*****************************************************************
09/10/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.217
*****************************************************************
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 NewsFromRussia.Com Iran nuclear program
2 AFP: US gives up on getting Iran to UN Security Council in September
3 AFP: UN atomic agency seeks to visit key Iranian defense site - dipl
4 Korea Herald: 'Uranium test stemmed from curiosity'
5 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL]Embarrassing disclosures
6 Korea Herald: N.E. Asia caught up in arms race
7 Korea Herald: Seoul rejects reports of nuclear experiments 6 years a
8 BBC: Diplomatic push on N Korea talks
9 AFP: South Korea's nuclear research not linked to weapons - US
10 KoreaTimes : 6-Party Nuke Talks Not Likely in Sept.
11 KoreaTimes : Lawmakers Downplay Nuclear Test
12 KoreaTimes: Poor Handling of Nuclear Issue
13 KoreaTimes: Seoul Strongly Denies Any Nuclear Program
14 Washington Times: U.N. nuclear agency asleep at the switch
15 US: MoJo: Driving Votes the Democrats' Way
NUCLEAR REACTORS
16 US: NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Environmental Impact Statement fo
17 US: NRC: In the Matter of U.S. Inspection Services, Dayton, OH; Orde
18 US: Chattanoogan.com: TVA's Baxter Touts Nuclear As Cheaper, Clean -
19 TheStar.com: Restarting Bruce reactors tricky
20 Mail & Guardian: SA nuclear ring's international links
21 US: Public Citizen: Nuclear Agency Illegally Hid Information From th
22 ThisisLondon: Invesco in U-turn over British Energy
23 Sofia Morning News: Poor Information Generates N-Plant Protests
24 US: APP.COM - Viewpoint: Oyster Creek plant is safe, doesn't pollute
25 Guardian Unlimited: BE rescue plan wins EC approval
NUCLEAR SAFETY
26 US: ONN. Ohio News Now: Kerry Pledges Support For Plant's sick Worke
27 VaalWeekly: NUCLEAR SCANDAL EXPLODES ...
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
28 US: AP Wire: Radioactive plume detected near former LA nuclear resea
29 Nevada Appeal: AG files new lawsuit over Yucca Mountain
30 Innovations Report: Do Rocks Hold The Key To Nuclear Waste Storage?
31 US: AU ABC: Ranger problems highlight safety 'flaws'.
32 Waterford News & Star: Cullen concerned over inadequate UK response
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
33 KIFI: U.S. Department of Energy Official Discusses Future of INEEL
34 Tri-City Herald: Board disputes Hanford cleanup safety
OTHER NUCLEAR
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 NewsFromRussia.Com Iran nuclear program
Pravda.ru [http://english.pravda.ru/] :// Russia
04:14 2004-09-11
The United States narrowed differences with European allies
Friday on how to pressure Iran to renounce the development of
nuclear weapons, but it hasn't yet won agreement to haul the
country before the U.N. Security Council, a U.S. official said.
Washington wants the Europeans to back its attempts to have Iran
declared in violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
If the U.N. atomic watchdog, the International Atomic Energy
Agency, were to vote to do so at its three-day meeting in
Austria next week, it could lead to Security Council sanctions.
Britain, France and Germany have signaled they don't want the
IAEA to vote on the U.S. proposal before November, to give
diplomatic efforts more time.
The gap between the United States and those three countries was
narrowed at a meeting of the Group of Eight countries, U.S.
Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton said. But, he added, "We
have a ways to go", informs USATODAY.
According to Reuters, The United States, which wants Iran hauled
before the U.N. Security Council over its nuclear program, said
on Friday there could be no "double standard" when tackling
South Korea's unsanctioned experiments.
But Undersecretary of State John Bolton, Washington's top
official on non-proliferation, said a full international probe
into Seoul's activities was needed before decisions were taken.
"We are still interested in knowing all the facts ... but one
thing I can assure is that we will not allow a double standard
in terms of how we treat the violations ...," he told a news
conference.
On Wednesday, U.S. officials, speaking on condition of
anonymity, told Reuters that South Korea would probably be
referred to the Security Council, which can impose sanctions on
countries that break nuclear treaties.
South Korea acknowledged last week that scientists from the
state-run Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute enriched a
trace amount of uranium in three laser tests conducted in
January and February 2000.
Western diplomats in Vienna have said the level of enrichment
accomplished was close to weapons-grade, but South Korea's top
nuclear scientist said that was speculation.
Bolton, who was in Geneva for a regular series of talks with
fellow members of the Group of Eight (G8) industrialized
countries on nuclear issues, said the Vienna-based International
Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) would discuss South Korea's
admission at its board meeting next week.
The official said US Under Secretary of State for arms control
and international security John Bolton was now talking in Geneva
with European diplomats "about a trigger mechanism" to
effectively set a deadline for Iran ahead of the following IAEA
board meeting in November.
The trigger could be "to require that Iran suspend immediately
and fully all uranium enrichment-related work" or "for Iran to
grant complete, immediate, unrestricted access to whatever
locations the IAEA deems necessary" or for Iran to provide by a
certain date, such as October 31, "full information on all
imported materials and components relevant to the P1 and P2
centrifuge program," the official said.
Uranium can be enriched through centrifuges into a highly
refined form that can be used as fuel for civilian reactors or
to make an atomic bomb.
Europe's three main countries -- Britain, France and Germany --
are against taking Iran to the Security Council as they stress
cooperating with Tehran to get it to come clean about its
program, reports Channelnewsasia.
Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU [http://www.pravda.ru/] ". When
*****************************************************************
2 AFP: US gives up on getting Iran to UN Security Council in September -
US official
[http://www.spacewar.com/] [http://www.spacewar.com/] US
VIENNA (AFP) Sep 10, 2004
The United States now realizes that it does not have the
majority it needs at the UN nuclear watchdog to bring Iran before
the UN Security Council over Tehran's alleged atomic weapons
program, a US official told AFP.
"We recognize we are not going to get majority support for a
non-compliance finding (to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)
in September" at the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA)
35-nation board of governors meeting in Vienna that begins
Monday, a US state department official told AFP by phone from
Washington.
The official said US Under Secretary of State for arms control
and international security John Bolton was now talking in Geneva
with European diplomats "about a trigger mechanism" to
effectively set a deadline for Iran ahead of the following IAEA
board meeting in November.
The trigger could be "to require that Iran suspend immediately
and fully all uranium enrichment-related work" or "for Iran to
grant complete, immediate, unrestricted access to whatever
locations the IAEA deems necesssary" or for Iran to provide by a
certain date, such as October 31, "full information on all
imported materials and components relevant to the P1 and P2
centrifuge program," the official said.
Uranium can be enriched through centrifuges into a highly refined
form that can be used as fuel for civilian reactors or to make an
atomic bomb.
Europe's three main countries -- Britain, France and Germany --
are against taking Iran to the Security Council as they stress
cooperating with Tehran to get it to come clean about its
program.
But diplomats said the three countries were now backing the US
call for Iran to fully suspend enrichment, including the first
step of converting mineral uranium yellowcake into the gas that
is the feedstock for making the enriched uranium that can be used
in bombs.
A "tactical gap" between Washington and the European countries
was narrowing but "we have a ways to go," Bolton told a news
conference in Geneva, following a US-hosted meeting with his
counterparts from the other Group of Eight (G8) industrialised
countries.
"The objective that the United States has been pursuing has been
to ensure that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapons capability
and that is an objective shared by all of the G-8 countries,"
Bolton said.
"There is no disagreement on our broad objective. What we have
tried to do here today and yesterday was to close the tactical
gap that has existed between the United States and ... Britain
France and Germany," he said.
"We made progress in that regard here ... I think discussions
will continue over the weekend and into next week and we will see
what we are able to do."
The US envoy declined, however, to say exactly what advances had
been made.
"I do not want to really get into the specifics because the
questions of closing the tactical gap I think are best addressed
in private consultations," he said, adding that emails and
telephone calls would follow Friday's talks.
The United States and the Euro 3 are separately preparing
resolutions for Monday's IAEA meeting in Vienna.
Iran's controversial bid to generate nuclear power at its Bushehr
plant is seen by arch-enemies Israel and the United States as a
cover for nuclear weapons development, allegations that Iran
denies.
Government officials from the G8 countries -- Britain, Canada,
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States -- as
well as other nations met in Geneva on Thursday to discuss
non-proliferation issues.
All rights reserved. © 2004 [http://www.afp.com/] . Sections of
*****************************************************************
3 AFP: UN atomic agency seeks to visit key Iranian defense site - diplomats
Homebase"> [http://www.spacewar.com/] WAR.WIRE
VIENNA (AFP) Sep 10, 2004
The UN atomic agency has asked to visit one of Iran's main
military sites, Parchin near Tehran, but the Iranians have not
agreed to the visit, diplomats said Friday, as an Iranian
resistance group said Tehran planned to build a nuclear bomb by
next year.
The visit would be part of the Vienna-based International Atomic
Energy Agency's (IAEA) investigation of Iran's nuclear program on
US charges that Tehran is secretly developing nuclear weapons.
Parchin, 30 kilometres (18 miles) southwest of Tehran, is a site
for a variety of defense projects, including Defense Industries
Organizationwork in chemical explosives, but the IAEA is
wondering if Tehran is possibly doing nuclear weapons work there.
Iran says its nuclear program is strictly civilian and peaceful
and that it is not developing atomic weapons.
A diplomat close to the IAEA confirmed that the agency had
requested to send inspectors to Parchin but said this was not
included in an IAEA report on Iran published September 1 since
"whenever you are in the negotiating process, you should not
mention what you are negotiating."
The IAEA's 35-nation board of governors is to meet next Monday to
review the Iran file, with the United States saying Iran should
be taken to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions.
The IAEA did write in the report: "It is important for Iran to
support the agency's efforts to provide access to locations,
personnel and information relevant to safeguards implementation
in response to agency requests."
A US official said from Washington that the IAEA had, according
to verbal accounts, dropped the mention of Parchin in the written
repport, as well as a reference to concern about Iran's work with
beryllium.
Beryllium has civilian applications but can also be used in
combination with polonium to make a neutron initiator that is
effectively a trigger for a nuclear bomb.
The official said the concern about Parchin was that the Iranians
may be working on testing "high-explosive shaped charges with an
inert core of depleted uranium" as a sort of dry test for how a
bomb with fissile material would work.
A non-American diplomat confirmed the US assertion.
An IAEA spokesman refused to comment.
Exiled Iranian opposition officials meanwhile claimed in Paris
Friday that the Tehran regime plans to have its first nuclear
bomb built by the middle of next year.
The National Council of Resistance of Iran said Tehran has
allocated some 16 billion dollars (13 billion euros) to the
program.
"The Iranian regime is trying every means to avoid a decision by
the IAEA's Board of Governors next week to refer Iran's case to
the UN Security Council," the group said, citing "accurate
information" from opposition inside Iran.
European countries which have sought to remain engaged with
Tehran are resisting calls to send Iran before the Security
Council.
The NCRI claimed that Tehran "is engaged in yet another deceptive
attempt to prevent a decisive decision by the international
community ... This would give (Iran) enough time to advance their
plans for developing a nuclear bomb."
Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei "has ordered the
relevant apparatus of the regime to produce the first nuclear
bomb by mid 2005," the resistance group said.
They said Khamenei had added another two billion dollars to this
project "which brings the total spending for the regime's nuclear
projects to 16 billion dollars."
In order to meet the deadline set by Khamenei, various sites
including Natanz, Isfahan, and Arak are very active and engineers
are working extended hours and during holidays, it claimed.
A leading Iranian hardliner warned the international community
Friday not delude itself that the Islamic regime could be
persuaded to abandon its nuclear programme, saying it had been
approved at the highest level of Iranian leadership.
"They should know that the Iranian nation has taken its decision
and that the supreme leader is firmly behind the notion of
acquiring nuclear technology," Ayatollah Ahmad Janati said.
All rights reserved. © 2004 Agence France-Presse
*****************************************************************
4 Korea Herald: 'Uranium test stemmed from curiosity'
2004.09.11
The writer of this article is president of the Korea Atomic
Energy Research Institute in Daejeon. He approved the experiments
in 2000 which produced 0.2 gram of enriched uranium, and explains
the background. - Ed.
By Chang In-soon
Scientists have a strong innate curiosity and a responsibility
to find how things work. That is what led to the production of
0.2 gram of uranium in experiments four years ago - a disclosure
made this past week which regretfully has stirred up unfounded
suspicions in foreign and national media.
We experimented to produce enriched gadolinium that is an
efficient and effective substance in controlling nuclear fuel. In
the effort to develop and localize nuclear fuel, we experimented
not only with gadolinium but also other substances such as
samarium and thallium. We found that the enrichment of gadolinium
was not economic. The research team, consisting of 4-5
scientists, then asked if they could try processing uranium using
the new technology.
I couldn't say no because I understood their curiosity, being a
scientist myself. We enriched 0.2 gram of uranium through a
series of the experiments and then immediately scrapped the
facility.
The Safeguard Agreement endorsed by the South Korean government
in February required the country to report any research or
experiment involving nuclear activity, as well as nuclear
substances. The government had to report within 180 days of
effecting the agreement.
The Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute therefore notified
the government in June about the uranium experiment, providing a
report that had to be sent to the International Atomic Energy
Agency. Government officials were baffled at the outset why we
had not provided this information previously.
The reason why we had not provided notification previously was
because until that time the uranium experiment was not part of
the gadolinium enrichment project. We didn't think it was
necessary to notify about a non-related experiment.
We did provide a report once the additional protocol came into
effect and made us responsible to notify every significant
experiment. Our report shows the international community how
transparent we are in running our nuclear research and how much
we are trying to comply with international agreements such as the
Non-Proliferation Treaty.
If our aim was to produce weapons-grade uranium, we would have
used a conventional method that has already proven effective.
Nobody uses laser technology to enrich weapons-grade uranium
generally. Also, if we had any other intentions, we would have
continued to run the facility - not scrap it - and would have
tried to conceal it.
The amount of the enriched uranium was only 0.2 gram. It is well
known to the world that about 15 kilogram of uranium and 90
percent of enrichment is required to produce a nuclear weapon.
What could we do using 0.2 gram of uranium? Therefore, I want to
make clear the experiment was executed for purely 'academic'
reasons and because of scientists' natural "curiosity'.
A few days ago, one Japanese journalist asked me repeatedly
whether the experiment was aimed at developing nuclear weapons. I
responded with a question on whether Japan was producing nuclear
weapons because it had an enrichment facility that could produce
more than 500 tons of enriched plutonium annually. He answered,
"no." I him that was my answer, too - "no."
It is groundless for the foreign media to regard our uranium
experiment, carried out because of common curiosity, as a trial
of nuclear weapon development.
As is generally known, the country relies for 97 percent of its
national energy resources. It has accomplished sustainable
economic growth so far because of its early introduction of
nuclear power plants. We run 19 nuclear power plants currently
that provide 40 percent of national energy supplies. We are 6th
in the world in nuclear power plants. However, we fully rely for
uranium enrichment' on foreign countries such as Australia,
Canada, and the United States.
I think bitterly to myself about the reality that we spend 400
billion won annually to import nuclear fuel and refuse to
consider our "curiosity" as a secret nuclear weapon development
program.
The experiment had no other meaning than to suggest, from an
academic point of view, a different way of separating chemical
elements.
I wish people would stop politicizing the issue. More than
anything else, as the top decision maker in charge of the
institute, I feel chagrined at causing any anxiety among the
Korean people and the international community.
2004.09.11
*****************************************************************
5 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL]Embarrassing disclosures
2004.09.11
One-fifth of a gram of low-grade enriched uranium and some
milligrams of plutonium truly are too little to be considered as
any serious efforts at weapons development, but they are large
enough to put the government of Korea in an extremely awkward
situation before the suspicious eyes of non-proliferation
watchers. Seoul's attempt to pass the buck to past
administrations looks futile.
Comparing the small amounts to the scale of the nuclear
development programs in North Korea, where plutonium produced
through operation of its 5 megawatt experimental reactor is
suspected to reach some tens of kilograms, are not of any help.
In the business of nuclear development, what counts is its
purpose, as well as the possibility of dissemination.
The plutonium extraction reportedly took place in a laboratory in
Seoul in 1982, in the time of President Chun Doo-hwan. It was
during the extension of military rule when it is hard to imagine
that a group of scientists at a state-run institute could conduct
experiments of such a sensitive nature without the knowledge of,
or authorization from, government authorities.
The head researcher responsible for the experiment is dead and
the surviving members of the team are quoted as saying it was a
genuine academic project. But we believe that the state
intelligence service at that time must have made some records on
the experiments that might be able to shed some light on the
mystery.
On the other hand, the uranium enrichment experiment was
conducted in 2000, six years after North Korea suspended its
plutonium-based nuclear development program under an agreement
with the United States in 1994 and is known to have engaged in an
uranium enrichment project with the help of Pakistan. Again the
key suspicion is any possibility of official involvement in the
experiment at the same state-run Korea Atomic Energy Research
Institute.
Thorough investigation and full disclosure are in order as to
the hows and whys of the nuclear experiments so that any domestic
and international suspicions can be dispelled and the forthcoming
six-way talks on North Korean nuclear development may not be
marred. Pyongyang officials' criticism of U.S. "double standards"
sounds bitter but their warning of a "nuclear arms race" in
Northeast Asia that might be triggered by the experiments in
South Korea is nonsensical.
2004.09.11
*****************************************************************
6 Korea Herald: N.E. Asia caught up in arms race
2004.09.11
By Joo Sang-min
This is the last article in a four-part series examining the
situation in Northeast Asia amid disputes among Korea, China and
Japan over history, territories and other issues. -Ed.
By Joo Sang-min
Despite burgeoning economic cooperation and common views on
terror threats, Northeast Asian countries are likely to lead the
world in the speed of missile proliferation, experts say.
The United States, Japan, China and the two Koreas are all
building up state-of-the-art defense capabilities as they seek to
expand their military roles in tandem with their corresponding to
their economic and political status.
The U.S. transformation of its global forces following the
Sept.11, 2001, terror attacks and the U.S. determination not to
lose a grip on the region have forced the relevant countries to
recalibrate their security postures.
Analysts agree Washington has been a stabilizing force by
maintaining a sizable number of ground troops in the region. They
note that the United States, with its global realignment, plans
to develop its forces into more agile units to respond better to
regional conflicts. At the same time, the United States wants to
establish a military position in the region to counter China's
efforts to expand its powers in the region.
Political scientist Kim Il-young of Sungkyunkwan University
expects a domino effect in the arms race in the region if the
U.S. military balance wanes.
"Japan would immediately seek its rearmament, followed by China
and Taiwan, to a point of developing nuclear weapons," he said.
Analysts say the missile shield will become the first stimulus
in a new arms race among Northeast Asian countries because they
want to try to outdo each other in missiles and counter-missile
technology.
Japan successfully defined itself as a key U.S. ally by actively
agreeing to the request to send units of its Self Defense Forces
to Iraq and decided to adopt a U.S.-led missile defense system by
2006, in return for acquiescence to expand its restrained
military role.
Japan has started to discuss revising its constitution by 2007 so
that it can rearm its Self-Defense Forces.
It has only about 258,000 soldiers, fare less than either Korea,
but its army, air force and navy forces are estimated to be
stronger than China and Russia.
It has 89 Apache helicopters, about 1,200 fighting tanks and
about 1,000 armored vehicles. The South Korean Defense Ministry
says Japan earmarked $44 billion for its 2004 defense budget -
second after the United States' $416.2 billion.
It also decided to deploy four destroyers equipped with the
advanced Aegis antimissile system in the East Sea. Ship-to-air
guided missiles called SM-3 and Patriot Advanced Capability-3
surface-to-air missiles will also be included in its defense
posture.
Its envisioned introduction by 2005 of aerial refueling tankers
also signals a major policy shift for Japan, as it will give its
air force the ability to project power well beyond its borders
and territorial waters.
Seeing these moves as a possible security threat in the near
future, China is also spurring its armament race.
It has emerged a No.1 weapons importer since 2001 and this year
is spending about $25 billion on its 2.5 million strong military.
China is also moving to deploy a military satellite and
satellite aircrafts, including Y-8 Airborne Early Warning
Aircraft.
It has been increasing its force of Russian Sukhoi-27/30 fighter
jets, which can operate independently in combat over hostile
territory and attack enemy airfields.
China particularly fears that the U.S.-led anti-arsenal shield
will be extended over Taiwan, increasing the independence
sentiment against the mainland government's policy of a unified
China.
"If Washington proceeds with its MD plans, Beijing believes its
own nuclear arsenal could be devalued," said Kim Byung-yong in a
weekly report published by the Korea Institute for Defense
Analysis, a government-funded military think tank.
Actually, the Bush administration is concerned about the
possibility that China could deny U.S. access to its allies and
interests in East Asia, a point emphasized in the U.S.
Quadrennial Defense Review report released in 2001.
The report said a "military competitor with a formidable
resource base will emerge," in a reference to China. It called
for a continued strong alliance with Japan if Washington is to
preserve a forward military capability in East Asia that "can
swiftly defeat an adversary with only modest reinforcement" while
sustaining a "favorable balance of military power" in East Asia.
North Korea's nuclear ambitions and conventional weapons, which
can carry chemical warheads, are a constant source of concern and
add insecurity in the region, analysts say.
A KIDA report entitled "2003-2004 Military Powers in Northeast
Asia," says Pyongyang, which realizes it cannot win a
conventional war, has been developing asymmetrical threats such
as nuclear and chemical weapons to use them as bargaining chips
for its survival.
"Different evaluations on the North's potential threats between
Seoul and Washington may deepen insecurity in the peninsula,"
said professor Kim of Sungkyunkwan University.
Kim Jae-du, a researcher at KIDA, said the North's reinforcement
of missiles was one of the reasons that the United States
accelerated its efforts to establish a missile defense system in
Northeast Asia, although this could fuel the Northeast Asia arms
race.
Pyongyang is building and deploying intermediate-range ballistic
missiles capable of hitting targets up to 4,000 kilometers away.
It has also been testing a new main engine for its long-range
intercontinental ballistics missiles, the Daepodong-2, the
Defense Ministry said in a report to the parliamentary Defense
Committee. The ICBM is capable of reaching U.S. military bases in
Alaska or Hawaii.
Analysts say the North's mainstay lineup of Scud and Rodong
missiles, which fly much shorter distances and can carry chemical
warheads, are much more dangerous since they can hit Seoul and
neighboring cities.
Such concerns were confirmed in another KIDA report compiled at
the request of the Defense Ministry and the president's National
Security Council. The report predicted South Korea will likely
suffer decisive damage if the North makes a sudden attack with
its biochemical and nuclear arms at an early stage of any
conflict.
Currently, the North has about 600 Scud missiles with ranges of
300 kilometers to 500 kilometers, as well as the Rodong-1 that
can go 1,300 kilometers and is capable of reaching most parts of
Japan.
The U.S. global repositioning of its troops is forcing South
Korea to drastically build up its military to be less dependent
on Washington and improve military intelligence-gathering
technology such as unmanned reconnaissance planes and airborne
warning and control systems,
Professor Kim Sung-han at the Institute of Foreign Affairs and
National Security said Washington wants to use its forces in
Korea, a deterrent against North Korean military threats, as an
expeditionary force in East Asia so they can be deployed to
regional conflicts or to fight terror.
"Washington wants to transform the alliance with Seoul into a
regional security alliance, and to that end, it wants Seoul to
transform itself into an up-to-dated fighting forces," Kim said.
Some analysts are concerned about an armaments race.
They say efforts to enhance war capabilities with the
introduction of state-of-the-art weapons in the region will
significantly accelerate the pace of an arm s buildup in the
region.
Long-range precision-strike systems nullify conventional war
superiority in terms of distance over land, sea, or air. Large
expanses of territory are no longer a war capability in the face
of asymmetrical threats. Ironically, new state-of-the-art weapons
promoted as deterrents are actually fueling the arms race.
(smjoo@heraldm.com)
2004.09.11
*****************************************************************
7 Korea Herald: Seoul rejects reports of nuclear experiments 6 years ago
2004.09.11
By Choi Soung-ah
The government yesterday adamantly denied new reports from
Washington accusing it of carrying out secret nuclear experiments
more than six years ago.
A top official at the Foreign Ministry said reports that South
Korea is suspected of having conducted such tests more than six
years ago in violation of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty are
"absurd" and "completely false," adding that measures are being
taken by the government to correct the wrongly stated facts.
"We make ourselves clear that those reports are preposterous and
completely groundless. We deny those accusations entirely," the
official said.
"After joining the NPT in 1975, the government and the IAEA
agreed on the security protocol and since then we have fully
complied with the nuclear-free agreement and closely maintained
IAEA inspections."
Stressing that Seoul will not allow such accusations hinder the
trust built up with the international community, the official
said "We have never had suspicions of nuclear development and
never will in the future."
The news follows Thursday's acknowledgment by South Korea it
extracted a tiny "insignificant amount" of plutonium during a
research experiment in 1982, a declaration that came only a week
after it admitted tests in 2000 had produced 0.2 gram of enriched
uranium.
Diplomats at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna
reportedly said Seoul was suspected of conducting nuclear
experiments more than six years ago. They were quoted as saying,
"South Korean officials had worked hard to hide the work from
inspectors."
"They (South Korea) had a fairly elaborate plan involving denial
and deception in order to evade detection by inspectors," a
report quoted one diplomat as saying.
The U.N. nuclear watchdog last week investigated South Korea's
admitted experiment on plutonium and uranium - the two key
ingredients for nuclear weapons - and will examine if it
seriously violated the treaty and whether that matter could be
referred to the United Nations Security Council in November.
"It is up to the IAEA to judge whether it was a violation or
noncompliance of the security pact, but we will continue to prove
that it was completely innocent," the official said.
According to the official, even if the IAEA rules that Seoul's
previous experiments, either with the plutonium or uranium, as a
breach of the treaty, the issue will not automatically be taken
up to the U.N. Security Council.
But if the nuclear watchdog judges the issue as "noncompliance"
of the pact, they are obligated to report the issue to the
council where it will be "taken into note" for further measures.
The South Korean government has already informed the situation
and explained its position to all 35 board-member nations of the
IAEA, the official said.
"Most countries showed the reaction that they understood our
explanation."
(bluelle@heraldm.com)
*****************************************************************
8 BBC: Diplomatic push on N Korea talks
Last Updated: Friday, 10 September, 2004
[South Korean workers dismantle the facilities of an experiment
reactor at a former research centre in Seoul ]
South Korea said its nuclear tests were on a small scale
Intense diplomatic efforts are under way to persuade North Korea
to give up its nuclear weapons programme.
Delegations of Chinese and British officials are holding talks in
the North's capital, Pyongyang.
The BBC's Charles Scanlon in Seoul says they will be hoping South
Korea's recent admission of nuclear experiments will not
undermine their efforts.
The US has warned Seoul to expect no favours after it admitted
experimenting with plutonium and uranium.
US Under Secretary of State John Bolton told the BBC that Seoul
had to abide by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
North Korea - which itself has a well advanced atomic weapons
programme - has said the South's admission threatens a new
nuclear arms race on the Korean peninsula.
Six-party talks
A senior Chinese leader, Li Changchun, is leading a delegation
that aims to persuade Pyongyang to return to multilateral talks
aimed at ending its nuclear programme.
China is due to host the next round of talks - also involving
both Koreas, Japan, the US and Russia - this month, but no date
has been set for the meeting after North Korea said it would not
attend.
[North
Korean spent nuclear fuel rods in Yongbyon] The North Korean
nuclear dispute has been raging for 22 months
British Foreign Minister Bill Rammell, the first UK minister to
visit North Korea, said the South's activities did not give the
North an excuse to continue its programme.
"They [South Korea] are co-operating [with the IAEA] and that's
different from a nation that has thrown out inspectors, admitted
it has enriched uranium then denied it," he said.
Meanwhile, the chief US negotiator on North Korea, James Kelly,
is in Tokyo to discuss the proposed talks with his diplomatic
partners.
"We are very much interested in having six-party talks by the end
of September... and we were talking today about how to do that,"
he told reporters.
However, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon has expressed
pessimism about the prospects of the meeting going ahead.
"It is becoming difficult to be optimistic," he told South Korean
radio.
Admissions
On Thursday, Seoul admitted it had extracted a small amount of
plutonium - a key ingredient in nuclear bombs - in secret
research conducted in the early 1980s.
It
has become difficult prevent expansion of a nuclear arms race
because of South Korea's test Han Song-ryol North Korean envoy to
UN Seoul battles disclosure fallout
An official from South Korea's science and technology ministry,
Kim Young-shik, said scientists had conducted an unauthorised
experiment out of academic curiosity.
He said the experiment had conformed to Seoul's commitments with
the International Atomic Energy Agency aimed at preventing the
use of nuclear material for military purposes.
Last week, Seoul admitted that a fifth of a gram of uranium was
produced in 2000 by scientists who did not have government
approval.
Officials insist the uranium experiment was conducted for South
Korea's civilian nuclear power industry.
The IAEA has been conducting an investigation and is expected to
give a preliminary report in the coming days.
Many questions are now being asked of South Korea's experiments,
our correspondent says.
North Korea's UN envoy Han Song-ryol described the South's
"nuclear experiment" as a "dangerous move".
"We view South Korea's uranium enrichment programme in the
context of a nuclear arms race in north-east Asia," Mr Han told
South's Yonhap news agency.
"It has become difficult to prevent expansion of a nuclear arms
race because of South Korea's test," he said.
*****************************************************************
9 AFP: South Korea's nuclear research not linked to weapons - US
Homebase"> [http://www.spacewar.com/] WAR.WIRE
WASHINGTON (AFP) Sep 10, 2004
South Korea's nuclear research is not linked to any manufacture
of atomic weapons, the United States said Friday.
"We don't see these as nuclear weapons activities," State
Department spokesman Richard Boucher told reporters.
He described the South Korean research involving both plutonium
and enriched uranium as "laboratory experiments" and said they
were "certainly a different scale and type within North Korea's
efforts to develop sources of enriched uranium for the purpose of
nuclear weapons."
South Korea, a close ally of the United States, admitted on
Thursday that its scientists had extracted a small amount of
plutonium, a key ingredient for making nuclear bombs, in secret
research in the early 1980s.
The admission came just a week after Seoul said its scientists
had conducted unauthorised experiments to enrich uranium, which
is also used to build atomic weapons.
The revelation embarassed both the United States and South Korea
which were trying to pressure North Korea to end its nuclear
weapons drive.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board will discuss
the issue at a meeting in Vienna next week and compile a written
report possibly by the end of November.
Boucher said it was premature to speculate on whether South Korea
would be referred to the UN Security Council for any flouting of
international regulations.
"We'll have to see what the investigation produces and what
outcome it is," he said.
Boucher said there was an obligation on the part of the IAEA
board to report any noncompliance to the Security Council, citing
past cases involving Iraq, North Korea and, most recently, Libya.
"And we'll just have to see."
All rights reserved. © 2004 Agence France-Presse
*****************************************************************
10 KoreaTimes : 6-Party Nuke Talks Not Likely in Sept.
Hankooki.com > Korea Times > Nation
By Yoon Won-sup Staff Reporter
Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon said Friday that the next round of
six-party talks on North Korea¡¯s nuke crisis, slated for late
this month, are looking more and more unlikely to take place this
month as originally expected.
``Under the current situation, it is hard to be optimistic about
whether the six-nation talks can be held in the near future,¡¯¡¯
Ban said in a meeting with a group of political editors of major
newspapers and broadcasters at the Press Center in central Seoul.
Ban¡¯s statement came amid the current strained relations
between Pyongyang and Washington despite ongoing efforts to keep
the multilateral talks afloat.
Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Soo-hyuck, Seoul¡¯s chief negotiator
of the talks, met with his Japanese counterpart Mitoji Yabunaka
and U.S. Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly to coordinate
their position on the nuclear issue in Tokyo Sept. 9-10.
The preparatory meetings for the main six-party talks were
originally planned for last month to work out details ahead of
the fourth round of nuclear discussion but Pyongyang had refused
to attend the working-level meeting.
At the last six-way talks in June, South and North Korea, the
United States, China, Japan and Russia agreed to meet again
before the end of September to solve the North¡¯s nuclear weapons
program.
However, doubts have grown recently over the outlook of the
multilateral discussion as Pyongyang issued a series of
statements accusing Washington of trying to use the dialogue as a
means to overthrow its government.
According to experts, Pyongyang is seeking to delay the nuclear
negotiations until after the U.S. presidential race, hoping that
President George W. Bush is voted out.
The foreign minister, however, urged North Korea to make its own
decision on how to resolve the nuclear deadlock considering that
the United States¡¯ stance over the communist regime will not
drastically change regardless of who is elected in the Nov. 2
U.S. presidential election.
Another stumbling block to the six-way talks emerged recently as
Seoul admitted it had conducted secret nuclear experiments:
plutonium-based nuclear experiments in 1982 and uranium
enrichment tests in 2000.
North Korea accused the South of accelerating a nuclear arms race
in Northeast Asia, indicating it may make use of the issue to
delay or boycott the six-party talks. Han Song-ryol, the North¡¯s
envoy to the U.N. in New York went further, saying, ``The U.S. is
worthless as a dialogue partner as it has clearly applied double
standards to the two Koreas.¡¯¡¯
In response, Ban said, ``South Korea has never had a nuclear
development programs and has never conducted research on nuclear
weapons. We provided all the details involving the tests to the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).¡¯¡¯
South Korea¡¯s nuclear experiments have nothing to do with the
North¡¯s nuclear weapons programs because the South, as a member
state of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), has been
open to IAEA¡¯s inspection, Ban added.
The minister also objected to some foreign media¡¯s reports that
Seoul¡¯s nuclear test should be reviewed by the U.N. Security
Council, hoping the issue is dealt with by the IAEA as the
international agency will hold a Board of Governors meeting
Monday.
yoonwonsup@koreatimes.co.kr 09-10-2004 17:03
*****************************************************************
11 KoreaTimes : Lawmakers Downplay Nuclear Test
Hankooki.com > Korea Times > Nation
By Park Song-wu Staff Reporter
Despite lingering controversy over nuclear experiments by some
local scientists, lawmakers asserted Friday that there is no need
to make an issue of the tiny amounts tested by them at state-run
research facilities in the past.
``We share the government¡¯s opinion that those experiments
began with researchers¡¯ scholastic curiosity and are not a big
problem,¡¯¡¯ Rep. Chun Jung-bae, floor leader of the ruling Uri
Party, told reporters.
Chun said his party and the government do not need to take action
at this moment because the experiments were not designed to
develop nuclear arsenals.
Lawmakers, however, expressed their concerns that the current
nuclear controversy, which they think has been ``exaggerated¡¯¡¯
by foreign news media, could negatively affect the six-way talks
aimed at solving North Korea¡¯s nuclear ambitions.
``I am worried it could have a bad effect on the upcoming
six-party talks,¡¯¡¯ Rep. Chun Yu-ok, spokeswoman of the main
opposition Grand National Party (GNP), said. ``The government
should clear itself of any suspicions that other countries may
have regarding this issue.¡¯¡¯
North Korea¡¯s deputy chief to the United Nations, Han
Song-ryol, warned Wednesday that South Korea¡¯s experiments could
``accelerate a Northeast Asia nuclear arms race¡¯¡¯ and accused
the U.S. of applying a ``double standard¡¯¡¯ to the nuclear
programs of the two Koreas.
But Han did not clarify whether Pyongyang will attend the
six-party talks.
Rep. Yun Ho-jung of the Uri Party said, ``These scientific tests
should not become a reason to stall the six-party talks.¡¯¡¯
He also proposed turning this nuclear fuss into a chance to set
up a nuclear watchdog in Asia. ``I want to propose the
establishment of an Asian nuclear watchdog, in which China, Japan
and the two Koreas could participate,¡¯¡¯ Yun said.
Lawmakers¡¯ reaction to the nuclear hullabaloo in South Korea
came a day after the Seoul government admitted Wednesday that
scientists in 1982 conducted an experiment in plutonium
extraction at a research facility.
Seoul also acknowledged a week ago that scientists at the same
facility enriched tiny amounts of uranium four years ago,
igniting allegations in Japan and the U.S. that South Korea tried
to develop nuclear arms.
Meanwhile, Rep. Lee Hahn-koo of the GNP raised a suspicion that
the Washington government might have played a role in this
controversy involving Seoul¡¯s nuclear experiments.
``It was only a one-off experiment and I don¡¯t think it will
become a source of grave concern,¡¯¡¯ the policy committee
chairman of the GNP said. ``But I wonder why officials in the
Washington government gave news media tips on the plutonium tests
in Seoul.¡¯¡¯
Quoting a senior U.S. official, the AP reported Wednesday that
South Korea had secretly conducted an experiment more than 20
years ago with traces of plutonium, a key ingredient in making
nuclear weapons.
It also quoted another U.S. official as saying the Washington
administration is aware generally of the content of South Korea's
reporting to the IAEA on nuclear experimental activity conducted
in past years.
The IAEA is a Vienna-based watchdog on international nuclear
activities.
im@koreatimes.co.kr 09-10-2004 16:12
*****************************************************************
12 KoreaTimes: Poor Handling of Nuclear Issue
Hankooki.com > Korea Times > Opinion
Pyongyang Should Not Exploit Seoul's Blunders
The government's ignorance and negligence has increased suspicion
around the globe about a nuclear program that does not exist.
Following its admission of a uranium enrichment experiment in
2000 last week, Seoul acknowledged on Thursday that the nation
had conducted plutonium-based nuclear research in the early
1980s. Officials said only tiny amounts of low-grade nuclear
material were involved in the two ``academic'' experiments. But
the international community appears concerned that South Korea
toyed with both methods of obtaining material used in nuclear
weapons.
Behind the latest diplomatic hubbub is the government's initial
clumsy handling of the issue. At first, the Science-Technology
Ministry said the ``laboratory test'' did not violate the rules
of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Revealing a lack of
interagency coordination, the Foreign Ministry then stated the
reverse, saying Seoul should have reported the separation of
enriched uranium earlier. The plutonium research has been no
secret between Seoul and the IAEA, but the belated public
admission has given rise to unnecessary misunderstandings about
Seoul's intentions.
By all appearances, there seems to be no ``South Korean nuclear
program.'' Seoul's repeated assurances that it has neither the
intention nor the capability to make nuclear weapons can be given
the benefit of the doubt. But the negligence of government
supervisors' in overseeing state-run institutions and scientists
is not excusable and should never be repeated. Nonproliferation
has long been a global concern, with the North Korean nuclear
program emerging as the biggest threat to security in Northeast
Asia. Any coincidence, however unintended, is bound to arouse
suspicion.
North Korea's response to the incident was as could be expected.
Han Song-ryol, deputy chief of Pyongyang's mission to the United
Nations, warned the case could ``accelerate a nuclear arms race
in Northeast Asia,'' while accusing Washington of applying double
standards to the nuclear programs of the two Koreas. This is of
course a blatant distortion of the disclosed facts. Any move by
the North to block the upcoming six-nation talks using this as a
pretext will only backfire. If Pyongyang has any complaints, it
should express them at the talks.
In a similar vein, foreign media outlets are advised to exercise
caution. In particular, some Japanese newspapers are writing near
fictions about South Korea's nuclear ambitions based on
unidentified sources. These only serve to fuel the call from
Japan's ultra-rightists for rearmament, including nuclear
weapons, thus provoking China and triggering a ``nuclear domino
effect'' in the region. But it is Japan that has uranium
enrichment facilities and handles plutonium.
To prevent any unfortunate developments, the government needs to
keep itself free from suspicion. Seoul has already pledged to
open all its facilities, regardless of the results of the IAEA's
review due early next week. That should serve as a lesson to
North Korea and other regional powers suspected of harboring
nuclear ambitions.
09-10-2004 18:47
*****************************************************************
13 KoreaTimes: Seoul Strongly Denies Any Nuclear Program
Hankooki.com > Korea Times
By Ryu Jin Staff Reporter
A top South Korean diplomat strongly denied a report by The
Washington Post that South Korea was conducting nuclear
experiments more than six years ago and trying to hide the work
from inspectors, once again stressing Seoul has no nuclear
weapons program.
``We¡¯re very concerned about the current situation in which the
recently revealed tests, both the plutonium- and uranium-based
ones, are lumped together to arouse a synergic effect to
undermine our country¡¯s nuclear transparency,¡¯¡¯ the official
said during a media briefing.
``Now there have even been news reports like one by The
Washington Post, which alleges Seoul had secret nuclear arms
programs,¡¯¡¯ he told reporters on condition of anonymity.
``That¡¯s totally groundless.¡¯¡¯
Officials at the Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry said they
will consider whether or not to take legal action against the
reports by some foreign media.
The senior official said the isolated experiment in early 2000,
which led to the separation of 0.2 gram of uranium and the
plutonium-based test in 1982 should be dealt with separately as
they are quite different in nature.
The 2000 uranium test was disclosed in June this year as the
South Korean government was preparing for a report to the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in compliance with the
Additional Protocol to the IAEA Safeguards Agreement, according
to officials.
The 1982 experiment that extracted a small amount of plutonium,
measured in the milligrams, has been a pending issue for the past
few years after it was raised by the U.N. nuclear watchdog in
1998 due to some mistakes about the test in reports.
``South Korea has been in full compliance with the IAEA
obligations of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and nuclear
non-proliferation,¡¯¡¯ the senior diplomat asserted.
Commenting on the future procedure at the IAEA, he said he
doesn¡¯t think the past research activities by small groups of
scientists were a matter that should be referred to the United
Nations Security Council.
``It will be dealt with at the IAEA Board of Governors meeting
due on Monday,¡¯¡¯ he said. ``But I don¡¯t think this problem
should be referred to the U.N. Security Council.¡¯¡¯
There was another report by a foreign news agency earlier in the
morning that quoted some U.S. diplomats as saying Seoul¡¯s past
work on plutonium and uranium _ the key ingredients for atomic
weapons _ could be referred to the Security Council in November.
``South Korea joined the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)
in 1975 and has been fulfilling its duties as a member state of
the IAEA,¡¯¡¯ he said. ``We don¡¯t have any nuclear weapons
program nor would we in the future.¡¯¡¯
jinryu@koreatimes.co.kr 09-10-2004 16:46
*****************************************************************
14 Washington Times: U.N. nuclear agency asleep at the switch
Nation/Politics - September 10, 2004
Treachery: Part III: Saddam's Iraq is just one of many rogue
regimes that the United Nations has failed to keep in check.
Again and again, dangerous states have built up their militaries
and weapons programs right under the world body's nose, despite
sanctions and anti-proliferation agreements.">
+
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
The United States stood by for years as supposed allies helped
its enemies obtain the world's most dangerous weapons, reveals
Bill Gertz, defense and national security reporter for The
Washington Times, in the new book "Treachery" (Crown Forum).
Last of three excerpts
Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq's new foreign minister, delivered a
memorable address to the United Nations Security Council in New
York on Dec. 16, 2003.
Zebari, an Iraqi Kurd, began his remarks by noting the
historic capture, three days earlier, of Saddam Hussein. Then,
after laying out a plan for Iraq to become a democracy, the
foreign minister lowered the boom on the assembled diplomats.
"One year ago," Zebari said, "this Security Council was
divided between those who wanted to appease Saddam Hussein and
those who wantedto hold him accountable. The United Nations as
an organization failed to help rescue the Iraqi people from a
murderous tyranny that lasted over 35 years, and today, we are
unearthing thousands of victims in horrifying testament to that
failure.
"The United Nations must not fail the Iraqi people again,"
he said.
It was clear to whom Zebari was referring: France, Germany,
Russia and China, among others in the world body, fought
U.S.-led efforts to end Saddam's bloody dictatorship.
But the organization's failure was far more significant than
failing the Iraqi people. The United Nations had failed in its
founding purpose: to preserve peace and international security.
It appeased Saddam for years before the United States called
for decisive action.
And Saddam's Iraq is just one of many rogue regimes that the
United Nations has failed to keep in check. Again and again,
dangerous states have built up their militaries and weapons
programs right under the world body's nose, despite sanctions
and anti-proliferation agreements.
Sleeping watchdog
Three times, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency
missed the covert nuclear-arms programs of rogue regimes,
allowing those states to build deadly weapons capability under
the guise of generating nuclear power.
Disclosures of the nuclear progress of North Korea, Libya
and Iran came in rapid succession, within the space of about a
year. If the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) did not
detect these programs, one must wonder what purpose the U.N.
branch serves.
The United Nations established the IAEA in 1957 to help
countries build nuclear facilities for generating electricity.
Its initial program, Atoms for Peace, quickly became "Atoms for
Bombs." And not much has changed in the past five decades,
except the size of the program.
Today, the IAEA has about 2,200 staff members at its
headquarters in Vienna, Austria, and at four regional offices in
Geneva, New York, Toronto and Tokyo. Its budget for 2004 was
$268.5 million.
The IAEA's statutory purpose is to assist in transferring
expertise and equipment for the "peaceful" use of nuclear power.
The international agency also is charged with making sure that
nations do not divert equipment or material for nuclear-energy
development into weapons programs.
Specifically, Section 5 of the empowering statute directs
the IAEA to "establish and administer safeguards designed to
ensure that special fissionable and other materials, services,
equipment, facilities and information made available by the
agency or at its request or under its supervision or control are
not used in such a way as to further any military purpose."
But the IAEA has not administered appropriate safeguards.
And as a result, it has been fooled again and again by states
such as North Korea, Iran, Libya, Syria and Iraq.
The centerpiece of the IAEA's work has been the Treaty on
the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons, or NPT, which went into
effect on March 5, 1970.
Korean threat
Rogue states generally sign international agreements only if
doing so is expedient. Nothing better illustrates this point
than North Korea.
The NPT provided cover for North Korea's secret
nuclear-weapons programs, allowing Pyongyang to purchase
equipment, train technicians and build reactors.
North Korea was one of the agreement's 188 signatories when,
in the fall of 2002, the communist regime of Kim Jong-il
revealed that it secretly had been developing nuclear weapons.
The IAEA failed to anticipate or uncover North Korea's
nuclear-weapons program. The agency admitted as much last year,
when it reported: "The agency has never had the complete picture
regarding [North Korean] nuclear activities."
Pyongyang froze plutonium production as part of a 1994 pact
with the United States known as the Agreed Framework. But the
CIA noted in 1995, in a classified Special National Intelligence
Estimate: "Based on North Korea's past behavior, the
[intelligence] community agrees it would dismantle its known
program [only] if it had covertly developed another source of
fissile material."
Sure enough, North Korea's disclosure in October 2002 of
its uranium-enrichment activity confirmed that Pyongyang was
trying to build nuclear bombs. In essence, Kim and the North
Koreans were announcing that membership in the NPT had been a
ruse all along.
Still, the IAEA did not take a hard line with Kim. It
responded to the disclosure by sending faxes requesting
"clarification." The North Koreans ignored the request.
Saber-rattling
The IAEA adopted a resolution calling on Pyongyang to
cooperate. The North Koreans responded with a letter saying that
they rejected the U.N. agency's unfair and unilateral approach.
The director of North Korea's nuclear program, Ri Je-son,
stated in a letter dated Dec. 4, 2002, that Pyongyang would
resume nuclear work if the United States did not resume oil
shipments to North Korea.
Then, on Jan. 10, 2003, North Korea unceremoniously
abandoned its partners in the NPT. In a broadcast on Kim's state
radio, government commentator Jong Pong-kil said the decision to
pull out was a defensive measure:
"The United States trampled on the NPT and the [North
Korean]-U.S. Agreed Framework and is trying to crush us by all
means," Jong declared. "By even mobilizing the IAEA, the United
States is compelling us to give up the right of self-defense.
Under such conditions, it is clear to everyone that we cannot
let the country's security and the nation's dignity be infringed
upon by remaining in the NPT treaty."
Jong then added a threat: "If the U.S. imperialists and
their following forces challenge our republic's withdrawal from
the NPT with new pressure and sanctions, we will respond with a
stronger self-defensive measure."
In other words, the North Koreans, who already had shown
that their membership in the NPT was a ruse, were announcing
that they would keep building nuclear arms.
The IAEA's response to Jong's announcement was tantamount to
appeasement. Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei, an Egyptian,
said North Korea must return to the NPT.
Then, during a meeting with U.S. senators, ElBaradei said:
"If North Korea were to show good behavior, they need to get
some assurance as to what to expect in return for good behavior,
and I think that's very important in articulation of what to
expect in case of compliance."
It did not matter that the North Koreans openly admitted
defying the IAEA for years; ElBaradei sent the message that the
international arms-control agency would impose no penalty.
The matter was sent to the U.N. Security Council, but that
body did little more than express "deep concern" for the
violations. The United States picked up its diplomatic approach,
which produced no results. North Korea continues its drive for
nuclear arms.
Iran and Libya
The United Nations also failed to confront the nuclear
threat from Iran, which, like North Korea, used the NPT to
acquire equipment and materials to make nuclear bombs.
When Iran's weapons work was discovered, showing that the
Iranians knowingly ignored obligations to their treaty partners,
the IAEA essentially ignored the violations. The agency sought
only an additional "protocol" from Iran as a new safeguard.
"This is a good day for peace, multilateralism and
nonproliferation," ElBaradei declared after Iran signed the
protocol. "A good day for peace because the [IAEA] board decided
to continue to make every effort to use verification and
diplomacy to resolve questions about Iran's nuclear program."
But "verification and diplomacy" failed to stop Iran from
developing nuclear arms in the first place. Despite pressure
from security officials within the Bush administration,
ElBaradei refused to cite Iran for breaking its obligations.
Moreover, the IAEA did not keep careful watch over Libya's
nuclear-weapons program, which was further along than both U.S.
intelligence or the U.N. agency had known.
When Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi publicly disclosed his
weapons program in December 2003, the IAEA knew nothing about
it. The agency said Libya should have reported its activities to
the IAEA.
The IAEA was happy to report Tripoli's decision to
eliminate "materials, equipment and programs which lead to the
production of internationally proscribed weapons."
But the agency tried to minimize its failure to discover the
program. It noted that a Libyan official characterized his
nation's uranium-enrichment program as "at an early stage of
development" and that "no industrial-scale facility had been
built, nor any enriched uranium produced."
Algeria long since had launched its own nuclear-arms
program in response to the military buildup by neighbor Libya,
with which it had tense relations, reflecting how weapons
proliferation only breeds further proliferation.
U.S. intelligence agencies in the spring of 1991 detected
the first signs that Algeria was developing nuclear weapons with
the assistance of China.
'New urgency'
The ultimate threat to peace is nuclear weapons in the hands
of international terrorists.
There is a real danger that terrorists could use nuclear
materials in radiological attacks, or "dirty bombs." Worse,
terrorists would use them in a nuclear blast that could kill
thousands or even hundreds of thousands.
To his credit, the IAEA's ElBaradei has begun to worry
about this threat.
"[Nuclear] source security has taken on a new urgency since
9/11," the U.N. arms agency's director general said in a speech
last year. "There are millions of radiological sources used
throughout the world. Most are very weak. What we are focusing
on is preventing the theft or loss of control of the powerful
radiological sources."
The fact is, al Qaeda and the world's other most lethal
terrorist organizations are trying to acquire nuclear arms.
The United Nations' record of failure to detect and halt
nuclear threats posed by rogue states, however, casts doubt on
its ability to grapple with such arms in the grip of shadowy
terrorist groups.
Purchase this book Online at Barnes and Noble
Part I:French connection armed Saddam
Part II:Libyan sincerity on arms in doubt
All site contents copyright © 2004 News World Communications,
*****************************************************************
15 MoJo: Driving Votes the Democrats' Way
[MotherJones.com] [Mother Jones] [News]
On the road with Driving Votes, whose volunteers drive from safe
states to swing states to get out the vote for Kerry.
By Stephen R. Miller
Photo: Daniel Yoshida
September 9, 2004
On a Friday in late August, thirty-some men and women, young and
old, gathered after work outside a train station in North
Berkeley. They piled into cars and made a 200-mile beeline from
the San Francisco Bay Area down I-80 for Reno. They weren’t going
to test their luck in the nickel slots. Rather, these strangers,
brought together by a group called Driving Votes
[http://www.drivingvotes.org/] , were road-tripping from
Kerry-leaning California in hopes of bringing home the political
mother lode this November: a Democrat in the White House.
Driving Votes is bringing volunteers from red and blue states
where the presidential election is all but over to work with
organizations to get out the vote in swing states like Nevada,
which in 2000 narrowly fell to Bush. The state's four Electoral
College votes make it a smaller prize than, say, Ohio or
Floirida, but Nevada could tip the balance to the next president.
Hence this weekend trip.
"I feel a strong sense of urgency around this election and a need
to contribute in a way that will have a concrete effect," said
Jennifer Kane, 27, the San Francisco-based assistant director of
Driving Votes. Kane took a leave of absence from her work as a
scientific illustrator to work for the organization full-time.
"The only way to do that is to get out the vote in a swing
state."
A typical Driving Votes trip pairs volunteers with organizations
such as America Coming Together [http://actforvictory.org/]
(ACT), a $95 million voter-mobilization effort sponsored by
America Votes, itself a coalition of 32 member organizations such
as the AFL-CIO, Planned Parenthood, and the Sierra Club. ACT
focuses exclusively on new and persuadable voters in swing
states, employing 1,400 paid canvassers in those states and
organizing volunteers from around the country to register voters,
identify key voter concerns, and provide information to those on
the fence. On a typical day, ACT employs twenty full-time
canvassers to roam the neighborhoods of Reno with PDAs, entering
data on voters that is instantly synched with a database of
Democrats and swing voters. On Saturday, thanks to the rush of
Driving Votes volunteers, mostly from the San Francisco Bay Area,
some 120 people were canvassing Reno’s streets.
The perennial drive to register new voters and swing persuadable
ones has taken on outsized importance this election, with the
country more or less evenly divided between Bush and Kerry, and
most voters already decided. As early as July, only 18 percent of
voters said they were open to persuasion this year, according to
a USA Today/Gallup poll, while only 2 percent were undecided.
(Compare 1996, when 39 percent considered themselves persuadable
at the same point in the cycle.) As a result, Democrats and
Republicans alike are using both high tech and old-fashioned
tactics to reach those few who are still up in the air. Central
to this effort is the creation of huge databases
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62770-2004Jul19.h
tml] that merge information from voter rolls, the census, and
consumer data, among other sources, to predict and shape voter
behavior. Volunteers then use that information to go door-to-door
to talk with those people and discuss issues.
Driving Votes entered into the fray this spring. Founder Matt
Lerner, a 29-year-old manager at Microsoft in Seattle, got the
idea after a friend suggested a trip to a swing state to register
voters. After tossing the idea around and cajoling some friends
to help out, the group launched a website in April and began
organizing trips. Interest exploded, and soon full-time staff
were needed to handle the logistics. Leighton Woodhouse, a
Berkeley graduate student who has put his studies on hold till
the election is over, now directs the operations of the four paid
staff and 500 volunteers in the 30 chapters in 27 states around
the country. Many of the chapters host weekly trips, and the
organization’s website also allows others to post trips of their
own on a "Ride Board
[http://www.drivingvotes.org/triplistings.php] ." More than 1,000
trips have been posted, according to Woodhouse, who estimates
that at least 5,000 people of all ages have taken part in a trip
either sponsored by Driving Votes or planned on its Ride Board
since April. Woodhouse estimates that the group has registered
"tens of thousands" of voters, in addition to its other
activities, though he notes that the organization’s effect may be
even more substantial, since many of the trips planned on the
Ride Board have not reported their successes.
In Reno, there were three trips planned from the Ride Board for
the same weekend as the official chapter trip, including trips
themed “Bush Smackdown 2004” and “Viva Blue!”, organized by the
“League of Pissed-Off Voters,” which targets “pissed-off” 17-35
year olds around the country. The group arrived from Berkeley in
a party bus stripped of its seats and decked out with couches.
The volunteers were first given a brief introduction to a script
and a series of do’s and dont’s from seasoned veterans like ACT’s
Maria Zamora, who first started canvassing with the United Farm
Workers in 1962. “Never ask, ‘Are you registered to vote?’”
(people ignore you) she tells them, and warns them not to enter
houses with fences (they likely have dogs that bite). The
volunteers were then given a list of names compiled by ACT and
members of America Votes, including MoveOn.org
[http://www.moveon.org/front/] , and split up into teams to go
door-to-door, looking to register voters and identify the top
priorities of those already registered.
A pair of roommates from Emeryville, California, Christina
Corodimas and Holly Fisher, who heard about Driving Votes through
friends, were dropped off at an inconspicuous lot of tract homes.
As the team approached the first house on their list, though, the
women became wary. The patio was untidy, a punching bag hung from
a tree, a tattered workout bench beneath it. When the man they
sought came to the door, he was tall and large with a full beard.
When asked what he thought mattered most in the upcoming
election, he said Yucca Mountain, a location nearby where the
federal government plans to dump nuclear waste, a solution
favored by Bush and opposed by Kerry. “Nevada’s a mining state,”
he said. “They should give us a lot of money, let us drill a big
hole and give everybody a job.” Corodimas and Fisher recorded his
concern in a box marked “Yucca Mountain” on a computer-scannable
form, that would later be entered into a database where the
information will be paired with the man’s voter registration
data.
The next name on their list, a registered young mother of two
working at a chain restaurant, would have likely stumped both
Karl Rove and James Carville. Her top two issues: the right to
carry a gun and the right for same-sex couples to marry. She
didn’t like either of the candidates. It was an introduction to
politics in a swing state, where political views do not fit
neatly into either the Republican or Democratic camps, making
issue identification all the more important. As before, Corodimas
and Fisher checked boxes on their forms, building the database of
what undecided voters look like, one conversation at a time.
Others they talked to were bitter. “The way the system is now, I
keep my opinions to myself,” said a man washing his car. “I don’t
vote. That’s that.” Even that was useful information, though. On
a line marked “Other,” Corodimas and Fisher noted that he doesn’t
-- and won't -- vote. Future canvassers will know not to waste
their time.
Big dogs yelped at every door, and in one dusty lot, two llamas
rested in the shade of a single tree. By lunchtime, having
knocked on over fifty doors, they had registered one new voter,
and talked about issues with five others.
Their experience was typical. Michael Reppy and David Leaf had
road-tripped from the Bay Area, but their morning’s efforts had
yielded no registered voters. “It’s a terribly inefficient way to
get out the message,” Leaf said, noting how many people weren’t
home and how long it took to walk from door to door. “But it’s
still the best way.”
Leaf, who first became politically active working on Adlai
Stevenson’s 1956 presidential campaign, rediscovered going
door-to-door last fall while working as the San Francisco
coordinator for Wesley Clark’s campaign. “It was such a high,” he
said. “I thought, ‘This is what democracy is all about.’”
Reppy, who was part of the student takeover of Columbia
University to protest the Vietnam War in the Sixties, had almost
given up on politics. “After Bobby Kennedy was shot, it was too
much,” he said. But with Bush, he’s back in the game. “You’ve got
to stand up,” he said. “Now is the time to fight back.”
After a brief lunch, the teams hit the streets once more. Matt
Macdonald, a firefighter from Santa Cruz, was assigned a set of
low-slung, adobe-style apartments. Macdonald had participated in
a Driving Votes trip to Las Vegas earlier this year, where
volunteers staffed a booth and registered 169 voters in a day.
Given that only 6,589 more Nevadans voted for Bush than for Gore
and Nader in the last election, every extra vote is especially
important. “In the morning we registered six Republicans and two
Democrats,” he said of the Las Vegas trip, noting that with
booths, election law requires that voters from all parties be
accepted for registration. “I was so upset,” he said, “But that
changed in the afternoon,” when the registration numbers picked
up and almost all were registered Democrats. At the end of the
day, Macdonald had registered five new Democratic voters. Though
it was far less than he’d registered in Las Vegas, he was happy
to be going door-to-door. “It’s important to be out here,” he
says, “even if it’s just people getting to see the face of a
liberal and know we’re not crazy, that’s worth it.” Macdonald
added, “I just can’t believe how many anti-political people there
are, people who just aren’t willing to vote. But,” he adds, “I’ve
had good luck if you can get them talking.”
Driving Votes is also sponsoring a caravan
[http://www.drivingvotes.org/caravan/index.shtml] that left
Seattle in August and will wend its way through all the swing
states for the next few months. But perhaps the most intriguing
aspect of the organization remains how the Ride Board, which also
provides downloadable instructions for registering voters,
empowers non-politicos to get involved. And they are getting
involved. More and more people are betting that a road trip may
make the difference in November. “Bible Belt or Bust,” “The
Northern New Mexico Meander,” and the “Quality Time With a Bunch
of Strangers” are but a few leaving soon. [.] What do you think?
[backtalk@motherjones.com?subject=Backtalk: Driving Votes the
Democrats' Way]
Stephen R. Miller is a freelance writer living in San Francisco.
This article has been made possible by the Foundation for
National Progress
[http://www.motherjones.com/about/admin/index.html] , the
© 2004 The Foundation for National Progress
*****************************************************************
16 NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Nine Mile Point
Nuclear Plant License Renewal
News Release - Region I - 2004-04
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region I September 9, 2004 CONTACT:
Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331
E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov]
an application to extend the operating licenses for the Nine
Mile Point 1 and 2 nuclear power plants. The plants, which are
operated by Constellation Energy Group, are located in Scriba,
N.Y.
Members of the public are invited to attend and comment on
environmental issues the NRC should consider in its review of
the proposed license renewal. The meetings will be held in the
Town of Scriba Conference Room, at 42 Creamery Road in Oswego,
N.Y. The first session will begin at 1:30 p.m. and continue
until 4:30 p.m. The second session, which will offer the same
presentations as the first session, will get under way at 7 p.m.
and continue until 10 p.m. The NRC will host an open house
beginning 1 hour before the start of each meeting to provide
members of the public with an opportunity to talk informally
with agency staff. However, formal comments must be expressed
during the transcribed meetings.
Both sessions will begin with an overview and an NRC staff
presentation on the environmental review process for license
renewal applications. After the NRC presentation, members of
public will be given the opportunity to present their comments
on environmental issues they believe the NRC should consider
during its review.
Under NRC regulations, the original operating license for a
nuclear power plant has a term of 40 years. The license may be
renewed for up to an additional 20 years if NRC requirements are
met. The current operating license for Nine Mile Point 1 is due
to expire on Aug. 22, 2009, while the current operating license
for Nine Mile Point 2 is scheduled to terminate on Oct. 31,
2026.
Constellation Energy submitted its license renewal application
on May 27 of this year. As part of its application, the company
submitted an environmental report. A copy of the application is
available via the NRCs web site at:
www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/nin
e-mile-pt.html. In addition, the Penfield Library, located at
the State University of New York Oswego, has agreed to make the
environmental report available for public inspection. The
librarys address is 7060 State Route 104 in Oswego.
An existing NRC document, Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants
(NUREG-1437), assesses the scope and impact of environmental
effects that would be associated with license renewal at any
nuclear power plant site. The document for which the NRC will
gather information at the Sept. 21st meetings will be a
supplement to that generic environmental statement that is
specific to the Nine Mile Point plants. It will contain a
recommendation regarding the environmental acceptability of the
license renewal action.
At the conclusion of the information-gathering process, the NRC
staff will prepare a summary of the conclusions reached and
significant issues identified. A copy will be sent to each
person who participated in the scoping process. The summary will
also be available on the NRCs web site at:
www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/nin
e-mile-pt.html.
The NRC staff will subsequently prepare a draft environmental
impact statement (EIS) supplement for public comment and will
hold a public meeting to solicit comments. After consideration
of comments on the draft report, the NRC will prepare a final
EIS supplement.
Interested individuals may register to attend or present oral
comments at the September 21st meetings by contacting Leslie
Fields of the NRC at 1-800-368-5642, ext. 1186, or by e-mail at
NineMilePointEIS@nrc.gov [NineMilePointEIS@nrc.gov] no later
than September 17. Those who wish to offer comments may also
register at the meetings within 15 minutes of the start of each
session. Individual oral comments may be limited by the time
available, depending on the number of persons who register.
In addition, members of the public may send written comments on
the environmental scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS
to: Chief, Rules and Directive Branch, Division of
Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T-6
D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555-0001. Comments may also be delivered to the NRC, Room T-6
D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Md., from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. during Federal workdays. To be
considered, written comments should be postmarked or dropped off
by Oct. 11. Electronic comments can also be sent via e-mail to
NineMilePointEIS@nrc.gov [NineMilePointEIS@nrc.gov] , again no
later than Oct. 11.
Last revised Friday, September 10, 2004
*****************************************************************
17 NRC: In the Matter of U.S. Inspection Services, Dayton, OH; Order
FR Doc 04-20496
[Federal Register: September 10, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 175)]
[Notices] [Page 54816-54818] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr10se04-78]
Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty I Materials License No.
34-06943-02 was issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC
or Commission) to U.S. Inspection Services (Licensee) on August
31, 1999. The license authorizes the Licensee to receive,
acquire, possess, and transfer iridium-192 and cobalt-60 in
sealed sources for use in industrial radiography and depleted
uranium for shielding in industrial radiography equipment in
accordance with the conditions specified therein. The license was
renewed in its entirety on June 22, 2004, with Amendment No. 7
and is to expire on September 30, 2011.
II An inspection of the Licensee's activities was conducted on
September 12, 2003. The results of this inspection indicated that
the Licensee had not conducted its activities in full compliance
with NRC requirements. A written Notice of Violation and Proposed
Imposition of Civil Penalty (Notice) was served upon the Licensee
by letter dated June 15, 2004. The Notice states the nature of
the violations, the provisions of the NRC's requirements that the
Licensee had violated, and the amount of the civil penalty
proposed for the violations.
The Licensee responded to the Notice in a letter dated July 12,
2004. In its response, the Licensee did not deny the violations,
in whole or in part, did not dispute the severity level assigned
to the violations, and did not contest the application of
enforcement discretion to increase the amount of the civil
penalty. The amount of the civil penalty was increased because of
a lack of management oversight of the radiation safety program
that significantly contributed to the conditions leading to the
overexposure event described in the June 15, 2004, letter and
Notice. However, the Licensee protested the proposed imposition
of a civil monetary penalty in the amount of $19,200 indicating
that the civil penalty adjustment factor for Identification was
applied incorrectly. The Licensee also claimed that credit was
not given for the corrective actions the Licensee had
implemented.
III After considering the Licensee's response and the statements
of fact, explanation, and argument for mitigation contained
therein, the NRC staff has determined, as set forth in the
Appendix to this Order, that the violations occurred as stated
and that the civil penalty of $19,200 proposed for the violations
designated in the Notice should be imposed.
IV In view of the foregoing and pursuant to Section 234 of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act), 42 U.S.C. 2282, and
10 CFR 2.205, It Is Hereby Ordered That: The Licensee pay a civil
penalty in the amount of $19,200 within 30 days of the date of
this Order, in accordance with NUREG/BR-0254. In addition, at the
time of making the payment, the Licensee shall submit a statement
indicating when and by what method payment was made, to the
Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear
[[Page 54817]] Regulatory Commission, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738.
V The Licensee may request a hearing within 30 days of the date
of this Order. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be
given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for
extension of time must be made in writing to the Director, Office
of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555, and include a statement of good cause for the
extension. A request for a hearing should be clearly marked as a
``Request for an Enforcement Hearing, EA- 03-204'' and shall be
submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC 20555.
Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of Enforcement,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to the
Assistant General Counsel for Materials Litigation and
Enforcement at the same address, and to the Regional
Administrator, NRC Region III, 2443 Warrenville Road, Suite 210,
Lisle, IL 60532-4351, Because of continuing disruptions in
delivery of mail to United States Government offices, it is
requested that requests for hearing be transmitted to the
Secretary of the Commission either by means of facsimile
transmission to (301) 415-1101 or by e-mail to [
hearingdocket@nrc.gov] and also 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] . If a hearing
is requested, the Commission will issue an Order designating the
time and place of the hearing. If the Licensee fails to request a
hearing within 30 days of the date of this Order (or if written
approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing
has not been granted), the provisions of this Order shall be
effective without further proceedings. If payment has not been
made by that time, the matter may be referred to the Attorney
General for collection.
In the event the Licensee requests a hearing as provided above,
the issues to be considered at such hearing shall be, whether, on
the basis of the violations admitted by the Licensee, this Order
should be sustained.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dated this 1st day of September 2004.
Frank J. Congel, Director, Office of Enforcement.
APPENDIX--Evaluation and Conclusion A response to the Notice was
provided by U.S. Inspection Services (Licensee) in a letter dated
July 12, 2004. In its response, the Licensee did not deny the
violations, in whole or in part, and the Licensee did not contest
the severity level assigned to the violations. The Licensee also
did not dispute the use of enforcement discretion to increase the
amount of the civil penalty. The amount of the civil penalty was
increased due to a lack of management oversight of the radiation
safety program which significantly contributed to the conditions
leading to the overexposure event. However, the Licensee
protested the proposed imposition of a civil monetary penalty in
the amount of $19,200 because the Licensee believed that the
civil penalty adjustment factor for Identification was
incorrectly applied and credit was not given for the corrective
actions taken by the Licensee.
Licensee's Request for Recission or Mitigation of the Civil
Penalty In the response to the Notice, the Licensee contended
that the NRC incorrectly applied the civil penalty assessment
process described in Section VI.C.2 of the ``General Statement of
Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions'' (Enforcement
Policy), NUREG-1600. In its presentation, the Licensee indicated
that a prior escalated enforcement action, EA-02-201, that
occurred within two years or two inspections of the current
enforcement actions should be withdrawn. With EA-02-201
withdrawn, the Licensee contended that the Licensee would no
longer have an escalated enforcement history within the prior two
years or two inspections; therefore, the NRC Staff was not
required to assess the civil penalty adjustment factor for
Identification in accordance with Section VI.C.2.b(1) of the
Enforcement Policy. In requesting that EA-02-201 be withdrawn,
the Licensee argued that 10 CFR 34.41, the regulation cited in
the Notice associated with EA-02-201, does not require that
radiographic personnel be in direct line-of-site with each other;
rather, the radiographic personnel present on August 29, 2002,
maintained contact with each other by radio which is sufficient
to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 34.41. The Licensee also
contended that credit was not given for the Corrective Action
civil penalty adjustment factor.
NRC Evaluation of Licensee's Request for Recission or Mitigation
of the Civil Penalty A. The Licensee is correct that the previous
escalated enforcement action, EA-02-201, should not have been
considered in determining the application of the civil penalty
adjustment factor for Identification. Section VI.C.2.b(1) of the
Enforcement Policy provides that the NRC will consider the civil
penalty adjustment factor for Identification for the second
non-willful Severity Level III violation within a period of two
years or two inspections, whichever is longer. The violations in
the current escalated enforcement action, EA-03-204, were
categorized as a Severity Level II problem.
In accordance with Section VI.C.2.b(1) of the Enforcement Policy
the NRC Staff is not required to consider a Licensee's
enforcement history in assessing the civil penalty adjustment
process for a Severity Level II violation. Since the current
violations are categorized as a Severity Level II problem, the
NRC Staff was not required to consider a previous escalated
enforcement action to assess the Identification civil penalty
adjustment factor. Therefore, the existence of EA-02-201 is not a
factor in assessing the civil penalty adjustment factor for
Identification.
The NRC Staff concludes that the civil penalty adjustment factor
for Identification was properly assessed in accordance with the
Enforcement Policy and consideration of the previous escalated
enforcement action, EA-02-201, was not required by the
Enforcement Policy to complete that assessment. Since the NRC
Staff identified the violation, no credit for the Identification
factor was warranted.
B. As part of its argument regarding the civil penalty adjustment
factor for Identification, the Licensee contended that the prior
enforcement action, EA-02-201, should be withdrawn. On November
29, 2002, the NRC issued a Severity Level III violation
associated with the Licensee's failure to have two qualified
individuals present during radiographic operations on August 29,
2002, at a field location in Indianapolis, Indiana, in violation
of 10 CFR 34.41(a), ``Conducting Industrial Radiographic
Operations.'' The Licensee contends that 10 CFR 34.41(a) does not
require radiographic personnel to maintain direct visual
line-of-site contact. Rather, the Licensee personnel used radios
on August 29, 2002, to maintain communications at the temporary
site in Indianapolis, Indiana, and the use of radios improved
their ability to provide immediate assistance to prevent
unauthorized entry into the radiation field. Therefore, EA-02-201
should be withdrawn. The Commission's regulations at 10 CFR 34.41
provide that during field radiography, the radiographer must be
accompanied by at least one other qualified individual and the
other qualified individual must observe operations and be capable
of providing immediate assistance to prevent unauthorized entry.
Additionally, 10 CFR 20.1902, ``Posting Requirements,'' provides,
in part, that the Licensee will post each radiation area with a
conspicuous sign or signs marking the radiation hazard.
A ``radiation area'' is defined in 10 CFR 20.1003 as an area,
accessible to individuals, in which radiation levels could result
in an individual receiving a dose equivalent in excess of 0.005
rem in 1 hour at 30 centimeters or 30 centimeters from any
surface that the radiation penetrates. For the purposes of 10 CFR
20.1003, individual means any human being. Measurements and
assessments of the radiation level at the Indianapolis, Indiana,
job site indicated a level of 25 milliroentgen per hour, exterior
to the building, at 65 feet from the exposure device containing
41 curies of iridium-192, assuming a point source, a gamma
constant
[[Page 54818]] of 5.2 roentgen per hour per curie at 30
centimeters, and considering shielding inherent to the facility
including structures and equipment.
On August 29, 2002, a radiographer and a radiographer's assistant
were assigned by the Licensee to conduct field radiographic
operations at a temporary job site in Indianapolis, Indiana. The
radiography consisted of eight exposures, including uncollimated
panoramic exposures, of a heat exchanger inside of a building.
The radiographer and the radiographer's assistant did not
conspicuously post the radiation area exterior to the building to
warn of the radiation area created during the radiographic
exposures. While the radiographer remained inside the building to
observe the radiographic operation, the radiographer's assistant
was to stay outside of the building to warn anyone approaching
the area of the radiation hazard.
One section of the radiation area was behind a wooden fence and
that area was accessible to the public. That section was not
posted as a radiation area and the fence blocked the view of that
area for the radiographer's assistant. Therefore, neither the
radiographer nor the radiographer's assistant could provide
immediate assistance to prevent unauthorized entry into the
radiation area because the radiographer's view of the area was
blocked by the building wall.
While controlling access outside of the building to prevent
unauthorized entry into another section of the radiation area,
the radiographer's assistant was approached by the owner of an
adjacent building with questions about potential radiation
hazards in that person's building. The radiograph's assistant
left the radiation area where he was posted to control access to
prevent unauthorized access and went to the near-by building to
answer questions about potential radiation hazards. While inside
the adjacent building, the radiographer's assistant could not
view the radiation area and the radiographer could not maintain
visual surveillance of the area because of the intervening
building wall. The absence of a qualified individual to maintain
surveillance to prevent unauthorized access to a radiation area
and the failure to post warnings of the radiation hazard are
violations of 10 CFR 34.41(a) and 10 CFR 20.1902. The NRC Staff
concludes that the radiographer's assistant could not observe a
section of the radiation area at the temporary job site in
Indianapolis, Indiana, and therefore could not observe
radiographic operations or provide assistance to prevent
unauthorized entry into a radiation area and the area was not
marked as a radiation area. The NRC Staff also concluded that the
radiographer's assistant left another section of the radiation
area unattended and the radiation area was not posted; therefore,
no means existed to warn individuals of the presence of a
radiation area or to prevent unauthorized entry into that area.
The use of radios between Licensee personnel would not have
adequately compensated for the absence of the radiographer's
assistant or appropriate postings to warn of the radiation
hazard.
Since qualified individuals could not observe the radiation area
exterior to the building while radiographic operations were
taking place, they were not in a position or capable of providing
immediate assistance to prevent unauthorized entry into the
radiation area exterior to the building, and radio communication
would not have provided any assistance to prevent unauthorized
entry into the radiation area. Therefore, EA-02-201 remains valid
and will not be withdrawn.
C. The Licensee contended that the NRC did not give credit for
the civil penalty adjustment factor associated with Corrective
Action. As explained in the June 15, 2004, letter from the NRC,
credit was warranted for the Corrective Action adjustment factor
and no additional civil penalty was assessed for the Corrective
Action factor.
The NRC gave appropriate credit to the Licensee for the
corrective actions implemented by the Licensee, as described in
the June 15, 2004, letter from the NRC to the Licensee.
Section VI.C of the Enforcement Policy, provides, in part, that
management involvement, direct or indirect, may lead to an
increase in the civil penalty. Section VII.A.1 of the Enforcement
Policy provides for escalating the amount of the civil penalty by
the base or twice the base civil penalty to ensure that the civil
penalty reflects the significance of the circumstances. The NRC
escalated the amount of the civil penalty by the base amount due
to a lack of management oversight of the radiation safety program
which significantly contributed to the conditions leading to the
overexposure event described in the June 15, 2004, letter and
Notice. The Licensee, however, did not contest this application
of enforcement discretion in its July 12, 2004, response to the
Notice.
NRC Conclusion The NRC has concluded that the violations occurred
as stated and neither an adequate basis for a reduction of the
severity level nor for recission or mitigation of the civil
penalty was provided by the Licensee. Consequently, the proposed
civil penalty in the amount of $19,200 should be imposed.
[FR Doc. 04-20496 Filed 9-9-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
18 Chattanoogan.com: TVA's Baxter Touts Nuclear As Cheaper, Clean -
9/10/2004 -
posted September 10, 2004
TVA Director Bill Baxter told the Chattanooga Civitan Club on
Friday that nuclear power provides the prospect for cheaper,
cleaner power for the Valley.
The speaker also said TVA is not now considering a rate increase,
but one is not out of the question.
He said it's vital that Congress approve the rebuilding of the
Chickamauga Lock or else there will be no barge traffic north of
the dam.
Mr. Baxter said a unit at the Brown's Ferry Nuclear Plant in
North Alabama will be coming on line in 2007 and will provide
enough power for an area the size of Chattanooga.
"It will pay for itself in about 84 months and afterwards will be
helping to pay our debt down," he said.
Mr. Baxter said nuclear power costs about 2.5 cents, coal 4.5
cents and natural gas 6.5 cents.
He said there will be no emissions from the Brown's Ferry
facility.
The speaker said the Bellefant nuclear plant may never be
finished, considering its design. But he said the site is
available for use for a next-generation nuclear design.
Mr. Baxter said it is hoped that the Department of Energy can
approve a new nuclear design that can be standardized and erected
without further design reviews. He said Bellefant has a state of
the art transmission system and huge switch yard, and he said the
community is very supportive of the nuclear option.
He said another nuclear unit might be added at Watts Bar at
Spring City if there is sufficient demand.
Mr. Baxter said TVA is trying to slim down its operations because
of the prospect that Congress may force it to compete in the open
market to keep customers like EPB.
He said TVA is spending millions of dollars more on security
since 9-11. He said public tours are no longer allowed at TVA
facilities, "and that's unfortunate."
news@chattanoogan.com [news@chattanoogan.com] (423) 266-2325 ©
2004 Site designed and copyrighted by Three HD Privacy Policy
*****************************************************************
19 TheStar.com: Restarting Bruce reactors tricky
Fri. Sep. 10, 2004. | Updated at 04:50 PM
Critics point to Bruce's repair needsPower companies say plant
is needed
JOHN SPEARS BUSINESS REPORTER
Ontario's decision to open negotiations on restarting two idle
nuclear reactors is getting a mixed reception.
Two watchdog groups condemned the move, but the lobby group for
the province's generating companies said the move is an
inevitable part of securing a supply of electricity.
Energy Minister Dwight Duncan has hired David Santangeli to
advise the province on negotiations with Bruce Power, which
operates six units at the Bruce nuclear station near Kincardine.
Bruce Power is considering restarting two mothballed units, both
of which need extensive repairs, but says it needs to know more
about the market for power before it embarks on the huge project.
Tom Adams, executive director of Energy Probe, warned that the
project is fraught with uncertainty, in part because the
technical issues are daunting.
The boilers that produce the steam to drive the electricity
generators are badly damaged and must be replaced, but they are
encased in the concrete that surrounds the reactor core. Cutting
them out and replacing them will be a complex task.
Another unknown is how many of the hundreds of pressure tubes in
the reactor core must be replaced. The tubes contain the uranium
fuel that powers the reactor.
In addition, Adams said the safety shutdown systems of the Bruce
A plant, which is one of the province's oldest, aren't the same
standard as the systems in newer plants.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission might decide to order
upgrades before permitting the Bruce units to start up, Adams
said.
The potential for big cost increases is great, Adams said, and
inevitably Bruce Power will want the province to underwrite much
of the risk.
"We've got the makings of a poisonous public-private
partnership," he said.
When times are good, Bruce Power will want the profits, he said,
but "on the bad days the public are the owners."
Dave Martin of Greenpeace was equally skeptical.
"They are going to guarantee a market for nuclear power in the
province and it will have a huge cost for ratepayers," he said.
"It will subvert the electricity market. It will be a huge
disincentive to conservation and renewable energy. And the risk
will be substantial."
"The question is: How much of a sweetheart deal will the McGuinty
government give Bruce Power?" he said.
The province has given local utilities an initial limit of $225
million to fund conservation programs, he said, yet they are
prepared to negotiate a multi-billion dollar nuclear deal.
Dave Butters, president of the Association of Power Producers of
Ontario, said negotiations with firms like Bruce Power are
inevitable as the government moves toward a hybrid electricity
system — part regulated and part market-driven.
"This is just a kind of reality we have to deal with to ensure
that Ontario has the supply that it needs at the price it can
afford," he said.
The important thing is to make sure whatever deals are negotiated
are "even-handed and transparent," he said.
Glen Estill of Sky Generation Inc., a wind power firm, said there
are valid reasons for having separate discussions with companies
like Bruce Power because nuclear reactors have unique features.
But he said the discussions should be geared to protecting the
public from hidden costs such as the expense of decommissioning
worn-out plants. Nuclear operators should also have to bear the
full cost of insuring against serious accidents, he said.
Without those features spelled out, "nobody knows what the cost
is," he said.
"It puts an almost unlimited liability on the province."
Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
*****************************************************************
20 Mail & Guardian: SA nuclear ring's international links
[http://www.mg.co.za]
Saturday, September 11, 2004, 7:46
Gerhard Wisser, the German-South African who is a key suspect
in an international nuclear technology smuggling network, was a
supplier to apartheid’s nuclear weapons programme, the Mail
&Guardian has been told.
Wisser was arrested in Germany on August 25 on charges of
“aiding the attempted development of atomic weapons”, but
released on bail. He was rearrested in South Africa on
Wednesday. Daniel Geiges, his co-director in a Randburg firm,
Krisch Engineering, was also arrested and appeared with him in
the Vanderbijlpark Magistrate’s Court on Thursday. They remain
in custody pending a bail application on Tuesday.
Wisser and Geige’s arrests follow that of Johan Meyer, whose
arrest last week focused world attention on South African links
to the alleged nuclear network. Meyer, who the M has been told
also worked on the apartheid-era programme as an engineer with
the then Atomic Energy Corporation, was released without
explanation on Wednesday and charges withdrawn. It is thought
that he has agreed to turn state witness.
Wisser has been resident in South Africa since at least the
1970s. His Krisch Engineering is described as a specialist in
vaccuum technology and metallurgy, as well as a supplier of
equipment for power stations, saw milling and industrial plants.
According to a well-placed source, Krisch Engineering was a key
supplier to the South African nuclear programme, which was shut
down by former president FW de Klerk in 1993.
“[Wisser] used to brag about how he had evaded the authorities,”
said the source, who knows the company well, but asked not to be
named. South Africa was at the time under international arms
embargoes and restrictions on the spread of nuclear-related
technology.
“He made most of his money from that programme. I would estimate
that R100-million worth of equipment flowed to Pelindaba [South
Africa’s nuclear research facility] through Krisch Engineering.”
A senior source involved in the investigation of the South
African node of the smuggling network confirmed that he was
aware of allegations concerning Wisser’s history.
Cecilia Höller, an alternate director at Krisch Engineering,
this week refused comment to the M. She said Wisser was not back
at work and that others were not available.
Höller did say, however, that the R100-million figure was
“probably a massive, massive, massive exaggeration”. She also
said it was unlikely for engineering firms not to have
“indirectly” worked on the grand apartheid-era projects, which
also included Sasol and Mossgas.
She did not directly deny that Krisch had worked on the
apartheid nuclear programme.
Meyer, whose lawyer Heinrich Badenhorst would not comment on his
unexpected release this week, was originally charged with
contravening the Nuclear Energy Act by possessing and producing
components of a centrifuge uranium enrichment plant without
authorisation.
According to a statement by the South African Council for the
Non-Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, 11 shipping
containers were found at the premises of his company Tradefin
Engineering containing components of an enrichment plant as well
as related documentation. In an enrichment plant, cascades of
centrifuges are used to isolate the highly enriched uranium
necessary for nuclear weapons.
Dr Wally Grant, a leader of the South African weapons
development programme, this week confirmed that Meyer had worked
under him at Atomic Energy Corporation at the time.
According to a statement issued by the German federal
prosecutor’s office, Wisser is suspected of acting as a
middleman in a 2001 request to provide special tubes to Libya
for use in a uranium enrichment facility.
To this end, he allegedly approached a South African company and
tubes were manufactured according to designs provided by Wisser.
It is not known if the company involved was Meyer’s Tradefin,
but a source close to the company said there was a longstanding
business relationship between Wisser’s Krisch and Tradefin.
The German authorities said, as far as was known, the equipment
never reached Libya, but that Wisser was paid €1-million (about
R8-million) in commission.
Wisser and Meyer’s arrests are among several across the globe
linked to a nuclear technology smuggling ring set up by
Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who admitted
earlier this year he had been involved in providing assistance
to Libya, Iran and North Korea in their attempts to develop a
nuclear capability.
As the revered “father” of the first “Islamic bomb”, he was
considered untouchable and was immediately pardoned by Pakistani
President Pervez Musharraf. Since then there has been a major
push by Western powers to “roll up” Khan’s network, which,
according to an estimate by the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA), extended across 20 countries.
The German prosecutors’ statement said the extent of Wisser’s
involvement in the Khan procurement network was the subject of
further investigation. It added that another German citizen,
Gotthard Lerch, resident in Switzerland, was also under
investigation regarding to the same matter.
A Swiss newspaper reported last Sunday that police raided three
Swiss-based companies in connection with a probe into the
activities of Lerch, a businessman active in the nuclear
industry.
The first link of Lerch and South Africa to the Khan network
came following the seizure of cargo on a German ship bound for
Libya in October 2003. British and United States intelligence
officials traced the cargo — precision-engineered machine parts
— back to a Malaysian company Scomi Prescision Engineering.
Malaysian police interviewed one Buhari “BSA” Tahir, a Sri
Lankan-born businessman based in Dubai.
It was from information obtained from Tahir, a trusted and close
confidante of Khan, that the first details of the Pakistani
scientist’s nuclear arms bazaar began to emerge.
Tahir, described by US authorities as the “chief financial
officer and money launderer” for Khan’s network, was accused of
being actively involved in supplying centrifuge components for
Libya’s uranium-enrichment programme.
According to a Malaysian police report, Tahir described how he
had got to know Khan in 1985, when he supplied airconditioners
to Khan’s laboratory.
In 1994 he was persuaded by Khan to send two containers of used
centrifuge units from Pakistan to Iran. Tahir organised the
trans-shipment of the two containers from Dubai to Iran.
According to the information obtained from Tahir, who remains in
detention under Malaysia’s notorious Internal Security Act, Khan
had been approached by Libya in 1997 to help with its enrichment
programme. Tahir had accompanied Khan to a meeting with Libya’s
chief atomic scientist, Mohamad Matuq.
Tahir provided details of individuals and companies allegedly
involved in Khan’s supply network.
He named Lerch as having attempted to source components in South
Africa to set up a machine shop in Libya to manufacture
centrifuge components. The project, according to the Malaysian
police report, was dubbed “machine shop 1001”.
The penetration of Khan’s network appears to be at least
partially responsible for the decision by Libya, in late
December last year, to abandon attempts to develop nuclear
weapons and invite inspectors from the IAEA to monitor the
dismantling of its weapons programme.
Contact author: E-mail the author of this article
Talkback: Have your say about this article
Daily cellphone alerts: Get news headlines by SMS
Daily Newsletter: Get the news by e-mail
NATIONAL | HOMEPAGE
[http://www.signmein.co.za/authentication.aspx?turl=mgkudu&psid={
01156FB8-77A6-4DB1-8EDD-42E4D937EA9C}&sn=Global&sa=500000&surl=ht
tp://www.mg.co.za/Content/l3.asp?cg=Insight-National|ao=121973&lg
=e]
Archive Search
Print edition
Daily news
[ Advanced ]
Online services
FIND A JOB
FIND
A DATE [http://mg.datingbuzz.com/s/]
NEWS BY E-MAIL
[http://www.mg.co.za/Content/l3_f.asp?o=561]
HOLIDAY
FINDER
[http://www.safarinow.com/destinations/south-africa/?skin=405]
FIND
OLD FRIENDS
[http://www.sareunited.com/sar_mg.html]
LEARN FRENCH
[http://www.alliance.org.za/sommaire.php3]
SUBSCRIBE
TO M&G
[http://www.mg.co.za/Content/l3_f.asp?o=557]
GET NEWS BY SMS [http://www.mg.co.za/sms]
FREE NEWS FEED
[http://www.mg.co.za/Content/l3_f.asp?o=19914]
PLACE
AN ADVERT
[http://www.mg.co.za/Content/l3_f.asp?o=565]
GET
LOTTO BY SMS [http://www.mg.co.za/sms]
-->
CONTACT US | ABOUT US | M HISTORY | SUBSCRIPTIONS
| FREE NEWS FEED | ADVERTISING | INTERNSHIPS
All material copyright MailGuardian.
Material may not be published or reproduced in any form without
prior written permission.
Read the MailGuardian's privacy policy
[http://www.opa.org.za]
*****************************************************************
21 Public Citizen: Nuclear Agency Illegally Hid Information From the Public
Sept. 9, 2004
Court Will Hear Challenge Tomorrow by Public Interest Groups
WASHINGTON, D.C. The government infringed on the publics
right to know by violating rulemaking procedures when it revised
its security regulations for nuclear power plants without
notifying the public or providing an opportunity for public
comment, said Public Citizen and the California environmental
group San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace
[http://www.mothersforpeace.org/] today. The U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will hear oral
arguments tomorrow on a lawsuit brought by the two groups
against the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC
[http://www.nrc.gov/] ).
The new regulations, issued on April 29, 2003, revised the
design basis threat (DBT), the terrorist attack scenario that
nuclear plants are required to be able to guard against. The
plant operators preparedness is mainly evaluated through
force-on-force tests simulations in which a group of mock
attackers attempt to gain access to restricted plant areas.
Citing a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, a law
governing agency rulemaking, the groups are asking the NRC to
put the new rules through a public rulemaking process, which
would allow an opportunity for the reactor states and the public
to comment on what should be in the new rule and require the
agency to take those comments into account.
After taking almost a year and a half following the 9/11
terrorist attacks to even consider upgrading the force-on-force
security requirements, the NRC rushed the process by bypassing
the public altogether, said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public
Citizens Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. This
failure is not only contrary to principles of open, democratic
government and the NRCs own promises, but ultimately makes
plants less secure by limiting the input and ideas received in
crafting such important regulations.
State governments and the public have played a crucial role in
the past in holding the industry and NRC accountable on issues
of nuclear safety and security. For instance, the addition of
a truck bomb scenario to the DBT in 1995 came mainly as a result
of citizen group pressure after the first World Trade Center
attack.
State agencies that must respond to terrorist acts, public
interest groups, and members of the public would all have had
great interest in commenting on many aspects of the new rule,
which could have resulted in a stronger regulation, said
Rochelle Becker, project manager with Mothers for Peace. While
NRC internal memos now say the NRC intends to conduct public
rulemaking in the future, a public rulemaking should have been
undertaken from the beginning.
Although details of the DBT remain secret for security reasons,
some characteristics are publicly known. For instance, the
number of mock attackers has increased and the new tests will
take place at a given plant at least once every three years,
rather than once every eight years. In contrast, the U.S.
Department of Energys sensitive nuclear facilities conduct
similar tests annually. The new rule goes into full effect on
Oct. 29.
Critics of security at nuclear power plants have found
significant ammunition lately. In July, the 9/11 Commission
stated in its final report that al Qaeda had strongly considered
targeting nuclear plants. Nonetheless, the new DBT evidently
does not require plants to take effective measures against
possible aircraft attacks by terrorists. The NRC also received
heavy criticism recently for allowing the Nuclear Energy
Institute, the industrys lobbying arm, to hire Wackenhut to
perform the new force-on-force tests, given that Wackenhut also
holds contracts to guard nearly half the nuclear plants in the
country. And in August, the NRC announced its decision to keep
secret all information relating to security inspections and
tests, such as the new force-on-force tests, and any enforcement
actions taken as a result of those findings.
The oral arguments will be heard at 9:30 a.m. in the principal
courtroom of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit,
located on the fifth floor of the federal courthouse at 333
Constitution Avenue, N.W.
###
*****************************************************************
22 ThisisLondon: Invesco in U-turn over British Energy
10 September 2004
BRITISH Energy's largest shareholder said it is not backing calls
for the nuclear generator's restructuring to be renegotiated -
just two months after saying it was.
Invesco, with a 10.1% stake, said in late July it was backing
moves to overhaul the scheme where shareholders end up with just
2.5% of the company.
However, it said: 'Invesco is not currently involved in efforts
to promote an alternative restructuring.'
The U-turn came about because Invesco held bonds in BE at the
time of the earlier comments, which have since been sold.
It is the second blow in as many days to Polygon and Brandes,
which are pushing for the restructuring to be changed.
It follows yesterday's damning report on British Energy from the
Committee of Public Accounts.
*****************************************************************
23 Sofia Morning News: Poor Information Generates N-Plant Protests
[Sofia News Agency]
novinite.com
Politics: 10 September 2004, Friday.
Protests from Romanian non-governmental organizations against the
construction of Belene nuclear plant "just 13 km away from the
border" are a product of poor or scarce information, according to
the chief of the construction project.
The units to be installed and operated there have nothing in
common with the notorious type in Chernobyl, Krassimir Nikolov
told local Darik Radio asked to comment on the recent Romanian
voices against the Belene project.
Experts pointed out that the project had been developed and
implemented for years, after being technically agreed with
Romanian authorities as well.
Romanian government has decided to form an expert group to
analyze Bulgaria's nuclear power plant project, Mediafax news
agency informed on Friday quoting the government's spokesperson
Despina Njagoe.
The group shall include the ministers of foreign affairs, of
economy and trade, of European affairs and nuclear power experts
presided over by the country's Minister of Environment Speranta
Yankulescu.
The project of building the Belene power plant on the Danube
river was unfrozen end of last year and is planned to be finished
till 2012-2014.[ width=]
novinite.com Forum Google Tourism Business
Novinite.com (thebulgariannews.com also) is unique with being a
*****************************************************************
24 APP.COM - Viewpoint: Oyster Creek plant is safe, doesn't pollute
and pays its share
ASBURY PARK PRESS
Published in the Asbury Park Press 9/10/04 The plant pays $9.2
million in state and local taxes and closing it would remove
$234.3 million from the stateeconomy.Many of the letters about
the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey over the past
months have obviously fallen for the scare tactics from the
Press' series of editorials, so-called "environmentalists groups"
and other public figures with their own agendas. Let's look at
their concerns:
+ Age of the plant: The opponents claim that the plant is too
old and should be decommissioned. While Oyster Creek is the
oldest operating plant in the United States, it has an
impeccable safety record and has undergone half a billion
dollars in renovations and upgrades since 1980.
+ Safety from terrorists: Concerned citizens claim that the
plant is a target for terrorists and is vulnerable. The plant
has more than doubled the number of security officers since
9/11, provided concrete barriers to all entrances and the front
perimeter on top of the three layers of external security. By
this fall, the plant will have upgraded the weapons of security
personnel to a version of the M-16 assault rifle, provided
bullet-resistant watchtowers (manned 24/7), extended a new
perimeter fence out to Route 9 with new checkpoints and
surveillance cameras, and will provide new security measures for
the canal that surrounds the plant.
An independent review of the reactor tower and containment
facility by the California-based Electric Research Power
Institute has shown that they both would withstand an impact of
a commercial airliner, as remote as that possibility would be
today. With the increase in airport security, sky marshals, the
vigilance of our citizens and increased intelligence efforts,
this scenario is widely overblown.
+ Radioactive byproduct: The plant has to store its radioactive
spent fuel rods on site. While this is true, it is also true for
most of the other 102 plants nationwide. The waste from the
plant is very small in comparison to the toxic waste from other
types of generation plants other than hydroelectric plants. The
plant produces no harmful emissions. The facility that
temporarily stores the spent fuel is also in a hardened
containment structure.
The plan was to have this spent fuel moved by 1998 to the Yucca
Mountain storage facility in Nevada, but the federal government
and federal courts have failed to have the facility open as
agreed with the nation's utility companies.
Ocean County was recently rated as having some of the worst air
quality on the East Coast. Is this because of nuclear power? No.
The source of this pollution has been traced by the
Environmental Protection Agency to energy plants in Pennsylvania
and Ohio that, for the most part, use coal and pollute us with
sulfur and carbon dioxide along with hydrocarbon emissions.
+ Evacuation routes: There are not enough roads to provide for
the safe evacuation of Ocean County residents. This also may be
true, but traffic is a systemic problem in this state and not
unique to Ocean County. The population of Ocean County was a
fraction of what it is now when the plant was built. Any smart
growth over the last 40 years should have taken into account
evacuation routes for all disasters, natural and otherwise.
Without the plant, the state would lose more than 450
high-paying jobs (not including security personnel), an
additional 1,000 jobs statewide, $12.3 million in employee tax
payments and $100,000 per year in employee United Way
contributions. The plant pays $9.2 million in state and local
taxes and closing it would remove $234.3 million from the state
economy. AmerGen has also donated 40 acres to the township for
Clune Park, with an estimated value of almost $4 million.
Lacey Mayor John Parker, in a recent edition of the Lacey
Beacon, is quoted as referring to Oyster Creek as "an example of
what an outstanding neighbor is."
If the plant were to close, Parker and the Township Committee
estimate the property tax increase to Lacey residents would be
approximately $630 per household per year. Are the surrounding
towns going to compensate Lacey for the loss of its plant and
biggest ratable since many of their mayors are so outspoken on
this issue? Doubtful.
Let's look at real resolutions together. Most residents feel
that Route 9 should be expanded to four lanes from Lakewood to
Little Egg Harbor. Lacey Road is already slated to be widened to
four lanes from Route 9 to the Garden State Parkway. This could
be extended to Manchester. We all know that the parkway needs to
be expanded to six lanes from Toms River to Cape May.
Sen. Leonard T. Connors Jr., R-Ocean, has outlined three
conditions that he wanted AmerGen to comply with before he would
lend his support to the relicensing of the plant. First is an
independent safety review of the plant. Second is assuring that
the plant is safe for all workers and the plant itself is safe
to operate and is complying with the new security protocols
required by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by Oct. 29.
Lastly, that the renewal license is reduced from 20 years to
five years.
These are fair conditions only if the licensing costs (more
than $10 million) are prorated for a five-year license. Citizens
and environmental groups should expend their energy in
pressuring the federal government to open the Yucca Mountain
storage facility and to clamp down on emissions from plants in
other states. They should also be supportive in either the
construction of a new nuclear generating plant or be proactive
in helping the plant with upgrades that they feel are warranted
to allay their concerns. Then perhaps common sense would prevail
over fear and politics.
Steve Waters
LACEY
*****************************************************************
25 Guardian Unlimited: BE rescue plan wins EC approval
David Gow in Brussels
Saturday September 11, 2004
The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk]
British Energy received a boost yesterday when it emerged that
the European commission will approve the government's £5bn rescue
plan for the stricken nuclear operator later this month.
It is understood that the EC will give the go-ahead for BE's
complex restructuring, which will leave shareholders with 2.5% of
the company, on Wednesday week. But even then, the group admits,
it will take several years for it to recover commercially.
Mario Monti, the outgoing competition commissioner, will approve
the government's multi-billion aid for decommissioning BE's eight
nuclear power plants over the next 80 years and for its
reduced-price contracts with British Nuclear Fuels for supplying
fuel and handling spent fuel rods.
But Mr Monti will set down a condition that the group avoid any
unlawful use of cross-subsidies by ringfencing its main power
generation business from its coal-fired plant at Eggborough,
north Yorks, and its arm selling power direct to companies.
Useful link
Green party of England and Wales [http://www.greenparty.org.uk]
Email us
politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk [
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
*****************************************************************
26 ONN. Ohio News Now: Kerry Pledges Support For Plant's sick Workers
September 11, 2004
Portsmouth
Ted Strickland Talks About Kerry's Pledge
John Kerry says if he's elected, he'll make sure sick nuclear
weapons plant workers get speedy compensation payments from the
government.
The program was started to help workers at the Portsmouth Gaseous
Diffusion Plant in southern Ohio. But so far, only 31 claims out
of 25-thousand filed have been paid.
Republican and Democrats in Congress are calling on the Bush
administration to improve the program's claim process.
Kerry's promise to workers at the plant was made in a letter to
Ohio Congressman Ted Strickland. It comes on the eve of President
Bush's visit to Portsmouth.
In the letter, Kerry also promises to continue cleanup activities
at the plant.
Bush promised in a letter in 2000 to support the plant and since
being elected, his administration has continued to fund cleanup
and cold standby operations at the plant.
(Copyright 2004 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
[http://www.worldnow.com] All content © Copyright 2004,
WorldNow and Dispatch Productions, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
27 VaalWeekly: NUCLEAR SCANDAL EXPLODES ...
[http://www.news24.com]
10/09/2004 10:07 AM - (SA)
Rabie Street in Vanderbijlpark's industrial area was a beehive of
activity on Saturday when members of the unit, Crime Against the
State (CATS), searched until late at night for equipment
allegedly used in the manufacture of nuclear weapons at Trade Fin
Engineering.
Ten crates with suspicious equipment were apparently found in a
secret closed up room on the premises of this well-known
engineering firm.
Members of the investigative team had to break down a wall that
was strengthened with steel beams, in order to gain access to the
room.
According to a source who does not wish to be identified,
someone who did not have information about the room would not
have realised what was going on.
Apparently the crates were already sealed for shipment overseas,
most probably Pakistan, when the investigative team made the
discovery.
A fleet transported the crates to Pelindaba outside Pretoria,
the home of South Africa's nuclear weapons' program in the
apartheid years, on Saturday.
This follows the arrest of Mr Johan Meyer, Director of Trade
Fin, last Thursday.
He appeared in the regional court briefly on Friday, on charges
of contravening the law on nuclear power and the manufacture of
weapons of mass destruction.
A huge sum of $20-million (R132-million) is apparently involved
in Meyer's transactions.
Apparently, the National Intelligence Agency, together with the
International Atom Energy Agency and the National Prosecuting
Authority have been investigating Trade Fin for the past year.
The investigative unit apparently received information about
Meyer's activities from informants and this led to the discovery
of the equipment.
Two more men, from Germany and Switzerland respectively, were
also arrested last week.
Preliminary investigations indicate that all three men were part
of the infamous "A.Q. Kahn Network" that has been connected to
the smuggling of parts, plans and expertise for the development
of nuclear weapons since the nineties.
© 2004 Vaal Weekly - All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
28 AP Wire: Radioactive plume detected near former LA nuclear research site
| 09/10/2004 |
Associated Press
SIMI VALLEY, Calif. - A radioactive plume has been detected in
two new test wells at the Santa Susana Field Lab, a former
nuclear research facility, officials said.
High levels of radioactive tritium were detected in the test
wells drilled by the U.S. Department of Energy after discovering
tritium earlier this year in the groundwater at the northern edge
of the research site in the Simi Hills.
The agency now plans to drill additional wells to determine the
source of the plume, its size, and the speed and direction of its
movement.
"The reactor was in operation 40 years ago and the plume still
appears close to the source. It hasn't moved off site," said
Majelle Lee, project manager with Boeing Co., which owns the lab.
Officials said Thursday that the tainted groundwater is not used
for drinking and does not pose a health risk to the public or
neighbors.
The DOE is ending its 15-year-long cleanup of the former nuclear
laboratory. The agency has been investigating a handful of sites
where tritium may have been released, based on 40-year-old
records detailing how radioactive materials were handled.
A groundwater sample taken in March from a test well drilled next
to the site of an experimental reactor found tritium at 80,000
picocuries per liter - or four times the drinking-water standard.
Tritium has not yet been detected in a cluster of monitoring
wells located downhill from the site but residents wonder if the
reports have been accurate.
"The question is what got off the site and what else was released
from the site," said Dan Hirsch, president of Committee to Bridge
the Gap, a nuclear-watchdog group.
Federal officials said they plan to conduct more groundwater
testing later this year.
Tritium, a byproduct of a nuclear reaction, has been found at the
lab before, but never at such high levels.
In 1991, it was detected at 5,400 picocuries per liter on nearby
property owned by the Brandeis Bardin Institute, which runs a
Jewish camp and educational facility. Other chemicals were found
in soil samples two years later taken from the camp along the
property line with Rocketdyne, which operated a nuclear reactor.
The federal government funded nuclear research at the lab, which
was run by Rocketdyne, now a division of Boeing, from the 1950s
through the 1980s.
---
Information from: Daily News, http://www.dailynews.com
[http://www.dailynews.com]
*****************************************************************
29 Nevada Appeal: AG files new lawsuit over Yucca Mountain
Geoff Dornan, gdornan@nevadaappeal.com
September 9, 2004
Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval filed a new lawsuit
against the Department of Energy this week challenging plans for
transporting nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain.
The transportation plan announced in April proposes building a
new railroad line to move containers of waste 318 miles from
Caliente to Yucca Mountain. And the casks containing the waste,
according to the lawsuit, would be light-weight truck casks --
not the larger, heavier casks that have been extensively tested
for safety in case of an accident.
The lawsuit says the plan violates the National Environmental
Policy Act, Interstate Commerce Act and regulations set by the
Council on Environmental Quality, Surface Transportation Board
and the DOE itself.
"With no public input whatsoever, DOE chose a new transport mode
that DOE itself had rejected for study because it is the most
expensive by a billion dollars, the most impractical, and has the
highest health and safety risk," Sandoval said. "The larger casks
would have sharply reduced the number of shipments and are less
vulnerable in accidents or terrorist attacks."
The lawsuit charges that the DOE shouldn't even be in charge of
the project since the law requires the Surface Transportation
Board to take that role. It says the Department of Energy didn't
even contact that body before proposing the new rail line -
pointing out the DOE has already applied to BLM for the near
310,000 acres of land needed for the new track.
The lawsuit seeks to vacate the DOE's decisions on the rail line
and require a new environmental impact statement instead.
It was filed in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, which
has already ruled in favor of Nevada in its challenge of the
DOE's decision to change radiation standards for the Yucca
Mountain project.
President Bush signed the order two years ago designating Yucca
Mountain as the site for the nation's high level nuclear waste
repository. He did so almost immediately after the DOE
recommendation reached his desk despite promising during his 2000
campaign that he would only do so after weighing whether the
project met requirements of "sound science."
Bush supporters maintain he did just that. John Kerry's campaign
and Nevada Democrats charge that Bush misled Nevadans to get
their votes in the tight 2000 election race.
Contact Geoff Dornan at nevadaappeal@sbcglobal.net
[nevadaappeal@sbcglobal.net] or 687-8750.
All contents © Copyright 2004 nevadaappeal.com Nevada Appeal -
580 Mallory Way - Carson City, NV 89701
*****************************************************************
30 Innovations Report: Do Rocks Hold The Key To Nuclear Waste Storage?
[http://www.innovations-report.com/home.php]
Glasgows 10.09.2004
Technology to monitor how the rock barrier around radio active
waste reacts has been developed by an Anglo French consortium
with the help of 466,286 euros from the EU’s Framework Programme
towards the projects total cost of 765,619 euros.
As the sources of traditional fossil fuels like coal, oil and
gas continue to decrease there is a growing demand for more
sustainable forms of energy. The option to turn to nuclear power
for the production of electricity has long been debated but
disposal of the waste material is a major cause for concern.
Experts believe one of the most viable solutions for the safe
management of nuclear radioactive waste is deep geological
disposal, but this needs extensive testing and validation before
it can be considered as the long-term solution.
“The OMNIBUS project developed ultrasonic technology with a
primary aim to monitor the rock barrier at potential underground
radioactive waste storage sites (including argillaceous rock
masses)”, says Professor Paul Young, the project co-ordinator at
the University of Liverpool’s Department of Earth Sciences. “The
technology (hardware and software) has been successfully tested
insitu to provide real time monitoring of rock masses to provide
information on changes that are occurring. The software provides
methods for interpreting these changes in terms of crack
density, crack size and orientation, as well as fluid content.
This information on changing rock properties is very important
in terms of short and long term safety in these types of
facilities.”
Three main technologies have been produced that will have
significant application in areas, apart from radioactive waste
management, where continuous and non-destructive testing of
brittle materials such as concrete and metals are undertaken.
For instance, in mining and petroleum sectors as well as in
seismological studies and civil engineering for structures
including dams, tunnels, and bridges. They are:
Ultrasonic Monitoring Hardware – A state-of-the-art system of
custom designed and built components as well as off the shelf
components. This includes the technology for installing
ultrasonic sensors in boreholes in a rockmass as well as for
high speed high resolution data collection.
Ultrasonic Monitoring Software – to allow ultrasonic data
acquisition control, real time ultrasonic data processing and
visualization, as well as ultrasonic data interpretation of rock
properties from the display and analysis of model data.
Ultrasonic Modelling Software – that can be used to help
understand the effect that rock properties have on ultrasonic
transmission characteristic including phase and amplitude
spectra.
“The nuclear energy programme of Framework Funding is aimed at
intensifying and deepening the already well established
co-operation at European level in the field of nuclear
research”, says Paul Leeks, Project Director for FP6UK. “The
exploitation of nuclear fission energy for energy production
requires progress to be made in the problem of waste, and more
particularly the industrial implementation of technical
solutions for the management of long-lived waste.
“The current Framework Programme (FP6) runs until 2006 and
organisations wanting free, easy to access, information on the
19bn euros of funding available to support internationally
collaborative R should log on to http://fp6uk.ost.gov.uk or call
central telephone support on 0870 600 6080.”
More information: fp6uk.ost.gov.uk
10.09.2004 | Dave Sanders | Source: alphagalileo | CMS by
NETZGUT
[http://www.counterlabs.de/]
*****************************************************************
31 AU ABC: Ranger problems highlight safety 'flaws'.
11/09/2004. ABC News Online
[http://www.abc.net.au/]
Unions say no amount of bureaucracy will fix problems at the
Ranger mine. (ABC TV) [ border=]
Ranger problems highlight safety 'flaws'
The union representing Northern Territory mining workers says
safety regulations should be completely overhauled in the face
of three audits into safety at the Ranger uranium mine.
Two reports into a contamination incident at the mine have
highlighted the inadequacy of safety regulations.
In March this year, workers at the mine drank and showered in
water later found to be contaminated with 400 times the legal
limit of uranium.
Deputy Opposition Leader Richard Lim says the Sessional
Committee on the Environment would monitor operations more
successfully than a government department.
But Didge McDonald, from Unions NT, says future bureaucratic
responsibility is irrelevant at the moment.
He says the Government should be more concerned with current
safety procedures at the mine.
"Basically we think that's a Mickey Mouse solution that doesn't
go anywhere near resolving the problems they have out there," Mr
McDonald said.
The mine will undergo the first of three independent audits on
Monday.
[http://www.abc.net.au]
© 2004 Australian Broadcasting Corporation
*****************************************************************
32 Waterford News & Star: Cullen concerned over inadequate UK response to Sellafield
Friday, September 10, 2004
MARTIN Cullen, Minister for the Environment, has welcomed the
decision of the European Commission to refer the UK to the
European Court of Justice over concerns at Sellafield. “When the
Commission gave the UK Government a June 1 deadline to respond,
it vindicated the Irish Government’s approach to Sellafield. The
announcement that the UK is being brought to court reinforces our
determination to ensure the safe closure of Sellafield,” he said.
The Minister was commenting on the European Commission’s
decision which followed the inadequate response by the UK to
concerns over the storage of nuclear material at the B30 pond at
the Sellafield facility.
“I am also disappointed that, yet again, the UK is resisting the
bringing of openness to the operations at Sellafield. It shows
the UK’s reluctance to change without been subjected to
determined legal, political and diplomatic action.
“This attitude only adds to the mistrust of all operations at
Sellafield,” Minister Cullen continued.
“It is unacceptable that the UK has not assuaged European
Commission concerns regarding the plutonium held at Sellafield
and I will be asking the Attorney General what action we can take
to support the Commission’s case in court.
“The issue of access to information at Sellafield has been
central to Ireland’s two legal challenges to the UN Court of
Arbitration. The decision is further evidence that the UK
Government is struggling to cope with the legacy of 50 years of
nuclear power,” he concluded.
© Waterford News &Star, 2004.
*****************************************************************
33 KIFI: U.S. Department of Energy Official Discusses Future of INEEL
www.localnews8.com
9/10/2004
A high-ranking U.S. Department of Energy official was in town
Friday to discuss the future of the INEEL.
William Magwood answered questions from the community about
whether or not the site is on the right track and how the site
could better interact with the community.
He also talked about his vision for the future of the lab.
Magwood says, “I do think there’s a vibrant future for
nuclear power both in the U.S. and worldwide and this laboratory
is going to be the epicenter. The INEEL is going to be a very
important component to the future of nuclear technology.â€
Magwood says one important project the site is working on is
creating reactor technology that makes both electricity and
hydrogen.
Under the president's national fuel initiative, Magwood says it
will allow us to use hydrogen instead of foreign oil in our cars
and buses.
*****************************************************************
34 Tri-City Herald: Board disputes Hanford cleanup safety
This story was published Friday, September 10th, 2004
By Annette Cary Herald staff writer
A board that has independent oversight of the Hanford nuclear
reservation is questioning whether environmental cleanup
contractors at the site are adequately following a rigorous
safety program at the tank farms.
It also has raised concerns about safety problems at the $5.7
billion vitrification plant under construction at the site.
Both programs have been plagued with safety problems in the past
year, John Conway, chairman of the Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board, wrote in a letter to the Department of Energy.
"The number of serious events at the tank farms is not to be
expected at a project with a mature and effective ISM (integrated
safety management) system," Conway wrote.
"While compensatory and corrective actions taken by the
Department of Energy and its contractor have yielded temporary
successes or addressed specific issues, lasting success in
implementing an effective ISM System at the tank farms has not
been apparent," he wrote.
The Wednesday letter was addressed to Paul Golan, acting
assistant secretary for environmental management at DOE.
Work is hazardous at Hanford's tank farms, where about 53 million
gallons of radioactive and hazardous chemical wastes are stored
in underground tanks. The wastes remain from 50 years of
producing plutonium for the nation's weapons program.
The safety system used calls for each work project to be defined
and any hazards considered and controls established before work
begins. After work is completed, feedback is required on any
difficulties to prevent a reoccurrence in future work.
The system was initiated by the safety board, which cited
examples of it not being used as rigorously as it should at
Hanford.
In one incident this spring, work was done on the wrong set of
pipes in a system used to transfer radioactive wastes because
blueprints were wrong. The blueprints were known to be inaccurate
before the work started, according to DOE. A hole was drilled
into a pipe thought to be idle, and radioactive liquid spilled
when it was later pumped through the pipe.
The next step of the process, assessing and avoiding hazards, is
supposed to be done in a pre-work meeting.
But the safety board report says, "These sessions often are
little more than informal discussions among the planner,
supervisor and work crew about how the work steps are to be
worded and organized. During the sessions, an actual hazard
analysis is seldom performed, and the words 'what if' are seldom
spoken."
Inadequate hazard analysis has been responsible for some
accidents at the tank farm in the past year.
In one case, workers' clothes were contaminated when a highly
contaminated pump was wrapped in a single layer of plastic when
it was moved. In another, a worker's finger was contaminated with
levels of radiation above established limits when workers moved
equipment that was later found to be more contaminated than
expected.
The board also criticized tank farm operators for not providing
feedback on completed activities, thus not passing on lessons
learned to others.
Safety drills also are generally inadequate, using obvious and
simple scenarios, the board said.
Safety problems at the tank farms this year recently caused DOE's
Office of River Protection to dock $300,000 from the fee paid to
CH2M Hill Hanford Group, which operates the waste site cleanup.
"It's evident the organization is not learning at the pace we
want it to," said John Swailes, DOE's assistant manager for tank
farm projects.
DOE generally agrees with the safety board on the problems at the
tank farms, "but we may disagree on the extent of the weakness,"
said Robert Barr, director of environmental safety and quality at
the Office of River Protection.
Weaknesses need to be corrected before more serious incidents
occur, he said.
CH2M Hill responded with a prepared statement that said the
safety board's letter reinforces the company's commitment to
improve and ensure that concerns are immediately addressed.
The safety board's letter also cited an increase this year in
safety problems at the vitrification plant construction site.
A key part of the plant's safety system is a checklist to
identify potential hazards. But the safety board warned that when
a checklist is used, workers may have a tendency to quickly check
off boxes rather than seriously consider hazards. The board
recommended use of the lists be reviewed.
Bechtel Hanford, the contractor in charge of the vitrification
plant construction, stopped work for a day this summer to address
safety concerns and has brought in a motivational speaker.
Problems were mostly near misses, such as dropping heavy pieces
of metal. Since the day to refocus on safety, a tractor and
flatbed trailer carrying a crane overturned and five
counterweights weighing a total of 16,000 pounds landed up to 30
feet away.
© 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************