges at the Appeal Court of the High Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh refused to quash breach of the peace convictions for three protesters, including Ms Tallents, who now lives in Helensburgh. The activists were found guilty of the public order offence during protests at the Scottish Parliament and the Faslane base between 1999 and 2002 and the judges ruled that their convictions should be upheld. ***************************************************************** 21 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Gets Look at Nuke Parts From Libya From the Associated Press [UP] Monday July 12, 2004 11:01 AM AP Photo DCMC102 By DEB RIECHMANN Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - In a Southern state he hopes to win again in November, President Bush is getting a look at nuclear weapons parts turned over by Libya while working to convince voters that his administration is making steady progress in the war on terrorism. Bush's destination Monday was the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, which began receiving shipments from Libya in March as part of an agreement with Moammar Gadhafi to end his country's nuclear weapons program. The president's effort to polish his image as a leader in a worldwide war on terrorism follows the release last week of a Senate report that harshly criticized unsubstantiated intelligence cited in the run-up to the war in Iraq, a crucial battle in the war on terrorism. For months, Bush has been highlighting his threefold strategy for fighting terrorists and those who threaten to use chemical, biological or nuclear weapons: taking the fight to the enemy, coordinating with other nations to isolate terrorists and advancing democracy, especially in the volatile Middle East. As the November election nears, Bush wants voters to compare situations in such nations as Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya to the way they were three years ago when the militant Taliban still ruled Kabul, Saddam Hussein was still in power in Baghdad and Libya was still supporting terrorism and spending money to acquire weapons of mass destruction. In remarks in Oak Ridge, a senior administration official said, the president would cite Libya as an example of how countries can ``abandon their nuclear ambitions.'' Improved relations with Libya eliminates a potential threat and sets an example for such nations as North Korea and Iran about the benefits of disarming, Bush supporters say. The White House has long portrayed Libya's pledge to abandon programs to develop weapons of mass destruction as affirmation of Bush's hard-line strategy on arms proliferation. It suggested the U.S.-led war in Iraq helped convince Gadhafi that he should act. Democrats, however, dismiss any such claim, saying instead it was the softer hand of diplomacy that helped score the turnaround in Libya. ``This is a real success for American foreign policy that happened on President Bush's watch,'' said Flynt Leverett, a foreign policy analyst at Brookings Institution. ``But what's maddening is that (administration officials) are misconstruing what produced this outcome. It was not Iraq, but diplomacy that started under (former President) Clinton.'' The diplomatic efforts, under way since the 1990s, involved Libya's decision to accept responsibility for the 1988 bombing of an American airliner over the Scottish town of Lockerbie, pay compensation to the families of the 270 people killed and dismantle its weapons programs. In March, the Energy Department, which oversees Oak Ridge, displayed 48 crates and boxes containing equipment used to make nuclear bomb fuel from uranium. Also on display were four centrifuges, which are used to separate uranium into its explosive components. Libya got the equipment from an underground supply network headed by Abdul Qadeer Khan, a top scientist in Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. Bush's trip to Tennessee to view the equipment and herald his administration's work to stop terrorism is his 10th presidential trip to the state. He carried Tennessee in the 2000 election over favorite son Al Gore, but he's not taking Tennessee's 11 electoral votes for granted. First lady Laura Bush is scheduled to give an address in Nashville on Thursday. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 22 NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to Hold Hearing on Use of Mixed-Oxide Fuel at Catawba News Release - 2004-08 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 04-084 July 9, 2004 Headquarters in Rockville, Md., on the proposed use of mixed-oxide (MOX) lead test assemblies by Duke Energy Corp. at its Catawba Nuclear Station. The Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League (BREDL) has been admitted as a party to the hearing on Duke Energys application to amend its operating license for Catawba to allow use of four MOX assemblies. (MOX contains a mixture of plutonium and uranium oxides, with plutonium providing the primary fissile isotopes.) The Duke request is part of a joint U.S.-Russian Federation program to dispose of surplus plutonium from nuclear weapons by converting the material into MOX fuel for use in nuclear reactors. At the hearing, the board will receive evidence on BREDLs non-security related contention challenging the adequacy of certain aspects of Dukes license amendment request. BREDL asserts that MOX fuel behaves differently than typical low-enriched uranium fuel, with implications for accident scenario analyses for the Catawba plant. Testimony will be presented, and witnesses may be cross-examined. Members of the public may attend as observers, but participation will be limited to representatives of BREDL, Duke Energy and the NRC staff. The board heard public statements on Dukes request at a June 15 pre-hearing session held in Charlotte, N.C. The evidentiary hearing was originally scheduled to be held on that date as well, but was rescheduled at the request of BREDL. The hearing will start at 1 p.m. on July 14 and reconvene at 9 a.m. on July 15. It will be held at the NRCs Two White Flint North Building, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Md. Visitors must present two pieces of identification (one with photo) and should allow ample time for processing through the buildings security checkpoint. Visitors should indicate to the guards that they wish to attend the Catawba hearing, and arrangements will be made to escort them to the hearing room. Last revised Friday, July 09, 2004 ***************************************************************** 23 NRC: Duke Energy Corporation, et al., Catawba Nuclear Station, Units FR Doc 04-15696 [Federal Register: July 12, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 132)] [Notices] [Page 41852-41855] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12jy04-61] 1 and 2; Notice of Opportunity To Comment and Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is reviewing an application for amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-35 and NPF-52, issued to Duke Power Company, et al. (the licensee), for operation of the Catawba Nuclear Station (Catawba), Units 1 and 2, located in York County, South Carolina. A Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing was published in the Federal Register on July 25, 2003. The proposed amendments, requested by the licensee in a letter dated February 27, 2003, as supplemented by letters dated September 15, September 23, October 1 (two letters), October 3 (two letters), November 3 and 4, December 10, 2003, February 2, 2004, (two letters), March 1 (two letters), March 9 (two letters), and March 16, (two letters), March 26, March 31, April 13, April 16, May 13 and June 17, 2004, would revise the Technical Specifications to allow the use of four mixed oxide (MOX) fuel lead test assemblies (LTAs). The term ``MOX'' arises from the following: the low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel used in U.S. reactors heretofore consists mostly of uranium oxides wherein the concentration of U-235 is increased during manufacture, such that U-235 constitutes up to four to five percent of the uranium by weight. In fresh unirradiated LEU fuel, U-235 is the fissionable component and it has no significant plutonium concentration. During irradiation, however, U-238 absorbs neutrons produced by the fission of U-235 and transmutes to the various isotopes of plutonium. Some of these plutonium isotopes are fissionable [[Page 41853]] and add to the power output of the LEU fuel such that with the irradiation of LEU fuel to medium to high burnup levels, a significant fraction of that fuel's power is produced by the fissioning of plutonium. As a part of a joint United States-Russian surplus weapons- grade plutonium disposition program supported by the Department of Energy (DOE) to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation worldwide by conducting disposition of surplus plutonium in the United States, the licensee proposes that plutonium oxide powder supplied by DOE will be processed, blended with depleted uranium dioxide powder, and fabricated into MOX fuel LTAs that will then be used at Catawba. The blending of the uranium oxide and plutonium oxide materials is the basis for the term ``mixed oxide'' or ``MOX'' fuel. Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations. The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, parts of which are presented below. I. Probability and Consequences Evaluation The proposed license amendment to allow the use of MOX fuel lead assemblies does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The ``accidents'' previously evaluated are described in the [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] UFSAR and fall into one of the following four categories: Normal Operation and Operational Transients. Faults of Moderate Frequency. Infrequent Faults. Limiting Faults. Inspection of the UFSAR descriptions reveals that the presence of MOX fuel lead assemblies could potentially impact the probability of occurrence for only two ``accidents;'' Radioactivity in Reactor Coolant Due to Cladding Defects and Fuel Handling Accidents. An evaluation of each of these events follows. Radioactivity in Reactor Coolant Due to Cladding Defects Probability Cladding defects are imperfections in the cladding material of a fuel assembly that allow fission products from the active fuel material to migrate to the reactor coolant. They can be caused by manufacturing defects that go undetected until the stresses of pressure, temperature, and/or irradiation eventually result in fuel cladding failure. This type of cladding failure occurs very infrequently in low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. The Mark BW design, which is the basis for the Mark BW/MOX1 design to be used in the MOX fuel lead assemblies, has experienced a failure rate of less than one per 100,000 rods, from all manufacturing related causes, since its inception in 1987. There is no reason to expect that the probability of this type of failure in a MOX fuel assembly will be any different than for a LEU fuel assembly because the probability of fuel failure due to these factors is no different for MOX fuel assemblies than for LEU fuel assemblies. The MOX fuel lead assemblies will be manufactured using the same quality standards that are used in the manufacture of LEU fuel, under a Quality Assurance program that conforms to 10 CFR 50 Appendix B. Likewise, the same operational procedures and precautions to preclude loose parts and debris in the reactor coolant will equally preclude fuel failures from these mechanisms for the MOX and LEU fuel assemblies. Other mechanisms that could potentially cause fuel cladding failure are physical interaction of the cladding with loose debris in the reactor coolant system or corrosion product transport and buildup on cladding material. The design of both the current LEU fuel assemblies and the planned MOX fuel assemblies minimizes these types of interactions such that the probability of fuel failure is equally unlikely for both MOX and LEU fuel assemblies. Fuel Handling Accident Probability There is nothing in the physical design of a MOX fuel lead assembly that would make it more susceptible to a fuel handling accident than a LEU assembly. The physical dimensions are virtually identical, the difference in weight between a MOX assembly and a LEU assembly is less than 1%, and the top nozzle engages the manipulator crane and handling fixture in the same manner as LEU fuel. The shipping container and associated unloading procedure for a fresh MOX fuel assembly are slightly different from that of a LEU fuel assembly but such differences do not result in a significant increase in the probability of an accident. The MOX fuel lead assembly shipping container is an end-loaded container with capacity for one fuel assembly as opposed to a LEU shipping container which is side loaded and has the capacity for two fuel assemblies. The MOX fuel assembly container is unloaded by uprighting the container, removing the closure lid, grappling the assembly with the Fuel Handling Tool, and lifting the assembly with a straight vertical lift out of the container. This is a straightforward lifting operation that will be practiced in a dry run involving a dummy fuel assembly, the MOX fuel shipping package, and specific fuel handling procedures. The same plant equipment will be used to grapple and lift a MOX fuel assembly that is used to lift a LEU fuel assembly. Once the MOX fuel lead assemblies are unloaded and placed into the spent fuel pool, subsequent handling operations are identical to LEU fuel handling. Thus, it is concluded that the probability of a fuel handling accident involving a MOX fuel assembly drop, either inside containment or inside the fuel building, is no different than for a LEU assembly. The other scenarios considered as part of the fuel handling accident analyses are a weir gate drop into the spent fuel pool and a tornado-generated missile entering the spent fuel pool. There is no connection between the type of fuel assembly and the probability of occurrence of either of these accidents. The probability of a tornado missile entering the spent fuel pool is a natural event whose frequency of occurrence will not change with the storage of MOX fuel assemblies in the fuel pool. The probability of dropping a weir gate into the spent fuel pool is dependent on the reliability of handling fixtures, crane rigging procedures, and the number of handling operations, none of which will be affected adversely by the handling or presence of MOX fuel assemblies. The conclusion is that amending the McGuire and Catawba licenses to allow the receipt, handling, storage, and use of MOX fuel lead assemblies does not result in a significant increase in the probability of occurrence of any accident previously evaluated in the UFSAR. [[Page 41854]] NRC Staff Analysis of Consequences The licensee's calculated numerical values of dose consequences have changed since the licensee's initial submittal as addressed in the licensee's submittals dated November 3, 2003, March 1 and March 16, 2004. Therefore, the NRC staff provides results from the licensee's submittals and the NRC staff's review that relate to an assessment of whether the radiological consequences from the use of MOX LTAs on previously analyzed design basis accident (DBA) would be expected to increase significantly. The NRC staff's review focused on the potential impacts of the following three characteristics of MOX fuel: (1) The fission product inventory in a MOX fuel assembly is expected to be different from that of an LEU assembly due to the replacement of uranium by plutonium as the fissile material, (2) the fraction of the fission product inventory in the gap region of a MOX fuel assembly is greater due to the increased fission gas release (FGR) associated with higher fuel pellet centerline temperatures of MOX fuel, and (3) the increased FGR can result in higher fuel rod pressurization. The configuration of the MOX LTAs is very similar to that of the LEU fuel assemblies currently in use at Catawba. No other plant modifications have been proposed by the licensee. There is no change in rated thermal power or any significant changes to other plant process parameters that are inputs to the radiological consequence analyses. As such, the only impacts on these analyses would be from changes in the fission product inventory and the gap fractions, and in the case of the fuel handling accident (FHA), changes in the spent fuel pool decontamination factor due to higher fuel rod pressurization. Radiological Consequence Analyses Three categories of DBAs were analyzed for the effects of MOX LTAs. The first category of accidents involves damage to a significant portion of the entire core. They range in core damage from the locked rotor accident (LRA) with 11 percent core damage, the rod ejection accident (REA) with 50 percent core damage, to the large break loss-of- coolant accident (LOCA) with full core damage. The results of Duke's analysis of these DBA categories are as follows: For the LRA, the four MOX LTAs represent only 19 percent of the 21 affected assemblies in the core. The potential increase in the iodine release and the thyroid dose is 12 percent. The thyroid dose increased to 4.1 rem at the EAB, and 1.3 rem at the LPZ. For the REA, the four MOX LTAs represent only 4.1 percent of the affected 97 assemblies in the core. The potential increase in the iodine release and the thyroid dose is 2.63 percent. The thyroid dose increased to 1.03 rem at the EAB, and 0.1 rem (increase masked by numeric rounding) at the LPZ. For the LOCA, the four MOX LTAs represent only 2.1 percent of the 193 assemblies in the core. The potential increase in the iodine release and the thyroid dose is 1.32 percent. The thyroid dose increased to 90.2 rem at the exclusion area boundary (EAB), 25.3 rem at the low population zone (LPZ), and 5.37 at the control room. These changes in dose consequences constitute a small percent of the difference between the current dose value and the regulatory guideline value, and therefore, do not represent a significant increase in the consequences of these previously evaluated accidents. The second category of accidents includes the fuel handling accident (FHA), the weir gate drop accident (WGD) and the fresh MOX LTA drop accident. Duke assessed the MOX LTA impact on doses for the FHA and WGD accidents by re-calculating the analyses of record with updated input data. Duke projected radiological consequences to increase for the FHA from 1.4 to 2.3 rem Total Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE) at the EAB, from 0.21 to 0.34 rem TEDE at the outer boundary of the LPZ and from 1.3 to 2.1 rem TEDE in the control room. Duke projected radiological consequences for the WGD to increase from 2.2 to 3.5 rem TEDE at the EAB, from 0.31 to 0.5 rem TEDE at the outer boundary of the LPZ and from 2.1 to 3.3 rem TEDE in the control room. Duke also assessed the radiological consequences of a drop of a fresh MOX LTA prior to it being placed in the spent fuel pool. Although the configuration of the MOX pellets and LTA fuel rods provides protection against inhalation hazards, it is conceivable that some plutonium might become airborne if the MOX LTA is severely damaged. The EAB and control room TEDE estimated by the licensee for the postulated fresh fuel assembly drop were less than 0.3 rem. These consequences are bounded by the consequences of a dropped irradiated fuel assembly. These resulting dose consequence values provide significant margin to the values specified in 10 CFR 50.67, ``Accident Source Term,'' as supplemented by regulatory position 4.4 of RG 1.183, ``Alternative Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors,'' and therefore, do not represent a significant increase in the consequences of these accidents. The third category of accidents includes accidents whose source term assumptions are derived from reactor coolant system (RCS) radionuclide concentrations. These include, steam generator tube rupture, main steam line break, instrument line break, waste gas decay tank rupture, and liquid storage tank rupture. The radionuclide releases resulting from these events are based on established administrative controls that are monitored by periodic surveillance requirements, for example: RCS and secondary plant specific activity LCOs, or offsite dose calculation manual effluent controls. Increases in specific activities due to MOX LTAs, if any, would be limited by these administrative controls. Since the analyses were based upon the numerical values of these controls, there can be no impact of MOX LTAs on the previously analyzed DBAs in this category. II. New or Different Accident Evaluation The proposed license amendment to allow the use of MOX fuel lead assemblies will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The MOX fuel assemblies have similar mechanical and thermal- hydraulic properties to and nuclear characteristics only slightly different from the current LEU fuel assemblies. The use of MOX fuel lead assemblies does not involve any alterations to plant equipment or procedures that would introduce any new or unique operational modes or accident precursors. The existing design basis accidents described in the UFSAR remain appropriate and have been evaluated to demonstrate that there is no significant adverse safety impact related to the use of MOX fuel lead assemblies. The main physical difference between a fresh MOX fuel assembly and a LEU fuel assembly is the presence of more radioactivity from the actinides in the MOX fuel matrix, resulting in a measurable dose rate in the immediate vicinity of a MOX fuel assembly. As a result, fresh MOX fuel is transported in a sealed leaktight shipping container by an enclosed tractor trailer truck. There are also differences in the fresh MOX fuel handling procedures, but these differences do not lead to a new or different type of accident. A fuel handling accident involving a fresh MOX fuel assembly has potential for off-site dose consequences; however, the results of this fuel handling accident are bounded by the current analysis of a spent LEU fuel assembly drop accident. The calculated site boundary and control room dose consequences for a fresh MOX fuel handling accident are much less than the calculated doses for an accident involving a spent LEU fuel assembly and are well within the guidelines in 10 CFR Part 100. This accident does not involve a new release path, does not result in a new fission product barrier failure mode, and does not create a new sequence of events that would result in significant cladding failure. Therefore, this accident is not a new or different kind of accident. In conclusion, amending the * * * Catawba license to allow the receipt, [[Page 41855]] handling, storage, and use of MOX fuel lead assemblies does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident. III. Margin of Safety Evaluation The proposed license amendment to allow the use of MOX fuel lead assemblies will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. There are provisions in the * * * Catawba Technical Specifications that allow a ``limited number of lead test assemblies'' to be placed in ``nonlimiting core regions.'' These provisions will not change and will apply to the planned use of MOX fuel lead assemblies. The effect of these provisions is to place restrictions on the allowable power distribution limits for a MOX fuel lead assembly. The core design process assures that the limiting fuel rod in the core, whether LEU or MOX, has adequate nuclear power design limits under normal, transient, and accident conditions. If the core design process reveals unacceptable margin, adjustments are made to restore the needed margin. The operating limits are established in Core Operating Limits Report to assure the design limits are not exceeded, thus assuring that adequate design margins for the fuel are maintained. This iterative design process is used to analyze the core containing MOX fuel lead assemblies to assure that there is no significant reduction in a margin of safety. Because these lead assemblies will be located in nonlimiting locations i.e., will have margin above that of the limiting assemblies, the results of safety analyses will likewise assure that appropriate margins to safety are maintained during transients and accidents. On the basis of the information provided by the licensee and developed by the NRC staff, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Comments on this Notice may also be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. A copy of any Comments should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is also requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to [OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov] . A copy of any Comments should also be sent to Ms. Lisa F. Vaughn, Legal Department (ECIIX), Duke Energy Corporation, 422 South Church Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006, attorney for the licensee. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's PDR. A Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing was published in the Federal Register on July 25, 2003 (68 FR 44107). On August 21 and August 25, 2003, respectively, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service and the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League filed a petition requesting a hearing and seeking to intervene in the license amendment proceeding. Pursuant to a notice issued on September 17, 2003, the Commission established an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to preside over this matter. Since a hearing has been requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. The completion of any ongoing hearing may take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated February 27, 2003, as supplemented by letters dated September 15, September 23, October 1 (two letters), October 3 (two letters), November 3 and 4, December 10, 2003, February 2, 2004, (two letters), March 1, 2004, (two letters), March 9, 2004, (two letters), March 16, 2004 (two letters), March 26, March 31, April 13, April 16, May 13 and June 17, 2004 which are available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] . Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1- 800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to [pdr@nrc.gov] . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of July 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Robert E. Martin, Sr., Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-15696 Filed 7-9-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-U ***************************************************************** 24 NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request To Decommission the FR Doc 04-15698 [Federal Register: July 12, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 132)] [Notices] [Page 41857-41859] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12jy04-63] S. C. Holdings (SCA Hartley & Hartley Landfill) Site, Kawkawlin Township, MI and Opportunity To Request a Hearing AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of a license amendment request and opportunity to request a hearing; notice of public meeting. DATES: Comment must be sent by August 11, 2004. A request for a hearing must be filed by September 10, 2004. Public meeting will be held on July 21, 2004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Nelson, Project Manager, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001; telephone (301) 415-6626; fax (301) 415-5398; or e-mail at dwn@nrc.gov [ dwn@nrc.gov] . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of a license amendment to Source Material License No. SUC- 1565, issued to S. C. Holdings (the licensee), to authorize decommissioning of its Hartley & Hartley Landfill Site in Bay County, Michigan, and to allow termination of this license. On November 26, 2003, S. C. Holdings submitted the Decommissioning Plan (DP) for the Hartley & Hartley Landfill Site for NRC review, approval, and incorporation, by amendment to license, SUC-1565. An NRC administrative review, documented in a letter dated March 1, 2004, found the DP acceptable to begin a technical review. If the NRC approves the DP, the approval will be documented in an amendment to NRC License No. SUC-1565. However, before approving the proposed amendment, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and NRC's regulations. These findings will be documented in a Safety Evaluation Report and an Environmental Assessment. The license will be terminated if this amendment is approved following completion of decommissioning activities and verification by the NRC in accordance with the license termination rule [[Page 41858]] (subpart E of 10 CFR part 20) and the Commission's regulations. II. Opportunity To Provide Comments In accordance with 10 CFR 20.1405, the NRC is providing notice to individuals in the vicinity of the site that the NRC is in receipt of a DP, and will accept comments concerning this decommissioning proposal and its associated environmental impacts. Comments with respect to this action should be provided in writing within 30 days of this notice and addressed to David Nelson, Project Manager, Mail Stop: T-7F27, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001, telephone (301) 415-6626, fax number (301) 415-5398 or e-mail dwn@nrc.gov [ dwn@nrc.gov] . Because of possible disruptions in the delivery of mail to United States Government offices, it is requested that comments mailed also be transmitted to the Project Manager by means of facsimile transmission or by e-mail. Comments received after 30 days will be considered if practicable to do so, but only those comments received on or before the due date can be assured consideration. III. Public Meeting A public meeting will be held in Bay County, Michigan, to solicit comments from individuals in the vicinity of the site and answer any questions about NRC's review of the DP for the S. C. Holdings SCA Hartley & Hartley Landfill Site. The public meeting will be held on July 21, 2004, from 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. at the Bay County Community Center, 800 John F. Kennedy Drive, Bay City, Michigan, 48708. IV. Opportunity To Request a Hearing The NRC hereby provides notice that this is a proceeding on an application for a license amendment. In accordance with the general requirements in subpart C of 10 CFR part 2, as amended on January 14, 2004 (69 FR 2182), any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who desires to participate as a party must file a written request for a hearing and a specification of the contentions which the person seeks to have litigated in the hearing. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.302 (a), a request for a hearing must be filed with the Commission either by: 1. First class mail addressed to: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications; 2. Courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Federal workdays; 3. E-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, hearingdocket@nrc.gov [hearingdocket@nrc.gov] ; or 4. By facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, at (301) 415-1101; verification number is (301) 415-1966. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.302 (b), all documents offered for filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all parties to the proceeding or their attorneys of record as required by law or by rule or order of the Commission, including: 1. The applicant, by delivery to Waste Management, Inc., 700 56th Avenue, Zeeland, MI 49464, Attention: Philip M. Mazor, and, 2. The NRC staff, by delivery to the Office of the General Counsel, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, or by mail addressed to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hearing requests should also be transmitted to the Office of the General Counsel, either by means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415-3725, or by e-mail to ogcmailcenter@nrc.gov [ ogcmailcenter@nrc.gov] . The formal requirements for documents are contained in 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), (d), and (e), and must be met. However, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.304 (f), a document filed by electronic mail or facsimile transmission need not comply with the formal requirements of 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), and (d), if an original and two (2) copies otherwise complying with all of the requirements of 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), and (d) are mailed within two (2) days thereafter to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (b), a request for a hearing must be filed by September 10, 2004. In addition to meeting other applicable requirements of 10 CFR part 2 of the NRC's regulations, the general requirements involving a request for a hearing filed by a person other than an applicant must state: 1. The name, address and telephone number of the requester; 2. The nature of the requester's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; 3. The nature and extent of the requester's property, financial or other interest in the proceeding; 4. The possible effect of any decision or order that may be issued in the proceeding on the requester's interest; and 5. The circumstances establishing that the request for a hearing is timely in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (b). In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (f)(1), a request for hearing or petitions for leave to intervene must set forth with particularity the contentions sought to be raised. For each contention, the request or petition must: 1. Provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted; 2. Provide a brief explanation of the basis for the contention; 3. Demonstrate that the issue raised in the contention is within the scope of the proceeding; 4. Demonstrate that the issue raised in the contention is material to the findings that the NRC must make to support the action that is involved in the proceeding; 5. Provide a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinions which support the requester's/petitioner's position on the issue and on which the requester/petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue; and 6. Provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. This information must include references to specific portions of the application that the requester/petitioner disputes and the supporting reasons for each dispute, or, if the requester/petitioner believes the application fails to contain information on a relevant matter as required by law, the identification of each failure and the supporting reasons for the requester's/petitioner's belief. In addition, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (f)(2), contentions must be based on documents or other information available at the time the petition is to be filed, such as the application or other supporting documents filed by the applicant, or otherwise available to the petitioner. Contentions may be amended or new contentions filed after the initial filing only with leave of the presiding officer. Requesters/petitioners should, when possible, consult with each other in preparing contentions and combine similar subject matter concerns into a [[Page 41859]] joint contention, for which one of the co-sponsoring requesters/ petitioners is designated the lead representative. Further, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (f)(3), any requester/petitioner that wishes to adopt a contention proposed by another requester/petitioner must do so in writing within ten days of the date the contention is filed, and designate a representative who shall have the authority to act for the requester/petitioner. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (g), a request for hearing and/or petition for leave to intervene may also address the selection of the hearing procedures, taking into account the provisions of 10 CFR 2.310. V. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for license amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] . From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this Notice are: The application for the license amendment and supporting documentation are available for inspection at NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] . ADAMS Accession Nos ML033430565, ML033430567, ML033430568 and ML033430570 contain the November 23, 2003, application for license amendment and the DP for the S. C. Holdings Hartley & Hartley Landfill Site, and ADAMS Accession No. ML040570438 contains the March 1, 2004, NRC acceptance review letter. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at (800) 397- 4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . These documents may also be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (First Floor), Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR is open from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of July 2004. Claudia M. Craig, Acting Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 04-15698 Filed 7-9-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 25 NRC: Notice of Consideration of Amendment Request to Decommission The FR Doc 04-15699 [Federal Register: July 12, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 132)] [Notices] [Page 41855-41857] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12jy04-62] Michigan Department of Natural Resources' Tobico Marsh State Game Area Site, Bay County, MI, and Opportunity To Request a Hearing AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of a license amendment request and opportunity to request a hearing; notice of Public Meeting. [[Page 41856]] DATES: Comment must be sent by August 11, 2004. A request for a hearing must be filed by September 10, 2004. Public meeting will be held on July 21, 2004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Nelson, Project Manager, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001; telephone (301) 415-6626; fax (301) 415-5398; or e-mail at [ dwn@nrc.gov] . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of a license amendment to Source Material License No. SUC- 1581, issued to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (the licensee), to authorize decommissioning of its Tobico Marsh State Game Area Site in Bay County, Michigan, and to allow termination of this license. On January 30, 2004, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources submitted Revision 1 of the Decommissioning Plan (DP) for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources' Tobico Marsh State Game Area Site, for NRC review, approval, and incorporation, by amendment to license, SUC- 1581. An NRC administrative review, documented in a letter to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, dated April 22, 2004, found the DP acceptable to begin a technical review. If the NRC approves the DP, the approval will be documented in an amendment to NRC License No. SUC-1581. However, before approving the proposed amendment, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and NRC's regulations. These findings will be documented in a Safety Evaluation Report and an Environmental Assessment. The license will be terminated if this amendment is approved following completion of decommissioning activities and verification by the NRC in accordance with the license termination rule (Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20) and the Commission's regulations. II. Opportunity To Provide Comments In accordance with 10 CFR 20.1405, the NRC is providing notice to individuals in the vicinity of the site that the NRC is in receipt of a DP, and will accept comments concerning this decommissioning proposal and its associated environmental impacts. Comments with respect to this amendment should be provided in writing within 30 days of this notice and addressed to David Nelson, Project Manager, Mail Stop: T-7F27, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001, telephone (301) 415-6626, fax number (301) 415-5398 or e-mail [ dwn@nrc.gov] . Because of possible disruptions in the delivery of mail to United States Government offices, it is requested that comments mailed also be transmitted to the Project Manager by means of facsimile transmission or by e-mail. Comments received after 30 days will be considered if practicable to do so, but only those comments received on or before the due date can be assured consideration. III. Public Meeting A public meeting will be held in Bay County, Michigan, to solicit comments from individuals in the vicinity of the site and answer any questions about NRC's review of the DP for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources' Tobico Marsh State Game Area Site. The public meeting will be held on July 21, 2004, from 7 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. at the Bay County Community Center, 800 John F. Kennedy Drive, Bay City, Michigan, 48708. IV. Opportunity To Request a Hearing The NRC hereby provides notice that this is a proceeding on an application for a license amendment. In accordance with the general requirements in Subpart C of 10 CFR Part 2, as amended on January 14, 2004 (69 FR 2182), any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who desires to participate as a party must file a written request for a hearing and a specification of the contentions which the person seeks to have litigated in the hearing. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.302 (a), a request for a hearing must be filed with the Commission either by: 1. First class mail addressed to: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications; 2. Courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff between, 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Federal workdays; 3. E-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, [HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV] ; or 4. By facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, at (301) 415-1101; verification number is (301) 415-1966. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.302 (b), all documents offered for filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all parties to the proceeding or their attorneys of record as required by law or by rule or order of the Commission, including: 1. The applicant, by delivery to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Office of Legal Services, PO Box 30028, Lansing, MI 48909, Attention: Kelli Sobel, and, 2. The NRC staff, by delivery to the Office of the General Counsel, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, or by mail addressed to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hearing requests should also be transmitted to the Office of the General Counsel, either by means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415-3725, or by e-mail to [ ogcmailcenter@nrc.gov] . The formal requirements for documents are contained in 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), (d), and (e), and must be met. However, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.304 (f), a document filed by electronic mail or facsimile transmission need not comply with the formal requirements of 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), and (d), if an original and two (2) copies otherwise complying with all of the requirements of 10 CFR 2.304 (b), (c), and (d) are mailed within two (2) days thereafter to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (b), a request for a hearing must be filed by September 10, 2004. In addition to meeting other applicable requirements of 10 CFR Part 2 of the NRC's regulations, the general requirements involving a request for a hearing filed by a person other than an applicant must state: 1. The name, address and telephone number of the requester; 2. The nature of the requester's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; 3. The nature and extent of the requester's property, financial or other interest in the proceeding; [[Page 41857]] 4. The possible effect of any decision or order that may be issued in the proceeding on the requester's interest; and 5. The circumstances establishing that the request for a hearing is timely in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (b). In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309 (f)(1), a request for hearing or petitions for leave to intervene must set forth with particularity the contentions sought to be raised. For each contention, the request or petition must: 1. Provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted; 2. Provide a brief explanation of the basis for the contention; 3. Demonstrate that the issue raised in the contention is within the scope of the proceeding; 4. Demonstrate that the issue raised in the contention is material to the findings that the NRC must make to support the action that is involved in the proceeding; 5. Provide a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinions which support the requester's/petitioner's position on the issue and on which the requester/petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue; and 6. Provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. This information must include references to specific portions of the application that the requester/petitioner disputes and the supporting reasons for each dispute, or, if the requester/petitioner believes the application fails to contain information on a relevant matter as required by law, the identification of each failure and the supporting reasons for the requester's/petitioner's belief. In addition, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f)(2), contentions must be based on documents or other information available at the time the petition is to be filed, such as the application or other supporting documents filed by the applicant, or otherwise available to the petitioner. Contentions may be amended or new contentions filed after the initial filing only with leave of the presiding officer. Requesters/petitioners should, when possible, consult with each other in preparing contentions and combine similar subject matter concerns into a joint contention, for which one of the co-sponsoring requesters/petitioners is designated the lead representative. Further, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f)(3), any requester/petitioner that wishes to adopt a contention proposed by another requester/petitioner must do so in writing within ten days of the date the contention is filed, and designate a representative who shall have the authority to act for the requester/petitioner. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(g), a request for hearing and/or petition for leave to intervene may also address the selection of the hearing procedures, taking into account the provisions of 10 CFR 2.310. V. Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for license amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] . From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this Notice are: ML040790356 which contains the January 30, 2004 application for license amendment and the DP for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources' Tobico Marsh State Game Area Site; ML041110650 which contains the April 22, 2004 NRC acceptance review letter. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at (800) 397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by email to [pdr@nrc.gov] . These documents may also be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (First Floor), Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR is open from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of July 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Claudia M. Craig, Acting Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 04-15699 Filed 7-9-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 26 NRC: Meeting on Planning and Procedures; Notice of Meeting FR Doc 04-15700 [Federal Register: July 12, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 132)] [Notices] [Page 41859] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12jy04-64] The ACNW will hold a Planning and Procedures meeting on July 20, 2004, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of ACNW, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday, July 20, 2004--8:30 a.m.-9:45 a.m. The Committee will discuss proposed ACNW activities and related matters. The purpose of this meeting is to gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Howard J. Larson (Telephone: 301/415-6805) between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (e.t.) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (e.t.). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in the agenda. Dated: July 2, 2004. Howard J. Larson, Acting Associate Director for Technical Support, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. 04-15700 Filed 7-9-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 27 Toronto Star: Lessons have been learned TheStar.com - Mon. Jul. 12, 2004. | Updated at 08:49 AM OPG committed to not repeating mistakes as it brings Pickering A Unit 1 online, says Jake Epp The Ontario government has endorsed a decision by the board of directors of Ontario Power Generation (OPG) to complete the return to service of our Unit 1 reactor at the Pickering A nuclear generating station. This is the shortest lead time source of major new electricity generation available to the province  515 megawatts of virtually smog-free power. We have taken a very thorough and careful approach on this project. There's no question that we learned many lessons from our experience in returning the Unit 4 reactor to service last year  a project that took much longer and cost more than expected. In May, 2003, the Ontario government commissioned a Pickering A review panel, which I chaired, to look into what went wrong. We reported on this issue and also made recommendations in the areas of corporate governance, project management, management effectiveness and company culture. Our intent was to help OPG ensure that the mistakes made on Unit 4 would not be repeated with a Unit 1 return to service project. Our panel delivered its report in November, 2003, just before I became chairman of OPG. The Ontario government then struck an OPG review committee under John Manley, whose mandate included a review of the potential return to service of Unit 1. I also served on this panel, along with former Scotiabank chair Peter Godsoe. Our report concluded that the project should go ahead, subject to meeting a number of milestones before starting major construction. The two reviews clearly highlighted the mistakes that OPG made in returning the Unit 4 reactor to service. They also made many recommendations, each of which OPG has addressed in preparing for the Unit 1 return to service. One of the major flaws in the Unit 4 project was that OPG moved into the major construction phase well before the preparatory phase was completed. This will not occur with Unit 1. As we prepare to begin major construction, all of the required preparatory work has been finished: All design engineering for the project is complete; All the planning and assessing for the first four months of the major construction phase is complete; More than 90 per cent of the materials for the first three months of the major construction phase are on site; The work schedule and budget for the project have been finalized; Contracts with all the prime contractors are in place. As a further measure, the Unit 1 restart is subject to rigorous external oversight. Schiff Hardin LLP is co-ordinating the oversight, working with J. Wilson &Associates and Meyer Construction Consulting. They have been involved in monitoring the progress of the project during the preparatory phase, reporting to the board of directors, and will maintain their oversight role through to the end of the major construction phase. Finally, OPG will keep the public informed of our progress and provide regular public updates on the Unit 1 return to service project as key milestones are reached. We will also provide a formal status report to the Ontario government in October, 2004. The return to service of Unit 1 will be complex and challenging. The project involves the completion of almost 20,000 tasks requiring 1.7 million person hours of work. It will include the testing, maintenance, rehabilitation or replacement of virtually every system, structure and component of Unit 1. In spite of the complexity of the project, this is a very worthwhile undertaking for Ontario. The OPG review committee confirmed that the going forward cost of power from Pickering A Unit 1 compares favourably with other large-scale sources of power available to the province. Our target date for completion of the construction phase is June 1, 2005. A commissioning phase would begin at that time and take place over the summer, with the unit expected to return to commercial service in September, 2005. OPG is ready to move forward on this important project. We have learned from past experience and built a strong foundation on which to complete the Unit 1 project. We will return Unit 1 to service in an expeditious and financially responsible manner, thereby contributing 515 megawatts of clean and economic electricity to Ontario's power resources. Jake Epp is chair of Ontario Power Generation and a former federal energy minister. Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Distribution, transmission or republication of any material from www.thestar.com [http://www.thestar.com] is ***************************************************************** 28 SouthofBoston.com: Nuclear plant becomes pawn The Enterprise 60 Main St. P.O. Box 1450 Brockton, MA 02303-1450 (508) 586-6200 CONTACT US [http://enterprise.southofboston.com/extras/contact.shtml] Unions generally have every right to picket and every right to go on strike. But a union goes too far when it tries to shut down a nuclear power plant as a negotiating ploy. The Utility Workers Union of America Local 369 has been negotiating a new contract with Entergy, the owner of the Pilgrim Nuclear Station in Plymouth, for about six months. It has not gone well and the union could go on strike as early as Tuesday, when the current contract expires. The union has asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to shut down the plant in the event of a strike. Such an order would give the union an unfair negotiating advantage and could jeopardize the safety of nearby residents. It is no secret that the coastal power plant is an inviting target for terrorism. That is one reason why its ability to operate should not be subject to negotiations. Plant officials say they could operate in the event of a strike by using nonunion plant managers and workers from other plants it operates. In any case, Entergy said, the plant would be taken offline if there were any safety issues. The union is being supported by a local citizens group, Pilgrim Watch, which also has asked the NRC to shut the plant in case of a strike. But Pilgrim Watch has a larger agenda; it previously asked the NRC to close the plant during almost the entire month of July because of the Democratic National Convention in Boston July 26-29. The NRC denied that request. The nuclear plant should not be used as a pawn in a contract negotiation. It also cannot become a pawn in international affairs. Pilgrim Watch was playing on the fears of residents by demanding the plant close from July 4 to the end of the convention. What sense does that make? Is the plant less vulnerable on July 3 or in August, or any other time? People have a right to be nervous when Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge goes on television and warns that al-Qaida is planning to attack the United States, but doesn't say where or when or how. Neighbors of a nuclear power plant must get edgy at those times. They don't need the added anxiety of having their plant "attacked" at other times, just because some workers are not satisfied with how their contract negotiations are progressing. CONTACT US [http://enterprise.southofboston.com/extras/contact.shtml] The Enterprise, 60 Main St., P.O. Box 1450, Brockton, MA 02303-1450 Telephone: (508) 586-6200 ***************************************************************** 29 SVBI: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Selects Autonomy to Power Licensing Support Network Web Site Silicon Valley Biz Ink: [http://www.svbizink.com Autonomy's Technology Expedites Evidence Sharing in Yucca Mountain Radioactive Waste Repository Case SAN FRANCISCO, July 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Autonomy Corporation plc (Nasdaq: AUTN; LSE: AU.), a leading provider of infrastructure software for the enterprise, today announced that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), an independent agency that regulates civilian use of nuclear materials, has recently upgraded its existing Autonomy configuration to power its Licensing Support Network (LSN) Web site, LSNNET.gov. The upgraded configuration to the most recent version of the software adds new services that allow significantly expanded capacity. The Web site, built by AT Government Solutions, is dedicated to sharing discovery materials relating to the Yucca Mountain radioactive waste repository proceeding. Autonomy's technology will perform accurate and efficient retrieval of more than a million documents for numerous participants involved in the hearings. Powered by Autonomy's Intelligent Data Operating Layer (IDOL) technology, LSNNET.gov provides a single place where the numerous parties and potential parties to the licensing hearing -- including the State of Nevada, several Nevada counties, the National Congress of American Indians and various environmental groups -- can share and search discovery documents in a uniform way. With Autonomy, concept queries bring back relevant information, as well as documents for which the user has not thought to search. This functionality makes Autonomy a precise and powerful tool that can sift through a massive amount of data quickly. "Because it's being used in a legal application, there was a major focus on using a software product that ensures reliable results," said Dan Graser, LSN administrator. "Autonomy's language analysis and relevance ranking gained our confidence that the system is reliable and that it meets expectations for precise information delivery." "With LSNNET.gov, the NRC has provided a valuable tool for document sharing in a complicated hearing," said John Cronin, vice president, Autonomy federal group. "Autonomy's technology is an integral part of expediting that process, given the number of documents and parties involved, and will positively impact the NRC's commitment to provide a level playing field for all involved in the Yucca Mountain radioactive waste repository case." Autonomy's unique IDOL integrates unstructured, semi-structured and structured information from multiple repositories through an understanding of their content. Autonomy grants enterprises the flexibility to use advanced information retrieval or legacy-based approaches. At the heart of Autonomy's software is its ability to process text, voice and video, and identify and rank the main concepts within them. It then automatically categorizes, links, summarizes, personalizes and delivers that information. Autonomy's technology also drives collaboration across the enterprise and enables organizations to effectively leverage expertise. Autonomy's infrastructure technology is used to automate operations within enterprise information portals, customer relationship management, knowledge management, business intelligence and e-business applications, among others. About Autonomy Autonomy Corporation plc is a global leader in infrastructure software for the enterprise. Autonomy's technology powers applications dependent upon unstructured information including call center, customer relationship management, knowledge management, enterprise portals, enterprise resource planning, online publishing and security applications. Autonomy's customer base includes more than 1,000 global companies including BAE Systems, Ford, Ericsson, Royal Sun Alliance, Sun Microsystems and public sector agencies including the U.S. Department of Defense, NASA and the U.S. Department of Energy. Strategic reseller and OEM partners include leading companies such as ATG, BEA, Business Objects, Citrix, Computer Associates, EDS, IBM Global Services, Novell, Novient, Veritas, Vignette, Supportsoft and Sybase. The company has offices worldwide. The Autonomy Group of companies includes: Aungate, a leading supplier of electronic communications management technology for regulatory compliance in the enterprise; Audentify, a leading supplier of next-generation contact center technology; and Virage, a leading provider of rich media communication and content management software. Caution Concerning Forward-Looking Statements With the exception of historical information, the matters set forth in this news release are forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. A number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. These factors include, among others, technology risks, including dependence on core technology; fluctuations in quarterly results; dependence on new product development; rapid technological and market change; reliance on sales by others; management of growth; dependence on key personnel; rapid expansion; growth of the Internet; financial risk management; and future growth subject to risks. These factors and other factors, which could cause actual results to differ materially are also discussed in the company's filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, including Autonomy's Annual Report on Form 20-F and Registration Statements on Form F-1. CONTACT: Kris Marubio, +1-415-243-9955, or krism@us.autonomy.com [ krism@us.autonomy.com] , or Dominic Johnson, +44 (0) 1223 448 000, or dominicj@autonomy.com [ dominicj@autonomy.com] , both of Autonomy Corporation plc; or Kelly Shall of Schwartz Communications, Inc., +1-415-512-0770, or autonomy@schwartz-pr.com; or Edward Bridges of Financial Dynamics, +44 207 831 3113, or edward.bridges@fd.com [ edward.bridges@fd.com] , both for Autonomy. © 2004 Silicon Valley Business Ink. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 30 [du-list] and so does Dan Fahey eat DU for breakfast Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:54:27 -0700 http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/pdf/duemdec.pdf ------------------------ 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/ ***************************************************************** 31 [du-list] Britian sues US giant over 'uranium poisun Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:54:24 -0700 http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1258632,00.html Briton sues US giant over 'uranium poison' Landmark court case could establish critical link for Gulf war veterans Antony Barnett, public affairs editor Sunday July 11, 2004 The Observer A former British defence worker has won legal aid to sue the giant US military corporation Honeywell over claims that he was poisoned by depleted uranium while working at its Somerset factory. The case is likely to have far-reaching implications for Gulf war veterans, aerospace workers and civilians living in former war zones. Richard 'Nibby' David, 49, suffers from serious respiratory problems, kidney defects and finds it extremely painful to move his limbs. Medical tests have revealed mutations to his DNA and damage to his chromosomes which he alleges has been caused by depleted uranium poisoning (DU), a radioactive waste product from the nuclear power industry that is used for shells because it can smash through tank armour. Millions of tonnes of DU shells have been fired by US and British forces in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. It has also been used as ballast in aircraft and counterweights on helicopter blades. While it is believed to be relatively harmless lying in the soil, a growing body of scientists believe that when its fine dust is inhaled it can cause a range of cancers, kidney damage and birth defects. It has been alleged that DU used in the 1991 Gulf war was responsible for abnormally high levels of childhood leukaemia and birth defects in Iraq. France, Spain and Italy claim soldiers who served in Bosnia and Kosovo, where Nato used DU shells, have contracted cancers. It is also believed to be a possible cause of Gulf war syndrome, which has left thousand of veterans with mysterious health problems. Advertiser links Minibus Insurance for Charities Total Insurance Group are minibus insurance specialists for... minibus-insurance.co.uk The Queen's Award for Voluntary Service To celebrate her Golden Jubilee, the Queen announced an... queensawardvoluntary.gov.uk The UK's Largest Conservation Charity The National Trust, renovating and restoring one of the... nationaltrust.org.uk While the defence and nuclear industries have played down the danger of DU, David's case is the first time that the arguments will be heard before a court. Should he win, the verdict will send shockwaves through the military establishment as it could pave the way for huge compensation claims against the armed forces. He also believes that dozens of his fellow workers at the Honeywell site in Yeovil have also suffered. A number of his closest colleagues have died or contracted liver cancers. Although the Legal Aid Board does not back personal injury claims, it decided that David's case was in the 'wider public interest'. The decision was a major victory after an eight-year struggle for justice after ill health forced him to give up his job in 1995 as a component fitter for Normalair Garrett, the Yeovil firm now owned by Honeywell, which makes parts for most of the world's fighter planes and bombers. After being struck down by a disorder that left him paralysed with pain and unable to breathe properly, David began looking for clues as to the cause. The breakthrough came in September 1995 while watching a news bulletin on Gulf war syndrome on which he saw how a UK army major struggled to get out of her car. 'I was in unbearable pain and unable to move. I thought I was going to die,' he said. 'But when I saw this woman major trying to move and saw the intense pain in her eyes I immediately knew she was suffering like me.' David had never been in the armed forces or the Middle East, but was convinced there was a link between his illness and those suffered by former Gulf troops. But it was not until February 1999 that the possibility that DU was the cause came when he heard a talk by US scientist Dr Asaf Durakovic, a former military doctor and nuclear medicine expert. Durakovic suggested that the debilitating, in some cases fatal, illnesses suffered by Gulf veterans were not necessarily caused by a cocktail of vaccines, as some claimed, but by DU poisoning. Durakovic decided to test the urine samples of 15 UK Gulf veterans and agreed to include David's. Six months later, the results showed that he had one of the highest levels of uranium contamination out of all the samples. 'It was unbelievable,' said David. 'I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. On one hand it gave an answer to why I was suffering, but also the knowledge I would never recover. Above all I was confused. How could I have been contaminated in England?' The answer was not long in coming. DU is a man-made material and experts told him that the most likely route of his contamination was his workplace. David decided to sue Honeywell Aerospace, but without being able to pay for lawyers it was impossible to collect evidence. But now he has been awarded legal aid he hopes to be represented by barrister Michael Mansfield QC and intends to call a stream of world experts to back his claim. One is Malcolm Hooper, emeritus professor of medicinal chemistry and chief scientific adviser to the Gulf Veterans' Association. 'This case will be highly significant not only for soldiers but for many others. We know of cases where firemen have had to deal with fires caused by burning DU at factories and prison officers have also been contaminated by inhaling fumes. I am in no doubt that inhaling DU has the potential to cause a great deal of damage.' Honeywell has declined to comment on details of the case, but will claim it never used DU at Yeovil. However, it is known that another aerospace group, Westland, which shared the Somerset site, has admitted using DU from 1966 until 1982 as counterweights for helicopter blades. David also claims Honeywell used special heavy metal alloys for making components which he believes may have contained DU. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ------------------------ 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/ ***************************************************************** 32 PA: SB 922 Day Care Emergency planning Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:55:34 -0700 Statehouse/Politics News Day-care evacuation bill loses supporters Legislation as passed limited to for-profits Sunday, July 11, 2004 BY GARRY LENTON Of The Patriot-News A bill that would require day-care centers to have emergency plans for evacuating children in an emergency such as a nuclear accident or terrorist attack is on Gov. Ed Rendell's desk awaiting his signature. But the bill, developed by state Sen. Christine M. Tartaglione, D-Philadelphia, is proving a disappointment to some of its supporters, who are asking the governor to veto it. Advertisement At issue is a compromise over the definition of child care that opponents say would leave nearly two thirds of the state's licensed child-care centers uncovered by the law. The compromise, demanded by Senate Republicans, limited the bill's reach to for-profit day cares only. Nonprofit centers, many operated by churches, and small family home care providers would not be required under the law to have evacuation plans. Senate Republicans said they would not support the language if it required small day cares, usually run out of a private home for two or three children, to develop the plans, said Don Kockler, chief of staff for Tartaglione. The change was a disappointment to Larry Christian, the New Cumberland father of two young girls, who raised the issue in 2003 after discovering that the day-care center he used near Three Mile Island had no evacuation plan. The Federal Emergency Management Agency requires state and local officials to develop emergency plans that protect people in the custody of institutions such as schools, nursing homes and prisons. But it leaves it up to the states to decide how to accomplish the task. In 2003, Pennsylvania's emergency plan did not mandate evacuation plans for child-care centers. Christian petitioned the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to require the planning. The commission has yet to act on that request. His concerns helped prompt Rendell and the state Department of Public Welfare to adopt rules requiring all child-care facilities to develop emergency plans. Tartaglione's bill, as originally proposed, would have given those rules the power of law. Now, Christian and others worry that the bill will weaken the Department of Public Welfare's regulations. "I had great hopes for" the bill, he said. "However, upon review, I have too many concerns with the way it defines which child-care facilities it protects. ... I would recommend Gov. Rendell veto it in its current form." Eric Epstein, president of a nuclear watchdog group and a Democratic candidate for state Senate, also withdrew his support for the bill Friday. Epstein worked with Christian to file the petition with the NRC and to lobby lawmakers. "I think the bill is a good start," he said. "But I'm uncomfortable with the creation of two classes of children. ... I don't think [Rendell] should sign it." The Pennsylvania Child Care Association, which represents the state's care providers, also called on Rendell to veto the measure. "The issue is, should a facility that cares for kids have an emergency preparedness program," said Terry Casey, executive director of the care association. "If the answer is yes, then why do we split into for-profit and nonprofit?" Tartaglione's staff defended the bill, saying it would not circumvent existing Department of Public Welfare regulations requiring all child-care facilities to have evacuation plans. To the contrary, Kockler said, the bill would add to the department's authority by making the requirement law at least for the larger, for-profit centers. "We don't think it precludes the department in any way from putting plans together to require nonprofits to have plans," he said. Rendell has until tomorrow to act on the bill. If he fails to sign it, it will pass automatically into law. A Rendell spokesman would not say if the governor planned to sign the bill. Christina Novak, spokeswoman for the Department of Public Welfare, said the Welfare secretary offered recommendations to the governor, but those recommendations were confidential. But Estelle B. Richman, Public Welfare secretary, expressed concerns about the bill in a June 29 letter to Tartaglione. In it, Richman noted that the bill would exclude 76 percent of the child-care facilities in the state "leaving a large majority of children in child-care facilities without the benefit of an emergency preparedness plan." Tartaglione responded that the exclusion was necessary to win bipartisan support for the bill. The bill would not take away the Public Welfare Department's authority to require nonprofit centers to create plans, she said. GARRY LENTON: 255-8264 or glenton@patriot-news.com ***************************************************************** 33 [du-list] DU Munitions Action Plan Update July 11, 2004 Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:54:29 -0700 "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"> Depleted Uranium Munitions Action Plan Updated July 11, 2004 by Glen Milner DOT-E 9649 has not been renewed. Letters may still be sent to the Department of Transportation. The Depleted Uranium Munitions Action Plan is an attempt by activists across the United States to prevent the renewal of a special U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) exemption, DOT-E 9649, which allows the shipment of depleted uranium munitions without a DOT “Radioactive” placard displayed on the shipment. The expiration date for the exemption was June 30, 2004. The complete action plan is posted at http://www.traprockpeace.org/du_mun_action_plan.pdf or contact info@gzcenter.org for a copy. The following is updated information based on discussions with Mr. Delmer Billings of the Department of Transportation on May 3, 2004 and July 9, 2004 and a letter from the U.S. Army to Congressman Jay Inslee dated July 6, 2004: DOT-E 9649 has not been renewed. Mr. Delmer Billings of the DOT stated on July 9, 2004 that his agency is waiting for further information regarding the shipment of depleted uranium munitions. The U.S. Army Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC, formerly MTMC), which manages the shipment of depleted uranium munitions, has been granted a time extension in order to provide information requested by the DOT. Congressman Jay Inslee (north Seattle area) received a letter dated July 6, 2004 from Major General Ann Dunwoody, of the U.S. Army, SDDC, that stated, "...the Department of Defense shipped depleted uranium munitions in the United States and overseas in both 2003 and 2004. DOD used DOT-E 9649 for those shipments.” This statement directly contradicted a statement by Major Mark Wyrosdick, of the U.S. Army, SDDC, in the March 2, 2004 renewal application for DOT-E 9649, which said, “There were no shipments made by DOD using this exemption…” Congressman Inslee also received a statement from the DOT dated July 6, 2004 which said the DOT is still reviewing the exemption. Mr. Delmer Billings, Director of the Office of Hazardous Materials of the Department of Transportation (DOT), stated on May 3, 2004 he thought he had received approximately 50 to 75 statements against the exemption renewal through e-mail and the postal service. It is likely activists have sent well over 100 letters or e-mail messages to Delmer Billings against the renewal of this exemption. Mr. Billings stated on July 9, 2004 that the DOT would soon be placing all letters, messages and documents regarding the renewal of DOT-E 9649 on the DOT docket management system which will be available for viewing online at http://dms.dot.gov. Mr. Delmer said the docket number should be available around July 16, 2004. Statements by activists may still be made to the Department of Transportation regarding DOT-E 9649. Mr. Billings stated on July 9, 2004 that he did not know why U.S. Army officers of the same military command, managing depleted uranium shipments, would give contradicting statements about whether the exemption is used. Mr. Billing also stated he could not deny the application for renewal until the Department of Defense is given the chance to respond to opposing allegations. A related statement from 1998: A letter from the Chief of the Transportation Operations Team, E. M. Jones, of the Department of the Army dated December 3, 1998, to the Commander of the Military Traffic Management Command stated that DOT-E 9649, at that time, needed to be renewed. The letter stated the current exemption expired on December 31, 1998. The letter stated, "The requirements for military shipments of munitions containing components made of depleted uranium has not changed." The Chief of the Transportation Operations Team further stated, "Historically, we have shipped millions of tons of this type of ammunition without incident under this exemption since this exemption was first approved." (emphasis added--note that just 2 million tons over the 12 year period since DOT-E 9649 had been approved would average 166,000 tons of depleted uranium munitions shipped under this exemption each year.) I apologize for the delay in reporting on this issue. Congressman Inslee had been trying since May 20, 2004 to obtain the statement from the U.S. Army that the exemption is used by the military. I will post the docket number for DOT-E 9649 when it is available. I can be contacted at gkaajm@juno.com or at (206) 365-7865. Glen Milner The following is from the original Depleted Uranium Munitions Action Plan: What to do… Contact the Department of Transportation Exemptions division and ask that the DOT immediately terminate and not renew DOT-E 9649. Depleted uranium munitions should have a “Radioactive” placard and an “Explosives” placard on shipments. Depleted uranium is an extremely toxic material and much more dangerous when shipped with an explosive propellant as in the case of DU munitions. In case of a fire, first responders (local police and fire fighters) would have no idea the shipment contained radioactive material. The public has a right to know about hazardous shipments through their communities. Send correspondence regarding DOT-E 9649 to: Mr. Delmer Billings DHM-31 Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Exemptions and Approvals Department of Transportation 400 7th St. SW Washington, D.C. 20590 Fax: (202) 366-3308 E-mail: delmer.billings@rspa.dot.gov Please also (if you want) send a copy to info@gzcenter.org Please share this information with others and local officials. Organizations sponsoring the Depleted Uranium Munitions Action Plan: Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action, Poulsbo, Washington Website: www.gzcenter.org E-mail: info@gzcenter.org Traprock Peace Center, Deerfield, Massachusetts Website: www.traprockpeace.org E-mail: traprock@crocker.com Military Toxics Project, Lewiston, Maine Website: www.miltoxproj.org Email: mtp@miltoxproj.org Nukewatch, Luck, Wisconsin Website: www.nukewatch.com E-mail: nukewatch@lakeland.ws 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 c78a7.jpg c791c.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: c78a7.jpg: 00000001,67a19ace,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: c791c.jpg: 00000001,67a19acf,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 34 [du-list Landmark case on depleted uranium poisoning Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:56:20 -0700 Hello, I don't know if the Worked to Death vs Pratt & Whitney case is over, but if not, this may be of interest. Since the North Haven plant is on the Quinnipiac River, which flows through my community, New Haven, I would really appreciate an update on the progress of your case. Mitzi Bowman, DWC upthesun@cshore.com (203)389-2067 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sidney Goodman" Sent: Sunday, July 11, 2004 7:55 PM Subject: Landmark case on depleted uranium poisoning > > > > > > Briton sues US giant over 'uranium poison' > > > > Landmark court case could establish critical link for Gulf war veterans > > > > Antony Barnett, public affairs editor > > Sunday July 11, 2004 > > The Observer > > > > A former British defence worker has won legal aid to sue the giant US > > military corporation Honeywell over claims that he was poisoned by > > depleted uranium while working at its Somerset factory. > > > > The case is likely to have far-reaching implications for Gulf war > > veterans, aerospace workers and civilians living in former war zones. > > > > Richard 'Nibby' David, 49, suffers from serious respiratory problems, > > kidney defects and finds it extremely painful to move his limbs. > > Medical tests have revealed mutations to his DNA and damage to his > > chromosomes which he alleges has been caused by depleted uranium > > poisoning (DU), a radioactive waste product from the nuclear power > > industry that is used for shells because it can smash through tank > > armour. > > > > Millions of tonnes of DU shells have been fired by US and British > > forces in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. It has also been used as > > ballast in aircraft and counterweights on helicopter blades. While it > > is believed to be relatively harmless lying in the soil, a growing body > > of scientists believe that when its fine dust is inhaled it can cause a > > range of cancers, kidney damage and birth defects. > > > > It has been alleged that DU used in the 1991 Gulf war was responsible > > for abnormally high levels of childhood leukaemia and birth defects in > > Iraq. France, Spain and Italy claim soldiers who served in Bosnia and > > Kosovo, where Nato used DU shells, have contracted cancers. It is also > > believed to be a possible cause of Gulf war syndrome, which has left > > thousand of veterans with mysterious health problems. > > While the defence and nuclear industries have played down the danger of > > DU, David's case is the first time that the arguments will be heard > > before a court. Should he win, the verdict will send shockwaves through > > the military establishment as it could pave the way for huge > > compensation claims against the armed forces. He also believes that > > dozens of his fellow workers at the Honeywell site in Yeovil have also > > suffered. A number of his closest colleagues have died or contracted > > liver cancers. > > > > Although the Legal Aid Board does not back personal injury claims, it > > decided that David's case was in the 'wider public interest'. The > > decision was a major victory after an eight-year struggle for justice > > after ill health forced him to give up his job in 1995 as a component > > fitter for Normalair Garrett, the Yeovil firm now owned by Honeywell, > > which makes parts for most of the world's fighter planes and bombers. > > > > After being struck down by a disorder that left him paralysed with pain > > and unable to breathe properly, David began looking for clues as to the > > cause. The breakthrough came in September 1995 while watching a news > > bulletin on Gulf war syndrome on which he saw how a UK army major > > struggled to get out of her car. > > > > 'I was in unbearable pain and unable to move. I thought I was going to > > die,' he said. 'But when I saw this woman major trying to move and saw > > the intense pain in her eyes I immediately knew she was suffering like > > me.' > > > > David had never been in the armed forces or the Middle East, but was > > convinced there was a link between his illness and those suffered by > > former Gulf troops. But it was not until February 1999 that the > > possibility that DU was the cause came when he heard a talk by US > > scientist Dr Asaf Durakovic, a former military doctor and nuclear > > medicine expert. Durakovic suggested that the debilitating, in some > > cases fatal, illnesses suffered by Gulf veterans were not necessarily > > caused by a cocktail of vaccines, as some claimed, but by DU poisoning. > > > > Durakovic decided to test the urine samples of 15 UK Gulf veterans and > > agreed to include David's. Six months later, the results showed that he > > had one of the highest levels of uranium contamination out of all the > > samples. > > > > 'It was unbelievable,' said David. 'I didn't know whether to laugh or > > cry. On one hand it gave an answer to why I was suffering, but also the > > knowledge I would never recover. Above all I was confused. How could I > > have been contaminated in England?' > > > > The answer was not long in coming. DU is a man-made material and > > experts told him that the most likely route of his contamination was > > his workplace. David decided to sue Honeywell Aerospace, but without > > being able to pay for lawyers it was impossible to collect evidence. > > But now he has been awarded legal aid he hopes to be represented by > > barrister Michael Mansfield QC and intends to call a stream of world > > experts to back his claim. > > > > One is Malcolm Hooper, emeritus professor of medicinal chemistry and > > chief scientific adviser to the Gulf Veterans' Association. > > > > 'This case will be highly significant not only for soldiers but for > > many others. We know of cases where firemen have had to deal with fires > > caused by burning DU at factories and prison officers have also been > > contaminated by inhaling fumes. I am in no doubt that inhaling DU has > > the potential to cause a great deal of damage.' > > > > Honeywell has declined to comment on details of the case, but will > > claim it never used DU at Yeovil. However, it is known that another > > aerospace group, Westland, which shared the Somerset site, has admitted > > using DU from 1966 until 1982 as counterweights for helicopter blades. > > David also claims Honeywell used special heavy metal alloys for making > > components which he believes may have contained DU. > > > > > > Special report > > The nuclear industry > > > > Graphics > > The Mox ships' journey around the world (pdf) > > Nuclear map of Britain > > US nuclear map > > > > Useful links > > British Energy > > Department of Trade and Industry > > British Nuclear Fuels Ltd > > Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament > > Greenpeace > > HSE nuclear glossary > > UK atomic energy authority > > National Radiological Protection Board > > Friends of the Earth > > World Nuclear Association > > World Nuclear Transport Institute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 > > > > ------------------------ 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/ ***************************************************************** 35 Global Research: Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War www.globalresearch.ca by Leuren Moret World Affairs – The Journal of International Issues, July 2004 www.globalresearch.ca 8 July 2004 The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR407A.html Heat not a furnace for your foe so hot that it do singe yourself. William Shakespeare (1564-1616) The use of depleted uranium weaponry by the United States, defying all international treaties, will slowly annihilate all species on earth including the human species, and yet this country continues to do so with full knowledge of its destructive potential. Since 1991, the United States has staged four wars using depleted uranium weaponry, illegal under all international treaties, conventions and agreements, as well as under the US military law. The continued use of this illegal radioactive weaponry, which has already contaminated vast regions with low level radiation and will contaminate other parts of the world over time, is indeed a world affair and an international issue. The deeper purpose is revealed by comparing regions now contaminated with depleted uranium — from Egypt, the Middle East, Central Asia and the northern half of India — to the US geostrategic imperatives described in Zbigniew Brzezinski’s 1997 book The Grand Chessboard. Fig. 1: Brzezinski’s map of the Eurasian Chessboard SOUTH REGION: “This huge region, torn by volatile hatreds and surrounded by competing powerful neighbors, is likely to be a major battlefield, both for wars among nation-states and, more likely, for protracted ethnic and religious violence. Whether India acts as a restraint or whether it takes advantage of some opportunity to impose its will on Pakistan will greatly affect the regional scope of the likely conflicts. The internal strains within Turkey and Iran are likely not only to get worse but to greatly reduce the stabilizing role these states are capable of playing within this volcanic region. Such developments will in turn make it more difficult to assimilate the new Central Asian states into the international community, while also adversely affecting the American-dominated security of the Persian Gulf region. In any case, both America and the international community may be faced here with a challenge that will dwarf the recent crisis in the former Yugoslavia.” Brzezinski The fact is that the United States and its military partners have staged four nuclear wars, "slipping nukes under the wire" by using dirty bombs and dirty weapons in countries the US needs to control. Depleted uranium aerosols will permanently contaminate vast regions and slowly destroy the genetic future of populations living in those regions, where there are resources which the US must control, in order to establish and maintain American primacy. Described as the Trojan Horse of nuclear war, depleted uranium is the weapon that keeps killing. The half-life of Uranium-238 is 4.5 billion years, the age of the earth. And, as Uranium-238 decays into daughter radioactive products, in four steps before turning into lead, it continues to release more radiation at each step. There is no way to turn it off, and there is no way to clean it up. It meets the US Government’s own definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction. After forming microscopic and submicroscopic insoluble Uranium oxide particles on the battlefield, they remain suspended in air and travel around the earth as a radioactive component of atmospheric dust, contaminating the environment, indiscriminately killing, maiming and causing disease in all living things where rain, snow and moisture remove it from the atmosphere. Global radioactive contamination from atmospheric testing was the equivalent of 40,000 Hiroshima bombs, and still contaminates the atmosphere and lower orbital space today. The amount of low level radioactive pollution from depleted uranium released since 1991, is many times more (deposited internally in the body), than was released from atmospheric testing fallout. A 2003 independent report for the European Parliament by the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR), reports that based on Chernobyl studies, low level radiation risk is 100 to 1000 times greater than the International Committee for Radiation Protection models estimate which are based on the flawed Atomic and Hydrogen Bomb Studies conducted by the US Government. Referring to the extreme killing effects of radiation on biological systems, Dr. Rosalie Bertell, one of the 46 international radiation expert authors of the ECRR report, describes it as: "The concept of species annihilation means a relatively swift, deliberately induced end to history, culture, science, biological reproduction and memory. It is the ultimate human rejection of the gift of life, an act which requires a new word to describe it: omnicide." 1943 MANHATTAN PROJECT BLUEPRINT FOR DEPLETED URANIUM In a declassified memo to General Leslie R. Groves, dated October 30, 1943, three of the top physicists in the Manhattan Project, Dr James B Conant, A H Compton, and H C Urey, made their recommendation, as members of the Subcommittee of the S-1 Executive Committee, on the ‘Use of Radioactive Materials as a Military Weapon’: "As a gas warfare instrument the material would be ground into particles of microscopic size to form dust and smoke and distributed by a ground-fired projectile, land vehicles, or aerial bombs. In this form it would be inhaled by personnel. The amount necessary to cause death to a person inhaling the material is extremely small … There are no known methods of treatment for such a casualty … it will permeate a standard gas mask filter in quantities large enough to be extremely damaging." As a Terrain Contaminant: "To be used in this manner, the radioactive materials would be spread on the ground either from the air or from the ground if in enemy controlled territory. In order to deny terrain to either side except at the expense of exposing personnel to harmful radiations … Areas so contaminated by radioactive material would be dangerous until the slow natural decay of the material took place … for average terrain no decontaminating methods are known. No effective protective clothing for personnel seems possible of development. … Reservoirs or wells would be contaminated or food poisoned with an effect similar to that resulting from inhalation of dust or smoke." Internal Exposure: "… Particles smaller than 1µ [micron] are more likely to be deposited in the alveoli where they will either remain indefinitely or be absorbed into the lymphatics or blood. … could get into the gastro-intestinal tract from polluted water, or food, or air. … may be absorbed from the lungs or G-I tract into the blood and so distributed throughout the body." Both the fission products and depleted uranium waste from the Atomic Bomb Project were to be utilised under this plan. The pyrophoric nature of depleted uranium, which causes it to begin to burn at very low temperatures from friction in the gun barrel, made it an ideal radioactive gas weapon then and now. Also it was more available because the amount of depleted uranium produced was much greater than the amount of fission products produced in 1943. Britain had thoughts of using poisoned gas on Iraq long before 1991: "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes. The moral effect should be good... and it would spread a lively terror..." (Winston Churchill commenting on the British use of poison gas against the Iraqis after the First World War). GUIDED WEAPONS SYSTEMS Depleted uranium weapons were first given by the US to Israel for use under US supervision in the 1973 Sinai war against the Arabs. Since then the US has tested, manufactured, and sold depleted uranium weapons systems to 29 countries. An international taboo prevented their use until 1991, when the US broke the taboo and used them for the first time, on the battlefields of Iraq and Kuwait. The US military admitted using depleted uranium projectiles in tanks and planes, but warheads in missiles and bombs are classified or referred to as a ‘dense’ or ‘mystery metal’. Dai Williams, a researcher at the 2003 World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference, reported finding 11 US patents for guided weapons systems with the term ‘depleted uranium’ or ‘dense metal’, which from the density can only be depleted uranium or tungsten, in order to fit the dimensions of the warhead. Figure 2 - Hard target guided weapons in 2002: smart bombs & cruise missiles with "dense metal" warheads (updated September 2002) Warhead weight [Hard target guided weapons in 2001: smart bombs & cruise missiles with "dense metal" warheads] Warhead weights include explosives (~20%) and casing. Dense metal ballast or liners (suspected to be DU) estimated to be 50-75% of warhead weight - necessary to double the density of previous versions. AUP = Advanced penetrators. S/CH = Shaped Charge. BR = BROACH Multiple Warhead System (S/CH+AUP). P = older 'heavy metal' penetrators. © Dai Williams 2002 source: Depleted Uranium weapons in 2001-2002: Occupational, public and environmental health issues - Mystery Metal Nightmare in Afghanistan? Collected studies and public domain sources compiled by Dai Williams, first edition 31 January 2002 Extensive carpet bombing, grid bombing, and the frequent use of missiles and depleted uranium bullets on buildings in densely populated areas has occurred in Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan. The discovery that bomb craters in Yugoslavia in 1999 were radioactive, and that an unexploded missile in 1999 contained a depleted uranium warhead, implies that the total amount of depleted uranium used since 1991 has been greatly underestimated. Of even greater concern, is that 100 per cent of the depleted uranium in bombs and missiles is aerosolized upon impact and immediately released into the atmosphere. This amount can be as much as 1.5 tons in the large bombs. In bullets and cannon shells, the amount aerosolized is 40-70 per cent, leaving pieces and unexploded shells in the environment, to provide new sources of radioactive dust and contamination of the groundwater from dissolved depleted uranium metal long after the battles are over, as reported in a 2003 report by the UN Environmental Program on Yugoslavia. Considering that the US has admitted using 34 tons of depleted uranium from bullets and cannon shells in Yugoslavia, and the fact that 35,000 NATO bombing missions occurred there in 1999, potentially the amount of depleted uranium contaminating Yugoslavia and transboundary drift into surrounding countries is staggering. Because of mysterious illnesses and post-war birth defects reported among Gulf War veterans and civilians in southern Iraq, and radiation related illnesses in UN Peacekeepers serving in Yugoslavia, growing concerns about radiation effects and environmental damage has stirred up international outrage about the use of radioactive weapons by the US after 1991. At the 2003 meeting of parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, discussing the U.S. desire to maintain its nuclear weapons stockpile, the Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi AKIBA stated, "It is incumbent upon the rest of the world ... to stand up now and tell all of our military leaders that we refuse to be threatened or protected by nuclear weapons. We refuse to live in a world of continually recycled fear and hatred". ILLEGAL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW Four reasons why using depleted uranium weapons violates the UN Convention on Human Rights: LEGALITY TEST FOR WEAPONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW TEMPORAL TEST – Weapons must not continue to act after the battle is over. ENVIRONMENTAL TEST – Weapons must not be unduly harmful to the environment. TERRITORIAL TEST – Weapons must not act off of the battlefield. HUMANENESS TEST – Weapons must not kill or wound inhumanly. International Human Rights and humanitarian lawyer, Karen Parker, determined that depleted uranium weaponry fails the four tests for legal weapons under international law, and that it is also illegal under the definition of a ‘poison’ weapon. Through Karen Parker’s continued efforts, a sub-commission of the UN Human Rights Commission determined in 1996 that depleted uranium is a weapon of mass destruction that should not be used: RESOLUTION 1996/16 ON STOPPING THE USE OF DEPLETED URANIUM - DU The military use of DU violates current international humanitarian law, including the principle that there is no unlimited right to choose the means and methods of warfare (Art. 22 Hague Convention VI (HCIV); Art. 35 of the Additional Protocol to the Geneva (GP1); the ban on causing unnecessary suffering and superfluous injury (Art. 23 §le HCIV; Art. 35 §2 GP1), indiscriminate warfare (Art. 51 §4c and 5b GP1) as well as the use of poison or poisoned weapons. The deployment and use of DU violate the principles of international environmental and human rights protection. They contradict the right to life established by the Resolution 1996/16 of the UN Subcommittee on Human Rights. FOUR NUCLEAR WARS "Military Men Are Just Dumb, Stupid, Animals To Be Used As Pawns In Foreign Policy" — Henry Kissinger Although restricted to battlefields in Iraq and Kuwait, the 1991 Gulf War was one of the most toxic and environmentally devastating wars in world history. Oil well fires, the bombing of oil tankers and oil wells which released millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Arabia and desert, and the devastation from tanks and heavy equipment destroyed the desert ecosystem. The long term and far reaching effects, and dispersal of at least 340 tons of depleted uranium weapons, had a global environmental effect. Smoke from the oil fires was later found in deposits in South America, the Himalayas and Hawaii. Large annual dust storms originating in North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia will quickly spread the radioactive contamination around the world, and weathering of old depleted uranium munitions on battlefields and other areas will provide new sources of radioactive contamination in future years. Downwind from the radioactive devastation in Iraq, Israel is also suffering from large increases in breast cancer, leukemia and childhood diabetes. RADIATION RESPECTS NO BORDERS, NO SOCIOECONOMIC CLASS, AND NO RELIGION The expendability of the sanctity of life to achieve US political ends was described by US soldiers on the ground, and from the air, along the Highway of Death in Iraq in 1991: "Iraqi soldiers [whether they] be young boys or old men. They were a sad sight, with absolutely no fight left in them. Their leaders had cut their Achilles’ tendons so they couldn’t run away and then left them. What weapons they had were in bad repair and little ammunition was on hand. They were hungry, cold, and scared. The hate I had for any Iraqi dissipated. These people had no business being on a battlefield." (S Hersh, New Yorker , May 22, 2000) American pilots bombing and strafing, with depleted uranium weapons, helpless retreating Iraqi soldiers who had already surrendered, exclaimed: "We toasted him…. we hit the jackpot….a turkey shoot….shooting fish in a barrel….basically just sitting ducks… There’s just nothing like it. It’s the biggest Fourth of July show you’ve ever seen, and to see those tanks just ‘boom’, and more stuff just keeps spewing out of them… they just become white hot. It’s wonderful." (L A Times and Washington Post, both February 27, 1991) Nearly 700,000 American Gulf War Veterans returned to the US from a war that lasted just a few weeks. Today more than 240,000 of those soldiers are on permanent medical disability, and over 11,000 are dead. In a US Government study on post-Gulf War babies born to 251 veterans, 67 per cent of the babies were reported to have serious illnesses or serious birth defects. They were born without eyes, ears, had missing organs, fused fingers, thyroid or other malfunctions. Depleted uranium in the semen of the soldiers internally contaminated their wives. Severe birth defects have been reported in babies born to contaminated civilians in Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan and the incidence and severity of defects is increasing over time. Women in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq are afraid now to have babies, and when they do give birth, instead of asking if it is a girl or a boy, they ask ‘is it normal?’. KNOWN ILLNESSES INFLICTED BY INTERNALIZATION OF DEPLETED URANIUM PARTICLES Table 1: Compiled by Leuren Moret from Interviews with Gulf War Vets and their families GENERAL abnormal births and birth defects abnormal metabolism of semen: contains amine & ammonium alkaline acute autoimmune symptoms (lung-, liver-, kidney failure) acute myeloid leukemia (deadly within days or weeks) acute immune depression acute respiratory failure asthma auto-immune deficiencies Balkan-syndrome blood in stools and urine body function control loss bone cancer brain damage brain tumors burning semen burning sensations calcium loss in body cardiovascular signs or symptoms chemical sensitivities Chronic Fatigue Syndrome chronic kidney and liver disorders chronic myeloid leukemia chronic respiratory infections colon cancer confusion diarrhea digestive problems dizziness Epstein Barr Syndrome fluid buildup fibromyalgia gastrointestinal signs/symptoms general fatigue genetic alterations glandular carcinoma Gulf war-syndrome headaches (severe) heart attack/disease high blood pressure high frequency of micturition Hodgkin lymphoma immune system deficiency infections insomnia involuntary movements joint/muscle/leg pain kidney failure/damage leukemia liver carcinoma loss of feeling in fingers Lou Gehrigs Disease -ALS low blood oxygen saturation ( low HbO2) low lung volume lung damage lung cancer lymph cancer lymphoma melanoma memory loss metallic taste Microplasma fermentans/ incognitis infections mood swings – violence homicide/suicide multiple cancers multiple myeloma myeloma muscle pain nerve damage neuro-muscular degenerative disease non-Hodgkin lymphoma other malignancies pancreas carcinoma Parkinsons disease petit & grand mal fits rashes reactive airway disease reduced IQ respiratory ailments shortness of breath sinus diseases skin cancer skin damage: sweat glands with trapped du-particles skin infections skin spotting smell, loss of sleep disturbances stiffening of fingers teeth crumbling thyroid cancer thyroid disease unable to walk unusual fevers/night sweats unusual hair loss vision problems weight loss CHILDREN alimentary disorders asthma bladder & sphincter paralysis blindness complete range of known and unknown Congenital Defects deafness dyspraxia headache kidney disease leukemia lymphoma malformations of legs, arms, toes & fingers respiratory disorders stillbirth neural tube defects FEMALE abdominal pain breast cancer breast cancer at very young age (20) cervix cancer endometriosis headaches incontinence joint pain lung cancer at age 20 and non-smoker menstrual problems miscarriages nausea ovarian cancer paralysis of digestive system thyroid problems uterine cancer MALE (acute) headache acute myeloid leukemia arthritis avoiding people breathing problems (stridor) chemical sensitivity chronic myeloid leukemia endometriosis in partners gastrointestinal disorder hip and leg pain joint pain lung cancer at young age lymphoma skin cancer skin eruptions stomach pain suicide testicular cancer unable to walk VISIE: http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/VISIE/du-diagnosis.html DESERT SHIELD/DESERT STORM website: http://www.ushostnet.com/gulfwar/articles.htm 04/1504 Soldiers who served in Bradley fighting vehicles, where it was common to sit on ammunition boxes where depleted uranium ammunition was stored, are now reporting that many have rectal cancer. For the first time, medical doctors in Yugoslavia and Iraq have reported multiple in situ unrelated cancers developing in patients, and even in families who are living in highly contaminated areas. Even stranger, they report that cancer was unknown in previous generations. Very rare and unusual cancers and birth defects have also been reported to be increasing above normal levels prior to 1991, not only in war torn countries, but in neighbouring countries from transboundary contamination. Dr. Keith Baverstock, a senior radiation advisor who was on the staff of the World Health Organization, co-authored a reportin November 2001, warning that the long-term health effects of depleted uranium would endanger Iraq’s civilian population, and that the dry climate would increase exposure from the tiny particles blowing around and be inhaled for years to come. The WHO refused to give him permission to publish the study, bowing to pressure from the IAEA. Dr. Baverstock released the damning report to the mediain February 2004. Pekka Haavisto, Chairman of the UN Environment Program’s Post-Conflict Assessment Unit in Geneva, shares Baverstock’s anxiety about depleted uranium but UNEP experts have not been allowed into Iraq to assess the pollution. "DEPLETED URANIUM SCARE" - Claimed by President George W. Bush on the official White House website: "During the Gulf War, coalition forces used armor-piercing ammunition made from depleted uranium, which is ideal for the purpose because of its great density. In recent years, the Iraqi regime has made substantial efforts to promote the false claim that the depleted uranium rounds fired by coalition forces have caused cancers and birth defects in Iraq. Iraq has distributed horrifying pictures of children with birth defects and linked them to depleted uranium. The campaign has two major propaganda assets:" "Uranium is a name that has frightening associations in the mind of the average person, which makes the lie relatively easy to sell; and Iraq could take advantage of an established international network of antinuclear activists who had already launched their own campaign against depleted uranium." "But scientists working for the World Health Organization, the UN Environmental Programme, and the European Union could find no health effects linked to exposure to depleted uranium." The US war in Afghanistan made it clear that this was not a war IN the third world, but a war AGAINST the third world. In Afghanistan where 800 to 1000 tons of depleted uranium was estimated to have been used in 2001, even uneducated Afghanis understand the impact these weapons have had on their children and on future generations: "After the Americans destroyed our village and killed many of us, we also lost our houses and have nothing to eat. However, we would have endured these miseries and even accepted them, if the Americans had not sentenced us all to death. When I saw my deformed grandson, I realized that my hopes of the future have vanished for good, different from the hopelessness of the Russian barbarism, even though at that time I lost my older son Shafiqullah. This time, however, I know we are part of the invisible genocide brought on us by America, a silent death from which I know we will not escape." (Jooma Khan of Laghman province, March 2003) In 1990, the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) wrote a report warning about the potential health and environmental catastrophe from the use of depleted uranium weapons. The health effects had been known for a long time. The report sent to the UK government warned "in their estimation, if 50 tonnes of residual DU dust remained ‘in the region’ there could be half a million extra cancers by the end of the century [2000]." Estimates of depleted uranium weapons used in 1991, now range from the Pentagon’s admitted 325 tons, to other scientific bodies who put the figure as high as 900 tons. That would make the number of estimated cancers as high as 9,000,000, depending on the amount used in the 1991 Gulf War. In the 2003 Gulf War, estimates of 2200 tons have been given — causing about 22,000,000 new cancer cases. Altogether the total number of cancer patients estimated using the UKAEA data would be 25,250,000. In July of 1998, the CIA estimated the population of Iraq to be approximately 24,683,313. Ironically, the UN Resolution 661 calling for sanctions against Iraq, was signed on Hiroshima Day, August 6, 1990. THE PARALLELS War can really cause no economic boom, at least not directly, since an increase in wealth never does result from destruction of goods. – Ludwig von Mises The parallels between Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan are startlingly similar. The weapons used, the unfair treaties offered by the US, and the bombing and destruction of the environment and entire infrastructure. In every city of Iraq and Yugoslavia, the television and radio stations were bombed. Educational centres were targeted, and stores where educational materials were sold were destroyed on nearly the same day. Under UN sanctions, Iraq was not even allowed pencils for schoolchildren. Cultural antiquities and historical treasures were targeted and destroyed in all three countries, a kind of cultural and historical cleansing, a collective national psychic trauma. The permanent radioactive contamination and environmental devastation of all three countries is unprecedented, resulting in huge increases in cancer and birth defects following the attacks. These will increase over time from unknown effects due to chronic exposure, increasing internal levels of radiation from depleted uranium dust, and permanent genetic effects passed on to future generations. Clearly, this has been a genocidal plan from the start. Fig. 3: Map of regions within a 1000 mile radius of Baghdad and Afghanistan which have been contaminated with depleted uranium since 1991. Depleted uranium dust will be repeatedly recycled throughout this dry region, and also carried around the world. More than ten times the amount of radiation, released during atmospheric testing, has been released from depleted uranium weaponry since 1991. In 2002 the US government admitted that every person living in the US between 1957 and 1963 was internally contaminated with radiation. Note that the contaminated region corresponds with the "South" region on the Eurasian chessboard in Fig. 1. What has happened to Human Rights, to the Rights of the Child, to civil society, and to common humanity? It is up to the citizens of the world to stop the depleted uranium wars, and future nuclear wars, causing irreversible devastation. There are just a few generations left before the collapse of our environment, and then it will be too late. We can be no healthier than the health of the environment — we breathe the same air, drink the same water, eat food from the same soil. "Our collective gene pool of life, evolving for hundreds of millions of years has been seriously damaged in less than the past fifty. The time remaining to reverse this culture of ‘lemming death’ is on the wane. In the future, what will you tell our grandchildren about what you did in the prime of your life to turn around this death process?" (Rosalie Bertell, 1982) THE DEEPER PURPOSE: G*O*D* [Gold, Oil, and Drugs] "We must become the owners, or at any rate the controllers at the source, of at least a proportion of the oil which we require." (British Royal Commission, agreeing with Winston Churchill's policy towards Iraq 1913). "It is clear our nation is reliant upon big foreign oil. More and more of our imports come from overseas." (US President George W. Bush, Beaverton, Oregon, Sep. 25, 2000). "If they turn on the radars we're going to blow up their goddamn SAMs (surface-to-air missiles). They know we own their country. We own their airspace... We dictate the way they live and talk. And that's what's great about America right now. It's a good thing, especially when there's a lot of oil out there we need." (US Brig. General William Looney in 1999, referring to Iraq). Millions of years ago, before India crashed into the Eurasian continent and uplifted the Himalayas, the ancient shallow Tethys sea stretched from the Atlantic across what is now the Mediterranean, Black, Caspian and Aral seas. Rich oil deposits are now located where ancient life accumulated and ‘cooked’ under just the right conditions to form large oil deposits in the ancient sediments. Long before 1991, Unocal in Afghanistan, Amoco in Yugoslavia, and various oil companies interested in Iraq oil deposits, had conducted extensive exploration and characterisation of oil deposits in the Middle East and Central Asian regions, including the northern half of India. Britain has maintained an interest in Middle Eastern oil deposits for a century, and has been the staunchest military partner of the US since the first depleted uranium war in 1991 in Iraq. Germany, another military partner in Yugoslavia with forces now in Afghanistan, was one of the major economic beneficiaries of the breakup of Yugoslavia and the colonisation of the Balkans. US interest in Yugoslavia had much to do with building pipelines from Central Asia to the Mediterranean warm water ports in Yugoslavia. A silent and hidden partnership between the US and Japan provided large amounts of cash from Japan to finance the 1991 Iraq and 1995/1999 Yugoslavian wars, with additional help in Afghanistan by providing not only cash, but fuel for the war, from Aegis warships of the Japanese Self Defense Forces in the Indian Ocean. Nippon Steel, Mitsubishi, and Halliburton are now partners in a Central Asian oil pipeline project. In 2004, despite much citizen opposition in Japan, the Japanese government has sent Self Defense Forces to Iraq for ‘reconstruction’. This action taken by the Japanese government, of placing troops on the ground in a war zone, will lead to rescinding Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, which forever prohibits military aggression by Japan. THE IRON TRIANGLE (all under one roof): MILITARY, BIG BUSINESS, POLITICS The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism -- ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power. - Franklin Delano Roosevelt But what do oil, military partners, depleted uranium wars, and US foreign policy have to do with nuclear weapons? The answer came to me in 1991 when I became a whistleblower at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Laboratory near San Francisco, California. Richard Berta, the Western Regional Inspector for the Department of Energy, told me "The Pentagon exists for the oil companies… and the nuclear weapons labs exist for the Pentagon." Depleted uranium was used beginning in 1991 for three reasons: + To test the radiobiological effects of 4th generation nuclear weapons, which are still under development + To blur and break down the distinction between conventional and nuclear weapons + To make it easier to reintroduce nuclear weapons into the US military arsenal Today, the US is number one in 4th generation nuclear weapons research and development, followed by Japan and Germany tied for number two, and Russia and other countries follow. Figure 4: Depleted uranium and 4th generation nuclear weapons Map by Mika TSUTSUMI 12/12/03 The Carlyle Group, a private massive equity firm, the 12th largest defense business with an obscenely high profit margin, is a business "arrangement" between the Bush and Bin Laden families, wealthy Saudis, former British Prime Minister John Major, James Baker III, Afsaneh Masheyekhi, Frank Carlucci, Colin Powell, other former US Government administrators, and Madeleine Albright’s daughter. The Carlyle Group is the ‘gatekeeper’ to the Saudi investment community. It owns 70 percent of Lockheed Martin Marietta, the largest military contractor in the US, and because Carlyle is privately owned, has no scrutiny or accountability whatsoever. A journalist who calls himself ‘a skunk at the garden party’ described investigating the Carlyle Group, he said ‘it’s like shadow boxing with a ghost’. The Group hires as lobbyists the best known politicians from around the world, in order to influence the politics of war, and privately profit from their previous public policies. The conflict of interest is obvious: President George W. Bush is creating wars as his father, former President George Bush, is globally peddling weapons and "protection". Lockheed Martin Marietta now owns Sandia Laboratories, a private contractor that makes the trigger for nuclear weapons, with a Sandia laboratory facility across the street from Los Alamos and Livermore National Laboratories, where the nuclear bombs are made. At the May 2003 University of California Regents meeting which I attended, Admiral Linton Brooks was present and newly in charge of the nuclear weapons programme under the Department of Energy. Admiral Brooks informed California Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante and the UC Regents that the management contract for the nuclear weapons laboratories, held unchallenged by the University of California for over 60 years, will be put up for competitive bid in 2005. The favoured institution, with a faculty member on the ‘blue ribbon committee’ making the contract award, is the University of Texas. This privatisation and management contract transfer of the US nuclear weapons programme will put control of the US nuclear weapons programme close to the Carlyle Group. The incestuous relationship between the US government, private companies, and the Bush and Bin Laden families in a way answers many of the lingering questions in everyone’s minds about many of the ill fated decisions and policies that have been implemented. Leuren Moret has worked at two US nuclear weapons laboratories as a geoscientist. In 1991 she became a whistleblower at the Livermore nuclear weapons lab, and since then has worked as an independent citizen scientist and radiation specialist in communities around the world, and contributed to the UN subcommission investigating depleted uranium. Her research on the environmental and public health effects of low level radiation from atmospheric testing fallout, nuclear power plants, and depleted uranium weaponry, is available on the internet and at http://www.mindfully.org. In 2003, she testified at the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan held in Japan, and presented at the World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference in Hamburg, Germany, and at the World Court of Women at the World Social Forum in Bombay, India in January 2004. She is a Global Research Contributing Editor, a City of Berkeley Environmental Commissioner, and the Past President of the Association for Women Geoscientists. More on Mindfully.org by Leuren Moret Websites: + International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan written opinion of Judge N. Bhagwat: also at http://www.traprockpeace.org/tokyo_trial_13march04.doc + Question 11: What does the US Government know about depleted uranium: http://traprockpeace.org/moret_25nov03.pdf + World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference: http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de + Radiation and Public Health Project: http://www.radiation.org + "A comparison of delayed radiobiological effects of depleted-uranium munitions versus fourth-generation nuclear weapons" by A. Gsponer, J.-P. Hurni, and B. Vitale, 4th International Conference of the Yugoslav Nuclear Society, Belgrade, September 30-October 4, 2002. http://arXiv.org/abs/physics/0210071 + "Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons: The Physical Principles Of Thermonuclear Explosives, Inertial Confinement Fusion, And The Quest For Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons" by Andre Gsponer and Jean-Pierre Hurni http://www.inesap.org/publ_tech01.htm + 54 minute VPRO Dutch TV "Carlyle Group" documentary on internet: http://www.vpro.nl/info/tegenlicht/index.shtml?7738514+7738518+77 38520+11838857 + Real Player Video Documentary on the Carlyle Group, by VPRO Dutch television[500 kbps real video] + Real Player Video Documentary on the Carlyle Group, by VPRO Dutch television[100 kbps real video] + Overview of documentary - Interactive Flash Animation- with links to biographies and articles (Dutch) and specific sections of video. + English translation of Dutch introduction Translation of the first one minute forty seven seconds of this program. The war in Iraq is over. The rubble is still smoking While the first dozers are already entering the country. After the coalition forces destroyed Baghdad it is now primarily American companies who are to rebuild Iraq. An interesting point is that these companies usually have people on the payroll who have been politicians. Is this a conflict of interests or a new (global) way of doing business? One of the corporations that work this way is the Carlyle Group. On their payroll are people like : George Bush (Sr.), James Baker III and old premier John Major. The Carlyle Group is a private investment bank which doesn't come to the publics attention very often but it is one of the biggest American (ed: USA) investors of the defense industry, telecom, property and financial services. What is the Carlyle Group? Who are the people behind the name? And how much power does Carlyle have? + Global Outlook: http://www.globalresearch.de Email this article to a friend To express your opinion on this article, join the discussion at Global Research's News and Discussion Forum, at http://globalresearch.ca.myforums.net/index.php The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.cagrants permission to cross-post original Global Research (Canada) articles in their entirety, or any portions thereof, on community internet sites, as long as the text & title of the article are not modified. The source must be acknowledged as follows: Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca. For cross-postings, kindly use the active URL hyperlink address of the original CRG article. The author's copyright note must be displayed. (For articles from other news sources, check with the original copyright holder, where applicable.). For publication of Global Research (Canada) articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: editor@globalresearch.ca. For media inquiries: editor@globalresearch.ca © Copyright belongs to the author, 2004. For fair use only/ pour usage équitable seulement. [home] ***************************************************************** 36 KUED: Shadow of Nuclear Fallout By Mary Dickson This article from the April, 2003 Catalyst Magazine, is reprinted with the author's permission. Click here to see Richard Miller's Map Other people keep pictures of their children in their wallets. I keep a small map I've had laminated to protect it from wear. I pull that map out during many conversations to show how far and wide fallout from nuclear testing was scattered. People are always shocked when they see it. Utah and Nevada are almost completely blacked out, and the black ink spreads as far north as Canada and as far east as New York, with heavy patches scattered throughout the country. Most Americans, even most Utahns, mistakenly think radioactive fallout affected only Southern Utah. Radiation isn't a respecter of arbitrary lines on a map. There is no magic shield that stopped it mid-point in Utah. The wind carried it across the country. That's how it got to Nebraska, Missouri , Iowa and other states where it put millions of Americans at risk of cancer and other fallout-related illnesses. The map in my wallet speaks volumes. The map, from Richard Miller's book, Under the Cloud: The Decades of Nuclear Testing, shows where fallout went during the 12 years of above ground nuclear weapons testing from 1951 to 1962. Miller calls his map a "connect the dots" of all points in the United States that were crossed by three or more trajectories of fallout. The map doesn't include the fallout from the three decades of underground testing that ended only in 1993. According to Miller, "there is no such thing as a test that is totally underground" since so many of those tests leaked. Baneberry, an infamous 1970 test, for instance, ejected fallout 8,000 feet into the air and went on for hours. Radioactive debris from another underground test showed up in southeastern Georgia. Miller, who has recently published a five-volume compendium of fallout data, The U.S. Atlas of Nuclear Fallout, has compiled and analyzed more data on the radioactive fallout that blanketed America than any other researcher. He and other internationally renowned experts, including Helen Caldicott, was in Salt Lake City for "The Nuclear West: Legacy and Future," the eighth annual Stegner Center Symposium at the University of Utah College of Law. The implications of his work are enormous. In his fallout atlas, he correlates fallout levels with cancer levels, county-by-county across the United States. "If someone lives in Peoria or in Washington state, I want them to know the history of their county in terms of fallout," he says. "It's part of their history." Norman Solomon, co-author of Killing our Own: The Disaster of America's Experience with Atomic Radiation, writes that the nationwide statistics in Miller's atlas "make us think exactly where we or our loved ones were at the time each diffuse radioactive cloud scattered its hazardous debris." Miller first became interested in fallout in the 1970s while working with OSHA. In 1974, he found pockets of cancer in Valley, Nebraska and a string of cancers in northern Missouri, a place that was notorious for high cancer rates. "I talked OSHA into getting outside the box and looking at these things because I wondered if there could be an occupational component, but I never did find anything work-related." When the National Cancer Institute came out with its model of fallout in October of 1997, Miller discovered that there were hot spots all across America, including an amazing hot spot in southern Iowa and northern Missouri, where he had, years before, found the high incidence of cancers. In the late 1970s, he and others in the OSHA office where he worked began finding high incidences of brain cancer at a site in Texas near chemical plants. As they were looking for causes, one team member, a physician with the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, jokingly suggested it could be fallout from nuclear tests. "I got to thinking about it and said that no one knows where those fallout tracks went," he says. Using data collected by the old Atomic Energy Commission, the Defense Nuclear Agency and the U.S. Weather Service, Miller began doing the research. In 1986, Macmillan published his book, Under the Cloud, charting all the fallout tracks. When the 1997 NCI study came out showing the trajectory of fall-out at 103 points across the Unvited States, Miller was sure it would create a major uproar, but surprisingly, not much came of the report. Nor did people pay attention when the NCI Journal soon after published an article showing a statistically significant link between thyroid cancer and fallout. "The NCI study was a little complicated," he says, noting that it was so extensive that it had to be published on the Internet instead of by conventional means. "Not many people downloaded it," he says. " I was one of those people bone-headed enough to take the NCI data and do the calculations." Miller crunched the data over a period of several years and published his findings in 2000 as The U.S. Atlas of Nuclear Fallout. "There were hot spots all across the country, not only for Iodine-131 which is linked to thyroid cancer, but for a variety of other radionuclides and radioisotopes associated with fallout." As part of his analysis, Miller compared the data against the Center for Disease Control "Wonder Database," which assigns a disease an International Disease Classification code and shows what the rates of that disease are for every county in the U.S. from 1979 on. Miller took about 25 different types of radiation-induced cancers and correlated them with fallout levels for the entire United States. His findings show an association between fallout levels and cancer rates, but he is careful to note, this does not prove causation. "However," he says, "the statistics suggest that the chance that these are random associations is very, very small - far less than one in a hundred. Given the numbers, it's clear that further research is necessary." Unfortunately, in February, the National Academies of Science called for an end to any more study of cancer risk associated with fallout, claiming that further research wasn't needed and saying that "neither data nor consequences justify a more detailed study." Says Miller, "They've said it's not worth the time. Of course, I don't agree with that assessment." Further studies could get far more specific than the 1997 NCI study. "The NCI study could be evaluated using tools and techniques that have been around for 20 years or more," he says. "Since fallout likely ended up in ponds and low areas, you could go to where we know fallout came down, sink a core into a pond, bring up the material and analyze it for radioisotopes." Now, here's where it gets interesting. Miller says, that in theory, you can actually pinpoint which nuclear test was responsible for fallout in a specific area by looking at the ratios between the radioactive isotopes found there. These ratios have been published and available since the early 1980s, courtesy of University of California researcher Harry G. Hicks. In fact, Miller used Hick's research data - known in the health physics community as the Hicks Table - to estimate total fallout as well as 66 individual fallout isotopes from the NCI's radio-iodine data. These values form the core of the U.S. Fallout Atlas series. "The point I'm making is that, while the analyses procedures are slow and cumbersome, the derived information is not particularly complex, and the means to evaluate the NCI study is almost low-tech," he says. "From every perspective, it's a feasible study. If the government decides not to follow this up, it would be a huge waste of he NCI's work. While I somewhat enjoy having the only book series with this kind of detail, I think that science and the public would be better served with a formal government evaluation of nuclear fallout." The implications of Miller's work, contained in his five volume atlas, are huge. If a link exists between some of the radionuclides and certain types of cancers, physicians across the country could use that information as an important diagnostic tool. They could ask patients where they grew up and where they've lived. If a patient lived in an area that got hit with high levels of Cobalt 60, for instance, a physician might want to consider looking at female colon cancer, which seems to be highly correlated with Cobalt 60 deposits. So far, he's had no luck convincing Congress to continue such studies. "I would think that some senators and representatives would look at their own families and the people they know and love who have cancer and want to study this more, " says Miller. "I would think they owe it to their constituency." Atomic weapons testing was a very unique period of history, and everyone's backyard was a part of that history. "It's a technohistory that we've ignored," he says. Not only have we ignored that chapter of our past, but we don't seem to have learned anything from the human toll of nuclear weapons testing. In fact, the Bush administration is making noise about starting up nuclear testing again. "That's probably going to happen," says Miller. "At some point - perhaps during the so-called bunker-buster tests - I would not be surprised to see what in effect will be above ground nuclear testing. Some of these things are supposed to have 300-kiloton warheads. There is no way a device like that can be field tested without producing a huge debris cloud." Given what he knows, isn't Miller tempted to become an activist? "You know," he says, "I followed my first book on nuclear testing with a novel, The Atomic Express. In it I included everything I knew about the military, about nuclear weapons, the 1950s, and everything else. In that book I projected what some might suggest is a negative view of the Atomic Energy Commission. If someone wants my personal opinion about the bomb, they can read that. But research for the Fallout Atlas was different. For that research I was just trying to learn something new. That was my only stake in the data. I always got a kick out of seeing those statistical results for the first time. There for a while, it was at least one surprise a day. Just being able to parse the data was enough for me. I always say the data should speak for itself. Look at the data." Miller's data, indeed, makes a powerful case. Just look at the map. It speaks volumes. Fallout Patterns Map by Miller - KUED 7 - Avoiding Armageddon - Utah's Legacy [http://www.kued.org/] [PBS Home] Fallout Patterns Map by Miller From: Under The Cloud: The Decades of Nuclear Testing. (c)1991 Richard L. Miller. Used by permission. Miller compiled this map showing where fallout went during the years of above ground nuclear testing from 1951-1962. He calls the map a "connect the dots" of all points in the United States that were crossed by three or more trajectories. For more, read "Charting the Far-Reaching Shadow of Nuclear Testing." ***************************************************************** 37 BBC: Ill Gulf veterans 'feel like foe' Last Updated: Monday, 12 July, 2004 [A unidentified soldier is injected during the first Gulf War] A soldier receives an injection in the run-up to the 1991 Gulf War Veterans of the 1991 Gulf War have been made to feel like "the enemy" when complaining of suffering post-conflict illnesses, a London inquiry has heard. John Nichol, president of the Royal British Legion's Gulf veterans' branch, said troops had been given a cocktail of anti-anthrax and plague vaccines. They were also possibly exposed to nerve agents when Iraqi weapons storage sites were destroyed, he said. A woman blamed the death of her baby on drugs given to her husband in Iraq. Vichy Warriner, 36, from Peterborough, told the inquiry her late baby girl was born with deformities which she thinks were caused by injections and tablets given to her former husband why he was deployed in the Gulf. In 1999, the couple learned from a scan at 35 weeks that their baby was hydrocephalus, having a disproportionately big head. When baby Catherine was born she had several deformities, including no ears, widely spaced eyes, a club foot and a set of ribs missing. She died after seven and a half hours. Tragically, for many of comrades in arms, the end of that six-week war marked the beginning of their suffering. John Nichol, 1991 Gulf War veteran Addenbrookes Hospital said mutagenic effects were "unlikely", but added they would not completely rule out a possible link between the deformities and medical treatment servicemen underwent during the Gulf War - given the limited knowledge of what went on during that conflict. Support groups claim about 6,000 veterans have suffered unexplained ill health. Hundreds of veterans have tried to claim compensation, but solicitors advised earlier this year that there was insufficient evidence to prove their cases in court. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) maintains the illnesses are so varied there can be no distinct syndrome or a specific cause. Flight Lieutenant Nichol told the inquiry opening on Monday that symptoms complained of included chronic fatigue, memory loss, depression, mood swings, aching joints, sensitivity to chemicals and cancerous tumours. The former RAF Tornado navigator, who was held as a prisoner of war for 49 days after his plane was shot down on the first day of the conflict, said: "The members of our armed forces were ready and willing to give everything, including their lives. "And now, in their hour of need, they expect - they deserve - their country to help them." [Kuwaiti oil field burning in 1991 Gulf War] An oil field burns in Kuwait during the 1991 Gulf War He added: "The men and the women you will hear from over the coming days are not the enemy, but many times over the past few years that is exactly how they've been made to feel - they deserve better." He said 1991 Gulf War troops had been given up to 14 inoculations and experienced the first mass use of nerve agent pre-treatment NAPS, as well as being exposed to the use of pesticides, depleted uranium dust and atmospheric pollution from burning oil wells. One of the first witnesses, Larry Cammock, chairman of the Gulf Veterans Association, said the inoculation programme had been "chaotic". He said he awoke one night to find somebody putting a needle into him. "When I asked what it was, he said 'you don't want to know, don't worry about it'." Mr Cammock said he now suffered from immune deficiency problems, diabetes, post-traumatic stress disorder and arthritis. The inquiry, which is being funded by an anonymous donor, aims to take evidence from 30 ex-servicemen, medical experts and government representatives. ***************************************************************** 38 Xinhuanet: UK starts independent probe into Gulf War syndrome www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-07-12 19:03:31 LONDON, July 12 (Xinhuanet) -- An independent inquiry started in Britain Monday into the causes of a range of debilitating illnesses suffered by thousands of veterans during the 1991 Gulf War, the BBC reported. Lord Lloyd of Berwick, a former Lord Justice of Appeal, is heading the inquiry into the so-called "Gulf War Syndrome." The three-week hearing aims to take evidence from 30 ex-servicemen, medical experts and government representatives. It has been expected that it would be able to establish the facts about the Gulf War illnesses and resolve the long-standing dispute over their causes. Thousands of British veterans say they have suffered from unexplained ailments including kidney pains, memory loss, chronic fatigue and mood swings. They blame the cocktail of tablets and vaccinations they were given to protect them against nerve agents,anthrax and botulism. Exposure to depleted uranium munitions has also been identifiedas a possible cause of the illnesses. However, it has never been accepted that the illnesses have a common cause resulting form the Gulf War, meaning that hundreds ofveterans may be unable to claim compensation. The British government has never acknowledged the existence of the Gulf War syndrome. The Ministry of Defense maintains that the illnesses are so varied that there can be no distinct syndrome or a specific cause. Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 39 Scotsman.com: Sub 'No Threat to Spain' - Straw Mon 12 Jul 2004 "PA" Foreign Secretary Jack Straw reassured Spain today that a British nuclear-powered submarine docked in Gibraltar posed no threat after Spain protested the submarine’s visit to the contested British colony. Straw said he told his Spanish counterpart Miguel Angel Moratinos that Britain “understood the sensitivity†of the submarine’s visit, which coincided with celebrations marking the 300th anniversary of the outpost’s capture from Spain. Both discussed the issue on the sidelines of a European Union foreign ministers meeting in Brussels. The visit of HMS Tireless, a 20-year-old submarine, to Gibraltar caused a diplomatic row, with Spain’s government and environmentalists protesting the vessel’s docking near the Spanish coast last week. “It was literally coincidence that you had this visit (of the submarine) alongside the visit of her Royal Highness Princess Anne in respect to the tercentenary of Gibraltar,†Straw said. “But I also underline the fact we want to achieve closest possible relations with the ... (Spanish) government.†Straw said the Tireless would be leaving Gibraltar “in a couple of daysâ€. A previous visit by the submarine caused another row between London and Madrid in 2000 when it broke down and was towed to Gibraltar for repairs to cracks in its reactor cooling system. Those repairs took a year to complete, triggering protests and concerns over the possible environmental threat the submarine posed. ***************************************************************** 40 Scotsman.com: 'Gulf War Syndrome' Inquiry Getting under Way Mon 12 Jul 2004 By Neville Dean, PA News An independent inquiry starts today into the causes of the range of debilitating illnesses suffered by thousands of veterans of the first Gulf War. Lord Lloyd of Berwick. a former Lord Justice of Appeal, is heading the inquiry into so-called “Gulf War Syndromeâ€, which is funded by an anonymous donor. The three-week probe aims to take evidence from 30 ex-servicemen, medical experts and Government representatives in a bid to establish the facts about Gulf War illnesses and resolve the long-standing dispute over their causes. Support groups claim about 6,000 Gulf War veterans have suffered unexplained ill health since the 1991 conflict, including kidney pains, memory loss, chronic fatigue and mood swings. More than 600 are said to have died. The veterans have blamed an “experimental†cocktail of tablets and vaccinations they received to protect them against nerve agents, anthrax and botulism. Exposure to Depleted Uranium (DU) munitions has also been identified as a possible cause of the illnesses. Hundreds of veterans have tried to claim compensation but they were dealt a blow earlier this year when solicitors advised that there was insufficient evidence to prove their cases in court. Lord Lloyd was asked to head the independent inquiry by Lord Morris of Manchester, honorary parliamentary adviser to the Royal British Legion, which first called for a public inquiry into Gulf War illnesses in 1997. The 75-year-old peer will sit alongside Dr Norman Jones, treasurer of the Royal College of Physicians, and Sir Michael Davies, formerly Clerk of the Parliaments. He has already said the inquiry, in central London, will not be using the term “Gulf War Syndrome†as there did not appear to be a single underlying cause for all of the symptoms. Lord Lloyd has written to both the Ministry of Defence and Department of Health asking them to give evidence to the inquiry, but has only received an acknowledgement so far. One of first sufferers to give evidence will be Shaun Rusling, vice chairman of the National Gulf Veterans and Families Association (NGVFA). He said he hoped the inquiry’s findings would ensure sufferers were provided with appropriate healthcare and granted their war pensions. “This inquiry is fundamentally important to the veterans,†Mr Rusling said. “Our hope is that it will bring into the public domain the cause of our ill health which was the vaccinations and medication we were given. “The MoD want to hide the facts and change history. They cannot do that. Servicemen the length and breath of the country have been diagnosed with Gulf War syndrome, but the MoD does not accept it. “I believe the evidence presented by the veterans and the medical experts will prove the case for the veterans. “It will then be up to the MoD to do its duty by the servicemen and women and give them the proper medical care and pension entitlement.†Both the MoD and the Department of Health yesterday said they were still considering whether to give evidence to the inquiry. It has been backed by the Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy, who described it as “long overdueâ€. ***************************************************************** 41 Scotsman.com: The Festering Sore of 'Gulf War Syndrome' Mon 12 Jul 2004 By Neville Dean, PA News The row over whether several thousand veterans of the first Gulf War became ill as a result of their service has been rumbling on unresolved for more than a decade. About 53,000 British soldiers took part in the Desert Storm campaign, the international effort to liberate Kuwait in 1991 following the invasion by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. Support groups say that since then, more than 500 former British soldiers have died of so-called Gulf War Syndrome and a further 6,000 are suffering its effects. The National Gulf Veterans and Families Association believes many of those who have died have committed suicide as a result of the stress of their illness and the toll it has taken on their jobs and personal relationships. The illnesses have been attributed to the “cocktail†of inoculations given to the Gulf War soldiers to protect them against chemical attack. Exposure to Depleted Uranium (DU) munitions has also been cited as a possible cause. The symptoms are said to be similar to those for chronic fatigue, including headaches, memory loss, muscle pain, nausea, gastrointestinal problems, loss of concentration, vision and balance problems. Sufferers have also complained of post-traumatic stress, stomach cramps, vomiting, kidney disorders, depression, dizziness and severe weight loss. Others have developed more serious conditions including asthma, arthritis, osteoporosis and dermatitis. The Ministry of Defence has always maintained that the illnesses are so varied there can be no distinct syndrome or a specific cause. Two years ago, the Gulf War veteran Shaun Rusling won a landmark ruling when a War Pensions Agency tribunal officially recognised Gulf War Syndrome as a disease. However, the veterans’ battle for recognition was dealt a severe blow earlier this year when they were advised there was insufficient evidence to pursue their claims for compensation. The legal team, which had been investigating the strength of the case for six years, said there was not enough scientific evidence to prove exactly what had caused their illnesses. That left the sufferers facing the prospect of having to fund their own hugely expensive compensation claims, without the millions of pounds worth of legal aid they had hoped for. [ ***************************************************************** 42 Scotsman.com: Sick Gulf Veterans 'Made to Feel Like the Enemy' Mon 12 Jul 2004 By Jennifer Sym, PA News Troops in the first Gulf War were inoculated with a cocktail of drugs which they believe left them with debilitating illnesses and may have contributed to fatal birth defects, an inquiry heard today. Veterans were even made to feel “like the enemy†when they complained of a range of conditions following the 1991 conflict, including chronic fatigue, memory loss, depression, mood swings, aching joints, sensitivity to chemicals and cancerous tumours, the hearing was told. The Gulf War Illnesses independent inquiry started hearing evidence in London today from veterans and relatives of those who served in the war. Flight Lieutenant John Nichol, who served as an RAF Tornado navigator, is now president of the Gulf Veterans’ Branch of the Royal British Legion. Together with pilot Flt Lt John Peters, he was shot down on the first day of the conflict, captured and held as a prisoner of war for 49 days. He told the three-man inquiry panel: “The men and the women you will hear from over the coming days are not the enemy – but many times over the past few years that is exactly how they’ve been made to feel – they deserve better.†He said during the conflict troops were given up to 14 inoculations, experienced the first ever mass use of NAPS tablets – the nerve agent pre-treatment used as an antidote against chemical weapons – and were exposed to heavy use of pesticides including those purchased locally. They were exposed to atmospheric pollution from burning oil wells and depleted uranium dust whilst decommissioning site and vehicles attacked with DU weapons and were possibly exposed to nerve agents when Iraqi chemical weapons storage facilities were destroyed, he said. Vicky Warriner, 36, from Peterborough, told the inquiry she attributes the deformities of her late baby Catherine to injections and tablets her former husband Mark was given when he served in the Gulf. In January 1999 a requested scan at 35 weeks revealed their baby had hydrocephalus and a body measuring 37 weeks but a head measuring 39 weeks. Their baby was subsequently born with a range of deformities including no ears, widely spaced eyes, club foot and a set of ribs missing, and lived for just seven and a half hours. Addenbrookes Hospital said although mutogenic effects seemed “unlikelyâ€, knowledge of what went on in the Gulf War was so limited they would hesitate to completely rule it out. The couple subsequently divorced and Mrs Warriner said: “I think he blamed himself for Catherine from what he received in the Gulf. I said ’I don’t blame you’, he didn’t have a choice as far as I’m aware. He had to have the injections and the tablets.†Larry Cammock, chairman of the Gulf Veterans’ Association, told the inquiry he was given a series of more than 16 vaccinations, including smallpox, yellow fever (twice), cholera, polio, meningitis, hepatitis B and C, rabies, plague, anthrax, “biologicals†and issued with malaria and NAPS tablets. He said the programme was “chaoticâ€, while Shaun Rusling, vice chairman of the National Gulf Veterans’ and Families’ Association (NGVFA), told the hearing he was the only veteran receiving a pension on the basis of Gulf War Syndrome. Without the diagnosis, pensions cannot be passed on to widows, the hearing was told. Mr Rusling appealed for the Government to support the inquiry and accused the MoD of “dereliction of duty and gross crass negligence†for not disseminating information at the time or testing troops in the subsequent 14 years for depleted uranium. The independent inquiry is funded by an anonymous donor, and the three-week probe aims to establish the facts about Gulf War illnesses and resolve the long-standing dispute over their causes. Support groups claim about 6,000 veterans have suffered unexplained ill health since the 1991 conflict, and more than 600 are said to have died. The MoD has always denied the existence of a so-called Gulf War Syndrome, insisting there was no single cause of the illnesses suffered. Hundreds of veterans have tried to claim compensation but they were dealt a blow earlier this year when solicitors advised that there was insufficient evidence to prove their cases in court. Lord Lloyd of Berwick, a former Lord Justice of Appeal, is sitting alongside Dr Norman Jones, treasurer of the Royal College of Physicians, and Sir Michael Davies, formerly Clerk of the Parliaments. The inquiry was adjourned until next Monday, when more veterans are expected to give evidence. ***************************************************************** 43 India: Dispelling notions on use of radiation NT Bureau Chennai, July 12: Governor P S Ramamohan Rao will inaugurate a four-day awareness programme on 'Applications of Radioisotopes and Radiation Technology for Societal Development at Anna University here tomorrow. Speaking to reporters on Saturday, Anna University Vice-Chancellor, E Balagurusamy said the programme was being organised as part of the golden jubilee celebrations of the Department of Atomic Energy . It would have of two-day workshop and a four-day exhibition. The applications of nuclear energy and radioisotopes had done marvels in various fields of human activity like healthcare, medicine, agriculture, food preservation and archaeology. Inspite of these achievements there was misconception about the use of radioisotopes and radiation among the public due to lack of proper information. Realising the need for dissemination of information on the potential applications of radiation and radioisotopes and bringing together the experts in the nuclear field, the general public and potential users of radioisotopes, the programme had been organised he said. Eminent experts from Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam, Board of Radiation and Isotope Technology, Mumbai and Anna University would deliver lectures on various themes. At the exhibition radiation detection equipment, the role played by Department of Atomic Energy in the application of Radiation and Radioisotopes for societal development and its applications at various would fields would be displayed to the public and students. Around 800 delegates, including college students, lecturers and teachers of different streams will be participating in the awareness programme. A free field trip to the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam has been organised by the University for the general public and students. For further details about the programme contact, V Murugesan, convenor of the programme over phone on - 22301168 / 22203144. ***************************************************************** 44 UK Independent: Gulf syndrome victims are heard at last By Terri Judd 13 July 2004 Veterans were "dismissed as trouble-makers" when they complained of a range of debilitating illnesses after the Gulf War in 1991, the first day of an independent inquiry into the suspected syndrome was told yesterday. The three-week hearing in London, headed by the former Lord Justice of Appeal Lord Lloyd of Berwick, will take evidence from 30 ex-servicemen, medical experts and government representatives in an attempt to establish the facts about Gulf War illnesses. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has always denied the existence of "Gulf War syndrome", insisting there was no single cause of the illnesses suffered by veterans of the conflict. Flight Lieutenant John Nichol, who became a familiar face during the war when he was captured by the Iraqis and paraded on television, told the inquiry yesterday that more than 637 previously young and fit servicemen had died since the end of the war. Of the 5,585 who had been granted disablement, 1,388 had specified conditions related to Gulf War illness, he said. He said that those afflicted had been rebuffed and treated like the enemy. "When the veterans were begging for advice, begging for answers, they were being fobbed off and dismissed as trouble-makers," he said. He added that the MoD had failed to heed warnings about the dangers of the cocktail of drugs given to servicemen and women in 1990 and 1991. Flt Lt Nichol, a former RAF Tornado navigator and president of the Gulf Veterans branch of the Royal British Legion, said he considered himself lucky not to have returned with the same health problems as many of his comrades. He said many had been "assaulted" by multiple inoculations programmes, including anthrax and plague, mass use of nerve agent pre-treatment tablets, heavy use of pesticides, atmospheric pollution from burning oil wells, possible exposure to nerve agents when storage facilities were destroyed and depleted uranium dust. Sufferers displayed a variety of symptoms - chronic fatigue, memory loss, depression, mood swings and aching joints - and some developed cancer. Of the 53,000 servicemen and women deployed, about 6,000 had complained of health problems, the inquiry heard, while others suffered in silence. Flt Lt Nichol said the MoD had spent £8.5m researching the illnesses since 1997, approximately the same amount as its annual entertainment budget. Lord Lloyd also heard from Samantha Thompson, whose husband, a naval officer, died two years ago of motor neurone disease, a condition which is more than twice as prevalent among Gulf War veterans than others of their age-group. She said the authorities in America recognised that the disease was attributable to the conflict. "For my daughter Hannah, I want her to see her father's death has been thoroughly investigated," she said. Shaun Rusling, who won an important ruling two years ago when a War Pensions Agency tribunal officially recognised Gulf War syndrome as a disease, also appeared at the inquiry. The inquiry, which is independent from the Government, is funded by an anonymous donor and cannot demand evidence from the MoD or the Department of Health. Lord Lloyd has written to the departments requesting they take part in the hearings, but they have yet to respond. Lord Lloyd said: "I hope very much they will co-operate with this inquiry. It seems to me they have nothing to lose from doing so." Lord Lloyd, 75, will sit alongside Dr Norman Jones, treasurer of the Royal College of Physicians, and Sir Michael Davies, formerly clerk of the parliaments. The donor, who is meeting the costs of between £50,000 and £100,000, is said to be concerned about the welfare of ex-servicemen and women. The MoD and the Department of Health said they were considering whether to give evidence to the inquiry, which was described by Charles Kennedy, the Liberal Democrat leader, as "long overdue". The inquiry was adjourned until next Monday. 'EVERY WEEK YOU HEAR OF SOMEONE ELSE WHO HAS DIED' Major Christine Lloyd considered herself 100 per cent fit when she volunteered to go to the Gulf in 1990 as a nursing officer; two months later, she returned exhausted, permanently aching and unable to concentrate long enough to administer medication. Yesterday she told the independent inquiry that she attributed her continuing ill health to the cocktail of vaccines and drugs she was given. Ms Lloyd was a 43-year-old reservist when she answered a call for medical volunteers. Before she left Britain in January 1991 she was given seven inoculations, including one described as "biological", which she later realised was anthrax. Two weeks later she arrived in Saudi Arabia to help set up a field hospital and prepare for what they believed would be a major influx of casualties. She noticed that the area was being sprayed with pesticides, including organophosphates, the safety of which is now questioned. The stress of Scud missile alerts was compounded by the poor facilities, she said. Many of the drugs dispatched to the field hospital were out of date, she claimed, while the equipment looked like something more suited to the Second World War. She began taking nerve agent pre-treatment (Naps) tablets and immediately became disoriented and dizzy. "The side effects of the Naps tablets continued: diarrhoea, frequency of urination and headaches," she added. But there were more vaccines to come. In February she was given another series, including inoculations against anthrax and plague. In mid-March she returned home. "After three weeks leave I returned to work. I was always exhausted. I had headaches. I couldn't concentrate. I was becoming a danger giving out medication. I had short-term memory loss. I could no longer walk up hills and mountains." In October 1992 she was declared unfit for work, and still suffers from a range of problems. "Every week you hear of another colleague who has died ... We need to get to the bottom of this," she said. Terri Judd UK Independent Ltd. ***************************************************************** 45 [NukeNet] Washington Post Editorial on Yucca Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:56:23 -0700 this is awful - I encourage everyone to write letters to the editor on it. not only does the Post support Yucca on the false claim that it will consolidate the waste from many sites to just one, but they support the idea of simply changing the law to fit the site (as has been done too many times already) rather than finding a site that fits well-reasoned laws. ============================== http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40033-2004Jul9.html Yucca Mountain Sunday, July 11, 2004; Page B06 SUCCESSIVE administrations have planned for it. The House and the Senate have approved it. The Energy Department is desperate to move forward on it. But the plan to create a permanent storage site for nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert may be delayed. The construction of the underground storage system, which may eventually cost up to $60 billion, was not fully funded in the president's budget this year, because the White House assumed Congress would pass legislation making a nuclear waste fund, which comes from user and utility fees, available to the project. That was one assumption too far: Congress failed to change the rules, and it has so far failed to find other ways to provide the funding needed to get the project on schedule. Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit complicated matters further, handing down a unanimous decision dismissing most of the objections that figured in multiple lawsuits against Yucca Mountain, save one -- but it's a big one. The court concluded that the Environmental Protection Agency acted wrongly when its regulations governing construction of the site demanded only that it guarantee its safety for 10,000 years. In fact, the National Academy of Sciences -- whose views Congress has said the EPA must comply with in these matters -- has declared that geological concerns should be considered for a much longer period, even up to a million years. If Yucca Mountain is to comply with the law, the entire project must be rethought or redesigned with that in mind. Alternatively, the law has to be changed. Theoretically, the latter course should be simplest. But this is an election year, and Nevada is a swing state whose voters definitely do not approve of nuclear waste in their back yard and whose legislators constantly work against it. Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) has stoked the political fires by denouncing the Yucca Mountain project, which the Bush administration supports. According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Mr. Kerry's vice presidential choice, Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.), had promised within hours of his selection to defer to Mr. Kerry on the issue, despite having voted in favor of the nuclear waste repository in 2002. Chances seem slim that Congress will hold hearings on the design of the storage site, or that it will pass legislation designed to sort some of this out -- the course of action the courts suggested. Yet without a major show of political will, the project will never be built. We support the Yucca Mountain project on the grounds that the center of a desert mountain is a better place for the nation's nuclear waste than the several dozen current repositories, many of which are near cities and some of which already are unsafe. But no project of this scale can succeed if Congress is unable to maintain consistent support. Underfunding the research and the construction is one way to ensure an environmental disaster, either in Nevada or in one of the waste dumps that won't be cleaned up if Yucca Mountain isn't built. If politics prevents this project from attracting funding and proper attention, then Congress must propose another solution for the nation's nuclear waste. © 2004 The Washington Post Company _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 46 Las Vegas SUN: Fate of repository shifts back into EPA's hands By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- A federal appeals court decision Friday puts the fate of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in the hands of the Environmental Protection Agency unless Congress intervenes. Nevada officials are optimistic the ruling will ultimately stop the Energy Department's plan to store nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Attorney General Brian Sandoval declared the project dead, but the nuclear industry and the department also declared victory, noting that the court rejected most of Nevada's challenges. "There are multiple paths forward, no one knows what the end is," said Steve Kraft, director of waste management at the Nuclear Energy Institute. He emphasized that nothing has changed in the project since Friday, that the court did not order work stopped on the project and that several years could pass before the effects of the decision could really be felt. "We won't know what's changed until those paths are taken; until it ends you don't know," he said. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia threw out the majority of Nevada's challenges, but it ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency did not follow the law and set a standard for how long the project should contain radiation without heeding the advice of the National Academy of Science. The EPA said 10,000 years. The academy said it should be for the peak life of the radiation, which could up to 300,000 years. Nevada officials say that would mean the project is dead because the project couldn't be built to last for that long. However, both the federal government and the state are expected to appeal the court ruling and, perhaps more importantly, Congress, which approved the repository, could get involved and make a law that would essentially overturn the court's ruling. "They're (DOE) going to the Hill," said Geoff Fettus, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). Fettus argued part of the case against the standards. The department has asked Congress earlier this year to change another NRDC court case, coincidentally won by Fettus, that found the department did not have the authority to classify high-level radioactive waste in three states as something else in order to leave it there. The department asked Congress to grant it the authority. The Senate approved the change just for South Carolina, while the House did not approve the measure. A congressional conference committee is still considering it. The department could ask Congress to change a number of things, but Michele Boyd, legislative representative for Public Citizen, said it would be "incredibly foolish" for any member to vote to remove the requirement for the academy's recommendation on the project because it would remove key scientific oversight. The court threw out the 10,000 year standard and ordered that the agency must either issue a revised radiation standard that follows the academy's recommendation or ask Congress for legislative authority to deviate from the academy's recommendations. "It was Congress that required (the) EPA to rely on (the academy's) expert scientific judgment, and given the serious risks nuclear waste disposal pose for the health and welfare of the American people, it is up to Congress -- not (the) EPA and not this court -- to authorize departures from the prevailing statutory scheme," according to the court decision. The court also threw out the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's licensing standard that also used the 10,000-year compliance period. The department is in the midst of working on the project's license application it planned to submit to the NRC in December using that 10,000-year compliance period and other radiation standards. "It's going to be difficult for (the) DOE (Energy Department) to submit a license application when they don't know the standards they have to meet," Fettus said. "This is critical to licensing. I think (the) DOE would like to relegate this as a minor footnote, but it's not." The department has said for years it needs to submit its license application by this December to reach its planned 2010 opening date. Boyd said there is no way the department could submit the license application because the 10,000-year compliance period is no longer legal. Due to the court decision, it no longer exists. But Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, like the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry's lobbying group, which also supports the project, did not see the decision having a large effect on the project. Instead, Abraham and NEI released statements pointing to the court's rejection of Nevada's challenges against Congress's approval of the project, the department's selection process and the commission's licensing criteria. "While the Court did not question the scientific validity of the Environmental Protection Agency's standards, it did vacate one aspect of the standard, the 10,000-year compliance period," Abraham said. "Therefore, DOE will be working with the EPA and Congress to determine appropriate steps to address this issue." Angie Howard, NEI executive vice president, said the decision should not delay the project. "We are confident the standards can be addressed and the project will move forward," Howard said. "The project can operate safely beyond 10,000 years and it's a matter of just going back and making some decisions." Howard said it was premature to say exactly what the next steps would be but said that more research has been done since the academy's recommendations. Fettus said that by going back to the academy's standard, which will reach far beyond the original 10,000-year mark, the geologic makeup of the mountain will have to be the main barrier against radiation harming the public because no engineered barrier will last that long. "It can't rely on manmade barriers," Fettus said. "The real fundamental issues here is the geology. Is it adequate? This is going to force that assessment. We cannot overstate the importance of that finding by the court." Fettus said there is no specific timeline set for the agency to start working on a new rule, but it is "a domino effect" that will put the licensing process on hold until the agency creates a new rule and the commission creates new licensing criteria based on that rule. A new agency rule will take time to create. The academy's radiation standard recommendation came out in 1995 and the agency did not finalize the rule until 2001. Antonio Rossman, a San Franciso-based attorney for Nevada, estimated it would take at least two years for the EPA to set a new standard, but then the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would also have to make its own new rule, which would also take time. Both would need public comment periods, drafts, final evaluations and other steps required by law when making federal rules. Meanwhile, Rossman pointed out that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act act prohibited filibusters in the Senate and specified the committees that could address the bill that would approve Yucca Mountain. He said those restrictions, which played out in 2002, would not be in place on any bill the department would try to push through. "Now all the rules in Congress to deal with this acute bias toward the minority can be put into play," Rossman said. Nevada's congressional delegation was quick to praise the decision Friday, but also knew it did not immediately spell the end of the project. "I have no doubt that the White House and the nuclear power industry are going to fight the court's action, but this should serve as a warning to both, that science, not politics, must guide this process," said Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev. "We have already wasted billions of dollars on a hole in the Nevada desert, and today's court ruling only proves that the Yucca Mountain is unsafe, unwise and unworkable." Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., said he had been waiting for Friday's decisions for 20 years and that is was a "huge win" for the state but that he still "does not trust Washington, D.C." "I'm not going to let my guard down," Porter said. "Both Democrats and Republican want to find a plan to store the waste, there are 29 states looking for a place for it. I know how serious of an issue this is, there are 400 member that support it and they will try to find a way. There are so many agendas involved." "I wish this would be the end of it but not it's not until I see the last shovel of dirt go into the hole," Porter said. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., called the decision a "fatal blow" to the project, especially because the department would have to go back to Congress to make a change or prove the site will be safe beyond 10,00 years. "That will be a high standard to meet, and one that I doubt the DOE could realistically meet. Ultimately, (Friday's) ruling creates a monumental obstacle and uncertain delay in the licensing process for Yucca Mountain," Gibbons said. "I don't think Congress is going to be easily swayed to deviate from its own safety requirement," Gibbons said. "Whether they can breathe life back into the cadaver, I don't know." ***************************************************************** 47 Las Vegas SUN: Political impact of Yucca remains unclear Democrats hope waste worries will help Kerry By Kirsten Searer LAS VEGAS SUN Forget the donkey: Local Democrats use Yucca Man and Chicken George as party symbols these days. The two mascots have shown up at numerous Republican events in the past few months. Yucca Man, an old friend to Democrats, dresses in a white haz-mat suit to represent the possible perils of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. Chicken George takes a pot shot at President Bush for failing to come to Southern Nevada to talk about Yucca Mountain since he signed a pro-Yucca bill in 2002. Democrats hope that Bush's decision to go ahead with Yucca Mountain -- combined with Democratic presidential contender John Kerry's resolute promise to halt the project -- will hand them Nevada this presidential election. And they feel buoyed by a federal court ruling Friday that found the government didn't heed the National Academy of Science in setting a key standard for the planned repository. But it's unclear what political impact the Yucca Mountain issue will have on this year's tight election. Any clarity of Yucca Mountain as a political issue has been clouded a bit. More than a dozen polls, commissioned over the last few years by Republicans, Democrats and pro- and anti-Yucca groups, show Nevadans' split feelings over Yucca Mountain: + Nevadans consistently object to the project. A range of people -- usually at least 70 percent -- consistently say they don't want the project to come to Nevada. + About 65 percent of Nevadans want the state to continue fighting the project in court, according to a poll commissioned by the state in October. That's almost exactly the same percentage of Nevadans who favored the court fight in June 2002. + Opinions -- and polls -- diverge from there. Some show that while Nevadans disagree with the project, Yucca Mountain doesn't rank high on a list of pressing issues. Other polls say it does. There's the rub as the issue garners more attention this election season. Keith Schwer, director of the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, has tracked Yucca polling for years. Opinions sometimes fluctuate, particularly in rural areas, during tougher economic times, when people see an opportunity for compensation from the government, he said. But usually, rooting for Yucca Mountain in Nevada is "like being against apple pie and motherhood." The question is, will Nevadans use it as a litmus test in the presidential election? Democrats hope so. They're mindful that had Al Gore won Nevada, he would have won the presidency. And Nevada is one of the so-called "battleground" states, meaning plenty of money and attention are being directed here. Over the weekend, national Democrats passed a platform that specifically condemned Yucca Mountain, saying, "We will protect Nevada and its communities from the high level nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, which has not been proven to be safe by sound science." The 2000 Democratic platform simply stated the nuclear waste should be stored in a "scientifically sound manner," though it did not mention Yucca Mountain. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., who sat on the platform committee this weekend, said the message says "to Nevada and the rest of the nation that Democrats find the Yucca Mountain Project to be unsafe, and that we will fight to protect our families from high-level nuclear waste." Berkley said she originally proposed a draft version of the plank, but the committee ended up strengthening the language. Nevada, she said, is the only state specifically mentioned in the Democratic platform. "We just were very fortunate that the language reflected not only the party's position but our soon-to-be (presidential) nominee's position, as well," she said. The national Republicans, though, say they have been basing their view on "sound science." "More than 20 years and $4 billion in scientific study demonstrates that Yucca Mountain is scientifically and technically suitable for development," said Tracey Schmitt, a spokeswoman for the Bush-Cheney campaign. "The D.C. Circuit Court affirmed the actions taken by this administration and the Congress to develop the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada as the nation's first long-term geologic repository for nuclear waste." The court ruling proves, Democrats have said, that Bush lied when he made a pledge to follow "sound science" when he proceeded with the project. "This does delay it long enough for us to change the administration," said Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins. "We won." State Republicans, meanwhile, are walking a careful line. On one hand, Bush's surrogates have flown into town to reassure the public that Bush has based the project on "sound science." On the other, Republicans from Gov. Kenny Guinn to Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., have coyly said they'll "agree to disagree" with the president. Ensign told the local media Friday that Bush "has been ill-served by his advisers" in proceeding with the project. Despite Kerry's strong anti-Yucca position, his new running mate, Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., like many other Democrats, voted in favor of Yucca Mountain in 2002. Many Republicans argue that Edwards' vote proves that both Republicans and Democrats stood behind the effort to pass Yucca Mountain, said Republican strategist Sig Rogich, who worked for the first President Bush. "None of us want Yucca Mountain here, that goes without saying," Rogich said. "But conversely, it's pretty difficult to say it all rests with the president of the United States when Congress, with an overwhelming majority, voted to send it here. That's Republicans and Democrats." The polls don't really help decide the issue. Polls have shown everything from Bush not being affected by his decision on Yucca Mountain to people being less likely to vote for him because of it. Longtime Nevada pollster Kent Oram said that Yucca Mountain typically ranks far below other issues of concern such as education, crime, drugs, water and traffic congestion. "It's not even high enough to register on discussion," he said. "It's a press issue. A lot of people talk a lot about it, but when we ask these questions for years it doesn't come up. If it does, it's minuscule." A new poll from America Coming Together, a group working to defeat Bush, disputes that assertion, however. The poll of registered voters found that only the rising gas prices weighed more on Nevadans' minds than Yucca Mountain. And those worries cut across party lines, the poll found. Groups that traditionally vote Republican all were "very worried" about the project. The question really will be how the voters perceive the debate, and the national campaigns are drawing clear comparisons. Kerry's campaign has promised that a President Kerry would create an international blue-ribbon panel to look at the issue and come up with recommendations on what to do with the nation's nuclear waste. "Given the urgency of this problem, it will be right away," said Sean Smith, spokesman for Kerry's Nevada campaign. "We can't have all this waste being trucked and shipped across this country." Smith brushed aside criticism that Edwards voted for Yucca Mountain, saying Kerry's 16-year record of voting against Yucca Mountain speaks for itself. "John Kerry is at the top of the ticket," Smith said. "It's his vision, it's his platform, and it's going to be his presidency." Republicans from Ensign to top presidential adviser Karl Rove have questioned whether Kerry could fulfill his promise to stop the project. Rove, who predicted that Nevadans will base their vote on the economy, the war on terrorism and the "values" of the presidential candidates, said Nevadans "are smart enough to know it's one thing to make a rash pledge that it's not coming here. "It's another thing to be able to operate on it when you have so many states that have material in their states and for so long have been told that eventually there will be a place to put it," he said. ***************************************************************** 48 Guardian Unlimited: Trial Begins on U.S. Nuclear Waste Costs From the Associated Press [UP] Monday July 12, 2004 11:46 PM By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The government's failure to open a dump site for commercial nuclear waste could expose taxpayers to tens of billions of dollars in damages. The first in an expected string of trials to determine exactly how much began Monday in a courtroom across the street from the White House. Owners of three reactors in New England claim they are spending hundreds of millions of dollars building storage facilities and maintaining spent nuclear fuel that the government under a contract had promised to pick up six years ago. In all, more than 60 claims have been filed seeking damages from the government. More than two decades ago, the government signed a contract with utilities promising to take charge of the highly radioactive used reactor fuel at commercial power plants beginning in 1998. But the government has yet to come up with a central storage site. A number of court cases have ruled that the Department of Energy is liable for the cost of keeping the waste because of a breach of contract. How much is at stake is anyone's guess, but the industry has put the number as high as $56 billion. The first case, involving three utilities that own the Yankee group of reactors in Maine, Massachusetts and Connecticut, went to trial Monday before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The trial is expected to last seven weeks. Jerry Stouck, an attorney representing the utilities, outlined a case that was expected to focus on expenses utilities had to pay because of the government's repeated failures - dating back to 1983 - to get approval for a central waste dump at Yucca Mountain in Nevada and its refusal in the interim to accept the waste at some other facility. ``They built these facilities for one reason only - because of DOE's default,'' Stouck said of the utilities. A Justice Department attorney countered that the damage claims were ``speculation'' and wrongly assumed that if the government had met the 1998 deadline, the New England reactors' waste would have been taken within a few years. In fact, the companies would have had to build storage facilities and maintain fuel for years as they awaited their turn for shipping waste to a central repository, the government argued. ``Even though there was a delay, the (utilities) cannot prove there was incremental damage,'' argued Harold Lester, the government's lead attorney, representing the Energy Department. The courts already have ruled the government violated its contract with the nation's utilities to take charge of the waste. Now the utilities are seeking damages, with a total of 65 claims having been filed including a rush of them at the beginning of the year, just before the six-year statute of limitation for lawsuits expired. ``Damages. Damages. It's all about damages. How much money are we entitled to,'' Stouck said during a break in the proceedings. The case before Judge James Merow of the claims court is limited to used reactor fuel that is being stored at the Maine Yankee, Connecticut Yankee and Yankee Rowe (in Massachusetts) nuclear plant sites. The issue is of special importance to the utilities because the reactors have been shut down and keeping the waste is more expensive and may affect site cleanup. ```If this litigation is successful, it will provide some financial relief to the electric customers who bear the increasing costs to store fuel at these sites as a result of the DOE's failure to met its legal obligations,'' said Bruce Kenyon, chairman of Yankee Atomic Electric Co. The utilities together are asking for $548 million in damages for costs incurred to keep the spent reactor fuel in dry-cask storage until 2010, the year the proposed Yucca Mountain waste site is expected to be opened. The amount is nearly double the $268 million cited in 1999 when the New England utilities began litigation. Stouck said the cost of keeping the waste on site, initially underestimated, has grown because today's terror threats require increased security. But the money sought in this trial is only a fraction of what the government may have to pay, given that these are only three of 65 claims filed by owners of the country's 102 reactors at 72 power plants. The bill could grow if the Yucca Mountain waste site does not open in 2010 as planned. A federal appeals court raised new questions about the Energy Department's ability to keep its timetable Friday as it rejected DOE's proposed radiation protection standard for that site. In a recent letter to Congress, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham estimated that utilities will incur $500 million a year in costs for every year the Yucca Mountain dump is delayed past 2010. ``Some portion of (that cost) ... the department will be liable for,'' he wrote. On the Net: Energy Department: www.doe.gov Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/ymp/index.shtml Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 49 RGJ: Nuke dump fight isn’t finished yet ||| Home [http://www.rgj.com/] RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL 7/11/2004 08:53 pm Opponents of the federal government’s plan to bury the nation’s nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain in Southern Nevada declared the plan dead Friday when an appeals court in Washington, D.C., ruled the Environmental Protection Agency’s standards for the dump illegal. If only it were so. Certainly, the ruling should cause President George W. Bush, who promised that the decision to open the Yucca Mountain waste repository would be based on the scientific evidence, to rethink his approval of the project. The court rejected the EPA’s requirement that the plan protect the public from radiation for 10,000 years. Instead, the court said, the repository must meet a much more stringent standard recommended by the National Academy of Sciences: as much as 300,000 years. That’s in keeping with what Nevada has been arguing for many years: When it becomes obvious that Yucca Mountain can’t meet the established standards, the EPA and Department of Energy simply change the standards to something the repository can meet. After the ruling, opponents, ranging from Washington, D.C.-based Public Citizen to U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said that meeting the more stringent standard would be next to impossible, so the decision effectively kills the plan. But proponents of the Yucca Mountain plan long ago put all their eggs into the rather fragile Yucca Mountain basket and they aren’t likely to give up that easily. Friday’s decision undoubtedly will be appealed, and instead of trying to meet the appropriate standard, they’re likely to ask Congress itself to change the law to lower the threshold to something that Yucca Mountain can meet. And Congress has shown it will take whatever action is necessary to ensure Nevada is stuck with the repository. Whatever happens, more lawsuits are likely, and the delays will push back the opening of Yucca Mountain even further. The appropriate answer, of course, would be for the Bush administration to order a crash program to find a better way to dispose of the waste that has been building up at nuclear power plants for decades than dumping it into a big hole in the ground. Having eliminated all the alternatives years ago to concentrate on the boondoggle at Yucca Mountain, however, the proponents have to continue the fight. So Nevada has no choice but to fight on, too. © Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett ***************************************************************** 50 AU ABC: South Australians suspicious of nuclear waste review [http://abc.net.au/ra/news/] The Australian government is reconsidering a proposal for a national radioactive waste dump in the state of South Australia. The review follows a court ruling that compulsory acquisition of land was not proper. There is also widespread community opposition to the proposal. During a visit to the state last week, Prime Minister John Howard indicated cabinet ministers would review the case. But South Australian Premier Mike Rann says a review was also announced shortly before the last federal election in 2001 but the ruling coalition postponed its decision until after it won government. Mr Rann says says the government should let South Australians know one way or another, prior to this election: "I think that if they try to do another delayiing tactic then South Australians will see through it totally," he said. 12/07/2004 15:09:10 | ABC Radio Australia News [http://abc.net.au/default.htm] © [http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm] ***************************************************************** 51 AU ABC: Cabinet decision on nuclear dump remains unclear ="Australian Broadcasting Corporation Online"> [http://abc.net.au/] Monday, 12 July 2004 Federal Government plans for a radioactive waste dump in South Australia remain unclear. During a visit to South Australia, Prime Minister John Howard said Cabinet would consider its position after the federal court ruled that the compulsory acquisition of the dump site, near Woomera, was unlawful. If the Commonwealth decides to appeal against the decision in the High Court it must do so by next Thursday. But after today's Cabinet meeting, front bencher Warren Truss would not reveal if a decision had been made. [http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm] ***************************************************************** 52 AU ABC: NT may be in line for nuke dump - MP [http://abc.net.au/] Tuesday, 13 July 2004 The Labor Member for Liangiari, Warren Snowden, says the Northern Territory may be being scouted as the site of a nuclear waste dump, because a Country Liberal Party (CLP) member has supported the idea in the past. The Federal Government is reviewing alternative locations for the dump after a court ruling against the compulsory acquisition of land in South Australia to house the facility. Mr Snowden says the CLP Member for Solomon, David Tollner, may have sparked interest in the Northern Territory when he said last year that he did not object to a nuclear waste site. Mr Snowden says there have been no discussions with the Government or the community. "To have the Member for Solomon go out and say, 'well look it's not that bad a thing to happen in the Northern Territory, there's plenty of places we could possibly have it' is just irresponsible and in my view stupid," he said. [ more news ] Last Updated: 6:09:00 AM (ACST) [http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm] ***************************************************************** 53 KVBC: Yucca Mountain Ruling Considered A Victory For Nevada July 12, 2004 Maria Silva Reporting [Msilva@kvbc.com] Two big decisions today affecting the Yucca Mountain project. One a major blow to Nevada. The other providing hope that Yucca Mountain won't become the nations nuclear waste dump. The Department of Energy claims a win because the court dismissed arguments the Yucca waste dump was unconstitutional. Nevada's win came from a technicality. The courts decided the government has to protect the public from radiation for more than 10-thousand years. The EPA will have to conduct studies, research that will take time and likely delay the 2010 scheduled opening of Yucca Mountain. It also gives Nevada leaders more time to kill the project. News 3's Maria Silva talked with those on the front line of this battle against the federal government. Soon after the ruling, both Nevada Democrats and Republicans made their feelings known; all celebrating today's ruling, a ruling they say should give Nevadans hope that the project can be stopped. "It's a tremendous blow to this bloated project." "This is a very significant date for our state." Both Nevada Senators Harry Reid and John Ensign called today's ruling a huge victory, but agreed the fight if far from over. Even though it's been an issue both Nevada Democrats and Republicans have been battling together for many years, the attention turned to how this will affect the November Presidential Election. "You can't pretend to be opposed to something and then with a wink-wink put in your party platform that we should negotiate for benefits or endorse the President who is rushing Yucca Mountain here." Kerry's stance on the issue: Clear. "He has a 16 year record of voting against it." Not so clear is running mate John Edwards. "In his career he's cast one vote for and one against it on all issues that affect Nevada. But in the end all agreed both parties will continue their fight against the project no matter what the cost. Senator John Ensign did acknowledged that Bush's push for the Yucca Mountain project may affect his popularity with Nevada voters, but says, come this November, Nevadans should look at all issues and not just the Yucca Mountain issue. The Kerry-Edwards campaign also released a statement. In it, it says, "Today's court decision confirms that the Bush Administration turned its back on sound science in its rush to build the Yucca Mountain Repository." Yucca Mountain Timeline: + It started back in the early 1980's when the Department of Energy identified Yucca Mountain as one of nine potential sites for storage of the nation’s nuclear waste. + In 1985 President Reagan approved three sites for consideration: Yucca Mountain, Hanford, Washington and Deaf Smith County, Texas. + In 1987 the other sites were dismissed. The government put all its effort in studying Yucca Mountain. + In February of 2002, President Bush gave final approval to make Yucca Mountain the home of the nation’s nuclear waste. [http://www.worldnow.com] All content © Copyright 2000 - 2004 WorldNow and KVBC. All Rights Reserved. For more information on ***************************************************************** 54 NEWS.com.au: N-dump appeal to milk the taxpayer (July 12, 2004) By Samantha Maiden and Rebecca DiGirolama TAXPAYERS face a multi-million-dollar legal bill if the Howard Government agrees today to mount a High Court challenge to ensure that a new radioactive waste dump is built South Australia. As cabinet meets to consider whether to search for a new radioactive waste dump site or appeal against a Federal Court ruling that the commonwealth has misused urgency provisions to secure the remote site, government sources have confirmed that the current legal costs of $60,000 could blow out to "millions of dollars". Despite fears that the controversial dump could damage the Liberal Party's chances of retaining up to three key marginal seats in Adelaide, Finance Minister Nick Minchin has also hit out at opponents of the dump in his home state of South Australia, insisting it is still the safest site in the nation. "All I can do is express my disgust with the political cynicism and opportunism of the Rann Labor Government in frustrating the overwhelming national interest in establishing a national repository in the safest place in Australia," he told The Australian yesterday. "Scientists have told us that is in the central north of South Australia. Cabinet will explore all options in light of the Rann Government's decision." Last year, John Howard accused South Australians of a "pathetically parochial argument" in trying to stop the nuclear waste dump, but he appeared to soften his view last week when campaigning in marginal seats in Adelaide. Pledging to consider voter concerns over the 12-year $5million search for a dump site, the Prime Minister said cabinet would discuss legal options "in a sensible, measured, reasonable way". Any High Court challenge risks a drawn-out legal battle with the Rann Government and would provide a political weapon to federal Opposition Leader Mark Latham, who has pledged not to build a dump in South Australia. The federal Government has until next Thursday to appeal against last month's Federal Court decision, which ruled that the Howard Government had unlawfully acquired land for the dump on Arcoona Station, near Woomera. Liberal MP Trish Worth, whose seat of Adelaide is one of three marginals under threat, said she was ready to face whatever cabinet decided. "I'm used to facing the music and I'm a strong believer in doing what's right for the nation, and we must have a resolution to this," she said. Science Minister Peter McGauran declined to comment yesterday, but has made it clear he wants the dump built on Arcoona Station "one way or another". Australian Conservation Foundation nuclear spokesman David Noonan said internal ALP polling had shown that the dump was the second greatest issue of concern for swinging voters in the seat of Adelaide. The Australian ***************************************************************** 55 NEWS.com.au: Howard warned over nuclear dump (July 12, 2004) By Sam Lienert THE Federal Government was today warned it would suffer a body blow in South Australia at the next election unless it abandoned plans for a nuclear waste dump in the state. SA Premier Mike Rann called on federal Cabinet to abandon plans to build a dump there after a recent Federal Court ruling struck down the acquisition of land for a nuclear waste repository at Woomera in SA's far north. "Unless it is resolved now, then I can give this very firm message that South Australians will use it as an opportunity to record a no vote to a nuclear waste dump at the coming election," Mr Rann told ABC radio. "I think that the Prime Minister knows that more than 80 per cent of South Australians are opposed to us having this inflicted on us." A spokeswoman for federal Science Minister Peter McGauran said the issue had been discussed at today's Cabinet meeting, but a decision would not be made tonight. Mr Rann said Prime Minister John Howard would do well to remember when making a decision there were several marginal Liberal seats in the state. He warned that if the Federal Government chose to appeal the matter in the High Court, the legal battle was likely to be ongoing during the election, and the government would feel the brunt of SA anger at the polls. "Any court action in the High Court would mean that in the middle of that action, South Australians could use the federal election as a referendum against the nuclear waste dump," he said. He said an announcement that the Government would review its plans would also be met with scepticism, as that happened before the last election, with the Government deciding after the election to revive dump plans. "I think if they try and do another delaying tactic then South Australians will see through it totally," he said. "South Australians don't want our state to be the nuclear waste dump site. "You've got to remember the history here - all the sites for nuclear bomb testing in our western desert back in the 1950s and 1960s. "There's all sorts of damage done to our outback, hundreds of millions spent on cleaning it up, and now here we go again." AAP Copyright 2004 News Limited. All times AEST (GMT+10). ***************************************************************** 56 NEWS.com.au: Cabinet splits over nuclear dump plans (July 13, 2004) [http://www.news.com.au/] By Paul Starick FEDERAL Cabinet has split over whether to abandon the national nuclear dump planned for South Australia to avoid an electoral backlash in crucial marginal seats. Cabinet yesterday failed to agree on whether to proceed with the dump in SA or find another site outside the state. It is understood senior SA ministers urged colleagues to consider the dump's unpopularity in their home state and the potential impact on three Government-held marginal seats at this year's federal election. But other ministers argued they did not want the headache of nuclear dump plans in their states. The impasse means Prime Minister John Howard, who visited Adelaide last week, will be expected to make a final decision on the divisive issue. It is understood the dump issue was the last item on Cabinet's agenda yesterday. Cabinet's next meeting is on July 20, in Brisbane. The Federal Government has until July 22 – Thursday next week – to decide whether to appeal to the High Court after losing a crucial legal battle over the dump. The Government's acquisition of the Arcoona Station land, near Woomera, was ruled unlawful by the Federal Court last month. Cabinet considered options including ruling out a national dump for SA and putting nuclear waste from federal agencies in a dump outside the state, on federal land. This would have involved "calling the states' bluff" and demanding they develop their own plans for storing their own nuclear waste. Some SA ministers supported this plan, even though it was a backdown from the hardline federal stance. Almost exactly a year ago, Mr Howard accused the State Government of "pathetically parochial argument" and "jingoism" for trying to stop the dump. On July 8, 2003, Mr Howard acknowledged the dump was unpopular but said "the alleged dangers have been grossly exaggerated". Mr Howard softened his stance during his three-day visit to Adelaide last week, vowing Cabinet would "take into account" South Australians' concerns when reconsidering the issue. "We're not going to take a bull-at-a-gate attitude and we're going to very careful and measured and considerate about how we handle the issue," Mr Howard said last Wednesday. Some senior Government figures are worried about the electoral risk of maintaining a tough stance on the dump when opinion polls show Adelaide's five marginal seats are extremely close. Some believe the Government could keep all three Liberal-held seats and pick up Wakefield from Labor, if the issue was neutralised. Before Cabinet met yesterday, Premier Mike Rann said he hoped it would make a decision on the dump. "I think the Prime Minister knows that people will go into the ballot boxes on election day and use it as a referendum to say no to a radioactive waste dump," he said. "Last week, while he was in Adelaide, the Prime Minister hinted that the Federal Government might reconsider this issue. "So we're hoping for a definitive yea or nay from Federal Cabinet." Australian Conservation Foundation executive director Don Henry said he was disappointed that Cabinet had been unable to agree on ruling out a dump for SA. "I think the issue is very important, and rightly so, for South Australians and it deserves Cabinet treating it very seriously," he said. "They should've made a decision to rule it out then and there. We'd urge for it to be top of the agenda for the next Cabinet meeting." The Advertiser Copyright 2004 News Limited. All times AEST (GMT+10). ***************************************************************** 57 [NukeNet] Savannah River N-Waste Tanks Cracked, Rusted Or Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:54:22 -0700 http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Nuclear-Waste-Tanks.html Reports: S.C. Atomic Waste Tanks Damaged By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: July 10, 2004 Filed at 4:39 p.m. ET COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) -- Fifteen tanks holding deadly atomic waste at a nuclear weapons complex along the Savannah River have cracked, rusted or leaked, according to federal inspection reports. Some of the cracks date to the 1950s, when the steel tanks first went into use at the Savannah River Site. But inspection reports say some leaks have been found in the past three years. Advertisement In 2001, 92 gallons of radioactive waste leaked through a 40-year-old tank into a containment area. Six leak sites were found on the 750,000-gallon, 24-foot high steel tank. Secondary containment systems have kept radioactive poisons from getting into groundwater. But a containment system failed in 1960, and the waste leaked into the ground, the reports said. The 300-square-mile federal weapons complex has 51 steel tanks holding 37 million gallons of waste, including uranium, cesium and plutonium. Westinghouse Savannah River Co., which runs the site for the U.S. Department of Energy, says some tanks are within 8 to 10 feet of the water table, raising concerns. But Dean Campbell, a spokesman for Westinghouse, says the government does not know of any tanks that currently are leaking. ``They obviously are getting older and will not last forever,'' said Charles Hansen, an assistant waste disposition manager with the U.S. Department of Energy. ``This is highly radioactive, and there is a concern to get that waste out as soon as possible. There's always some potential for inadvertent leakage into the environment.'' The Energy Department wants Congress to allow it to empty most of the waste from tanks and fill them with a grout intended to reduce the threat remaining material can pose to groundwater. But critics of the DOE plan say the tanks' poor condition shows the need to empty the containers completely. _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 58 Oak Ridger: Bush gets 'close look' at Oak Ridge Story last updated at 2:42 p.m. on July 12, 2004 By: Paul Parson | Oak Ridger Staff paul.parson@oakridger.com [paul.parson@oakridger.com] During a Monday morning visit to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, President George W. Bush got a "close look" at some Libyan nuclear weapons-related material and delivered a 30-minute speech on the country's accomplishments in the war against terrorism. "America is safer because of your service in Oak Ridge," the president told the crowd of officials that filled the 273-seat Wigner Auditorium - and the many other employees who watched via a Web cast. Department of Energy officials, Oak Ridge officials, and supporters Monday morning at ORNL. Bush viewed Libyan nuclear materials being stored in Oak Ridge before his speech, saying America's possession of them has made America safer. "The world changed on Sept. 11," he said. "And, since that day, we have changed the world." The president said America has led a "steady and confident" campaign against "the dangers of our time." According to ORNL Director Jeff Wadsworth, the items President Bush saw during his 15- to 20-minute tour consisted of material that could be used to enrich uranium. That capability would mean a country would be able to make nuclear weapons. The Libyan-related materials were initially shipped to Oak Ridge earlier this year. And, just last month, Oak Ridge officials also assisted in the removal of radioactive material from a former Iraqi nuclear research facility. However, the president made no mention of this project during his talk. President Bush was unable to visit the Y-12 National Security Complex during his trip to Oak Ridge. Both ORNL and Y-12 have played major roles in nonproliferation efforts. Dennis Ruddy, president and general manager of BWXT Y-12, said it was great for his facility and ORNL to receive acknowledgment of Oak Ridge's accomplishments. Oak Ridge Mayor David Bradshaw agreed. ***************************************************************** 59 Re: [du-list] Terminate DOT-E 9649 Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 18:56:55 -0700 Great letter, Elaine. I've posted it to go with the action plan. See the homepage at http://www.traprockpeace.org Best wishes, Charlie Charles Jenks, attorney at law President of the Core Group Traprock Peace Center 103A Keets Road Deerfield, MA 01342 413-773-1633; fax 413-773-7507 charles@mtdata.com http://www.traprockpeace.org On Jul 12, 2004, at 1:40 PM, Elaine Hunter wrote: Mr. Billings, I ask that the DOT immediately terminate and not renew DOT-E 9649. Depleted uranium munitions should have a “Radioactive” placard and an “Explosives” placard on shipments. Depleted uranium is an extremely toxic material and much more dangerous when shipped with an explosive propellant as in the case of DU munitions. In case of a fire, first responders (local police and fire fighters) would have no idea the shipment contained radioactive material. The public has a right to know about hazardous shipments through their communities. Many time I pass the Blue Grass Army Depot [BGAD], a repository for depleted uranium munitions, which is adjacent to the cities of Richmond and Berea, KY. As I sit now, I am less than 10 miles from BGAD. It disturbs me very much to know these munitions can be transported without HazMat identification. Kentucky has some of the highest vehicle insurance rates in the country. The roads get rainy, snowy, icy, messy--accidents happen. Whatever delivery route is taken, large populations are at risk if there should be a catastropic accident. Our citizens and our brave men and women who respond to such accidents deserve, no, have the right to know immediatly what they are dealing with. The federal government and the military MUST stop trying to gut everything that has been done to protect citizens and the environment. The future of our children and grandchildren depend on it. Elaine A. Hunter, DUinKY Awareness Campaign--deep inside the DU Triangle. 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 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 theYahoo! Terms of Service. ------------------------ 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/ ***************************************************************** 60 [du-list] DU in the news - 11th July 04 Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:54:18 -0700 http://onlinejournal.com/Commentary/070604Becker/070604becker.html Includes... What would you do if newborns in your family and community were born with hideous defects as a result of the all the depleted uranium contamination left behind by the spent munitions that liberated (sic) you? Commentary What would you do? By Glenn Becker Online Journal Contributing Writer Download a .pdf file for printing. Adobe Acrobat Reader required. Click here to download a free copy. July 6, 2004—What would you do if in the middle of the night a heavily armed and armored goon squad invaded your sanctuary called home and terrorized you and your family with threats and beatings, and maybe even raped the females, killed one of your family members or took them away never to be seen or heard from again? What would you do if your child was in the backyard playing and suddenly you see his head explode from a psychopathic snipers' bullet? What would you do if you saw a picture of your best friend lying dead in a partially wrapped body bag and a foreign soldier posing gleefully giving the thumbs up signal? What would you do if a car full of neighbors drove by and suddenly their car was riddled to pieces by .50 caliber gunfire and the shooters then walked up to the mangled mass of metal and finished off those who managed to survive the unprovoked attack? What would you do if newborns in your family and community were born with hideous defects as a result of the all the depleted uranium contamination left behind by the spent munitions that liberated you? What would you do if you had to watch a loved one die a slow agonizing death due radiation poisoning from the same depleted uranium contamination? What would you do if you had to recant your religious beliefs, or face the possibility of sick and perverted sexual humiliation or a tortuous death? What would you do if your unwitting child curiously picked up an unexploded cluster bomb and was killed or maimed? What would you do if you found out your daughter felt she had to become a prostitute in order to help the family afford the basic necessities of life? What would you do if a local family was having a wedding party and they were torn to pieces by foreign troops firing bullets and bombs, and had no regard as to whether or not they killed innocent men, women or children? What would you do if foreign corporations came into your country and plundered your natural resources? What would you do if you were coming home only to find arrogant bullies had demolished it with bulldozers? What would you do if those who act less than human treated you as if you were less than human? What would you do if constant fear, suffering and death caused by foreigners, with no end in sight, came to visit your neighborhood and country? Take a moment or two and try to imagine yourself in these conditions, and then ask yourself, what would you do? That is, if you dare. cf Terrorists not crazy, says psychiatrist Reuters - Jul 9, 2004 LONDON (Reuters) - Terrorists are not crazy, but can be driven to kill by witnessing violence first hand or on television, a leading researcher says. 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 c4ceb.jpg c4d39.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: c4ceb.jpg: 00000001,4bef5bab,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: c4d39.jpg: 00000001,4bef5bac,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 61 [du-list] DU in the news - 13th July 04 Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 18:56:53 -0700 SICK Gulf Veterans 'Made to Feel Like the Enemy' The Scotsman - Edinburgh,Scotland,UK ... They were exposed to atmospheric pollution from burning oil wells and depleted uranium dust whilst decommissioning site and vehicles attacked with DU weapons ... <http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=3194698> 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 186351.jpg 186480.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: 186351.jpg: 00000001,1986207f,00000000,00000000 Attachment Converted: 186480.jpg: 00000001,19862080,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************