***************************************************************** 09/21/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.226 ***************************************************************** 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 Las Vegas SUN: Bush Defends Iraq War in U.N. Speech 2 BBC: UN seeks unity on Iraq and Darfur 3 BBC: Bush defends Iraq policies at UN 4 Las Vegas SUN: Iran Defies Demand of Nuke Watchdog Agency 5 BBC: Iran converting nuclear material 6 Las Vegas SUN: Khatami: Iran Will Pursue Nuclear Program 7 Las Vegas SUN: Iran Defies Demand of Nuke Watchdog Agency 8 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: N.Korea Claims Foundation for Multilatera 9 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: IAEA Inspectors Investigate South Korea 10 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: IAEA Chief Appeals to North Korea to Allo 11 JoongAng Daily: South's secret tests linked to atomic talks 12 Straits Times: Fears of nuclear test by North Korea rise - 13 Xinhuanet: IAEA inspection continues in S. Korea 14 Korea Times: 6-Way Talks to Address Seoul's Nuclear Tests: China 15 US: Carlyle Stealth Takeover of US Nuclear Weapons Labs 16 US: The Bulletin: Missile defense: Winning minds, not hearts | 17 US: Atomic Bulletin: U.S. nuclear reductions 18 US: The Bulletin: A not unreasonable failure? 19 US: The Bulletin: Intelligence: No easy fix 20 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Said to Sell Smart Bombs to Israel 21 Greenpeace International: Nukes On Vacation 22 Scotsman.com: UK Contributes £1.1 Million to Iaea Nuclear Safeguards NUCLEAR REACTORS 23 US: Hampton Union Local: NRC to meet with power plant officials 24 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Kelly calls for wiring inspection at Indian Point 25 Xinhuanet: Number of global nuclear power units reaches 439 26 US: NRC: NRC, Exelon to Discuss Apparent Violation at Oyster Creek P 27 US: TheStar.com: Nuclear monster on our doorstep 28 US: Hudson Valley News: Kelly repeats call for Indian Point cable pr 29 US: NRC: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); Noti 30 US: Middletown Press: Lawyer explains nuke plant reassessment plan 31 US: TheDay.com: Board Rejects Request To Challenge Millstone License 32 US: The Bulletin: Three Mile Island: Health study meltdown NUCLEAR SAFETY 33 [NukeNet] Global Pact Against Depleted Uranium 34 Depleted Uranium kills forever 35 DU: A WMD (Axis of Logic) 36 [du-list] ABOUT VIEQUES SUPERFUND LETTERS 37 US: [FOODIRRADIATIONCA] Governor Schwarzenegger Vetoes AB 1988 38 US: [DU-WATCH] Gulf War & Birth defects 39 PRAVDA.Ru: Depleted Uranium, weapons of war - the Pandora's box - 40 The Herald: Words of hope for Kazakh nuclear victims 41 US: Paducah Sun: Honeywell, NRC to meet again over December gas rele 42 US: WIVB TV4 Buffalo, NY: Schumer to Fight for Nuclear Workers' Comp NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 43 US: [NukeNet] Fall Gathering and Gov't Nuke Waste Meetings 44 [NukeNet] Expert Faults Court's Ruling About Waste From 45 Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Plutonium Shipments Head to France 46 Las Vegas RJ: Yucca guidelines at least several months away 47 Las Vegas SUN: Experts question safety of Yucca casks 48 Las Vegas SUN: Nevada urges rejection of appeal 49 US: AP Wire: House passes bill for groundwater cleanup in Santa Clar 50 Nevada Appeal: EPA hopes to have new Yucca radiation standard early 51 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Huntsman declares he's against N-waste in Uta 52 Salt Lake Tribune: Leavitt looks to end-run Yucca 53 US: Penton: NSF adds perchlorate to test list 54 KVBC: Environmental Groups Urge Lawmakers To Consider Yucca 55 KLAS: New Call to Oppose Yucca Mountain 56 Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Government Ships Plutonium to France NUCLEAR WEAPONS US DEPT. OF ENERGY 57 Tri-City Herald: End of an era (D Reactor pulled down) 58 San Francisco Chronicle: UC / Regents advised to seek lab contract 59 NPR: Scientist Criticizes Los Alamos Security Shutdown 60 lamonitor.com: Nanos: History will tell if right 61 The Bulletin: No plans for new nukes here! OTHER NUCLEAR 62 [NukeNet] FW: Global Pact Against Depleted Uranium 63 The Bulletin: Preempting the truth ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Las Vegas SUN: Bush Defends Iraq War in U.N. Speech By SCOTT LINDLAW ASSOCIATED PRESS UNITED NATIONS (AP) - President Bush defended his decision to invade Iraq in a speech on Tuesday to the United Nations, urging the world community to turn its attention to fighting the war on terrorism and humanitarian concerns. He told a subdued U.N. General Assembly session that the U.S.-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein delivered the Iraqi people from "an outlawed dictator." Two years after he told the world body that Iraq was a "grave and gathering danger" and challenged delegates to live up to their responsibility, Bush did not dwell on his decision to invade without the consent of the U.N. Security Council. Instead, he urged the world community to "fight radicalism and terror with justice and dignity." Bush said that terrorists believe that "suicide and murder are justified ...And they act on their beliefs." And he cited recent terror acts, including the death of children in their Russian school house. "This month in Beslan, we saw once again how the terrorists measure their success in the deaths of the innocent and in the pain of grieving families," the president said. "The Russian children did nothing to deserve such awful suffering." Ahead of Bush's speech, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan opened the meeting of the 191-nation gathering with a warning that "the rule of law" is at risk around the world. "No one is above the law," Annan said. "Again and again, we see fundamental laws shamelessly disregarded - those that ordain respect for innocent life, for civilians, for the vulnerable - especially children," he said. He condemned the taking and killing of hostages in Iraq, but also said Iraqi prisoners had been disgracefully abused, an implicit criticism of the U.S. treatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad. Last week, Annan said in an interview with the British Broadcasting Corp. that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq "was illegal" because Washington and its coalition partners never got Security Council backing for the invasion. Bush reached out to the international organization to help with the reconstruction of Iraq. "The people of Iraq have regained sovereignty," he said, noting that the prime minister of Iraq's interim government Ayad Allawi was among those attending the session. "The U.N. and its member nations must respond to Prime Minister Allawi's request and do more to help build an Iraq that is secure, democratic, federal and free," Bush said. "A democratic Iraq has ruthless enemies," Bush added, asserting that a terror group "associated with al-Qaida" was now engaged in terror acts - including Monday's beheading of an American civil engineer. "We can expect terror attacks to escalate" as elections approach in both Afghanistan and Iraq, Bush said. He said his mission was "not to retreat, it is to prevail." "We will standing with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq until their hopes for freedom and liberty are fulfilled," Bush said. Six weeks before Election Day, Bush's unapologetic comments were directed as much to his audience at home as to the assembled U.N. delegates. His Democratic rival, John Kerry, has accused him of "stubborn incompetence" and "colossal failures in judgment" on Iraq policy and of having squandered international good will. Bush's speech, lasting just under 20 minutes, included an appeal for more humanitarian involvement, ranging from helping to end the bloody conflict in Sudan to fighting AIDS in Africa. Bush's remarks drew applause only once - at the end of his speech. He also told the gathering he was proposing a "democracy fund" within the United Nations. He said the fund would help countries lay the foundations of democracy by instituting the rule of law, independent courts, a free press, political parties and trade unions. "Money from the fund would also help set up voter precincts and polling places and support the work of election monitors," he said. Bush said the United States will make an initial contribution. "I urge all other nations to contribute as well," he said. "It's a great calling for this organization," he added. -- ***************************************************************** 2 BBC: UN seeks unity on Iraq and Darfur Last Updated: Tuesday, 21 September, 2004 By Susannah Price BBC correspondent at the United Nations [UN's New York HQ] The shadow of Iraq is again falling over the UN's annual session More than 100 world leaders are gathering in New York for the annual debate at the UN General Assembly. The General Assembly is expected to address a wide range of issues, including the crisis in Darfur, Iraq and conditions in the developing world. Over the past year, the members of the UN have been trying to overcome the deep divisions left by the Iraq war. Iraq remains a key issue for the UN, which found itself largely sidelined after the fall of Saddam Hussein. The UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, is expected to speak out at the meeting of the 191 member countries against those who disregard laws protecting civilians - citing examples in Darfur, Iraq and the Middle East. A senior official in his office said the secretary-general would look at the idea that there "should be fixed rules of human conduct everyone understands that they should obey". Problems in Iraq The official said the secretary-general would not be discussing the legality of the military action in Iraq. Last week, in a BBC interview, Mr Annan said the invasion of Iraq was illegal because it did not have Security Council approval, which sparked an angry reaction from the US and its allies. What is important to the right now is to try to increase participation in solving the problems of Iraq John Danforth, US Ambassador to the UN However Iraq is still likely to feature in the debate. "What is important to the US right now is to try to increase participation in solving the problems of Iraq," said the US Ambassador to the UN, John Danforth. "I think it is a major issue before the General Assembly and before the world community in general." US President George W Bush has said he will talk about the possibilities of improving healthcare, expanding prosperity and extending freedom as an alternative to terrorism and violence. Darfur Another main issue is likely to be the crisis in the western Sudanese region of Darfur where tens of thousands of people have died. Darfur is one of the burni issues of the day Jean Ping, General Assembly President A resolution passed by the 15-member UN Security Council on Saturday called for Sudan to rein in the militias accused of widespread killing, or face the threat of sanctions. There could be pleas during the debate for the international community to provide more funding to help the humanitarian effort. "Darfur is one of the burning issues of the day," said the current President of the General Assembly, Jean Ping. "It is also under consideration by the African Union and the Security Council, but it is brought to the Assembly we will debate it." Development goals Nearly 100 heads of state and government are expected to address the two-week long debate along with many foreign ministers. For many from the developing world, poverty will be a major issue. Our concerns in the West a not necessarily priority concerns all over the world David Malone, International Peace Academy President "Many countries will want to see action on the development goals put forward at the UN," said David Malone, President of the International Peace Academy in New York. "Our concerns in the West are not necessarily priority concerns all over the world." The reform of the Security Council is a key issue for some members who do not have one of the five permanent seats. A meeting is planned between Japan, India, Brazil and Germany, who all want permanent seats. However a high level panel which is discussing UN reform will only make its recommendations in December. The resolutions passed by the General Assembly do not have any legal force, but they do have moral authority. Analysts say it is more a forum for debate than a forum for action. ***************************************************************** 3 BBC: Bush defends Iraq policies at UN Last Updated: Tuesday, 21 September, 2004 [President Bush at the UN] Bush called for more UN help in Iraq US President George W Bush has strongly defended his decision to invade Iraq and has called on the United Nations to "do more" to help rebuild the country. Speaking at the UN General Assembly in New York, Mr Bush urged members to support Iraq's interim government. He said every nation that seeks peace had an obligation to tackle oppression and violence. "There is no safe isolation from terror networks or failed states that shelter them," Mr Bush said. Mr Bush was speaking some hours before reports emerged that Iraqi militants had killed a second American hostage. Human dignity "We all have a stake in the world's newest democracies," President Bush said, saying the people of Iraq and Afghanistan were on the path to freedom. He said the decision to invade Iraq was justified, and he challenged UN members to back the government of Iraq's interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi. We know that oppressi governments support terror while free governments fight the terrorists in their midst President Bush Key extracts of Bush speech Bush warms to UN Watch the speech Mr Allawi had "earned the support of every nation that believes in self-determination and desires peace", said Mr Bush. The issue of Iraq has come back to the fore in the US election race, after Mr Bush's Democratic challenger, John Kerry, on Monday criticised what he called the president's "colossal failures of judgement". With the poll only six weeks away, Mr Bush took the opportunity to play the statesman and challenge the accusations that his foreign policy has been one-sided and blinkered, reports the BBC's diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus. Mr Bush highlighted what he called the battle between democratic nations and terrorism. Recalling the case of a mother whose daughter was killed in the Beslan school tragedy, President Bush said the US was determined to help destroy terrorist networks wherever they operate. But he also spoke of a better world beyond the war on terror, outlining the need to improve healthcare, expand prosperity and extend freedom as an alternative to terrorism and violence. He also proposed establishing a democracy fund within the UN to help states foster the rule of law. Rebuke The rule of law was the main theme of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's opening speech, in which he stressed that all states, "strong and weak, big and small", needed a framework of fair rules. [Iraqis in an electronics shop in Baghdad watch President Bush's speech] Watching from afar, Iraqis hear Mr Bush pledge to stand by them "It is the law, including Security Council resolutions, which offers the best foundation for resolving prolonged conflicts - in the Middle East, in Iraq and around the world," said Mr Annan. Civilians were being massacred in cold blood in Iraq while relief workers, journalists and other non-combatants were taken hostage and killed in the most barbarous fashion, he said. "At the same time, we have seen Iraqi prisoners disgracefully abused," he said, a reference to the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq. Mr Annan's speech was a strong rebuke to the stronger nations, in particular the US, correspondents say. President Bush was among the first to address the two-week debate of the 191 member countries. Speaking to reporters in New York, the president rejected Mr Kerry's accusations that his mistakes had led to a huge crisis in Iraq. "My opponent has taken so many different positions on Iraq that his statements are hardly credible at all," Mr Bush said. For his part, Mr Kerry said Mr Bush had failed to present a true picture of Iraq to the UN and "does not have the credibility to lead the world". ***************************************************************** 4 Las Vegas SUN: Iran Defies Demand of Nuke Watchdog Agency By GEORGE JAHN ASSOCIATED PRESS VIENNA, Austria (AP) - 0921iran-nuke Shrugging off an ultimatum from the U.N. nuclear agency, Iran revealed Tuesday that it started converting tons of raw uranium as part of a process that could be used to make nuclear arms. The International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board of governors unanimously adopted a resolution Saturday demanding that Iran freeze all uranium enrichment - including conversion - and warned it faced being taken before the U.N. Security Council, which could impose sanctions. Describing his country as a victim of "pressures imposed by the United States," Iranian Vice President Reza Aghazadeh said that of the more than 40 tons of uranium being mined for enrichment "some (already) has been used." Enrichment can be used to produce uranium for generating electricity or to create highly processed uranium needed to make nuclear bombs. Iran insists its aims are peaceful, and President Mohammad Khatami suggested his country would not bargain on enrichment. He said Iran was determined to exercise its right to peaceful nuclear technology - even at the risk of severing ties with the IAEA, thereby removing all international oversight. "We will continue along our path even if it leads to an end to international supervision" of Iran's nuclear activities, Khatami said at a military parade in Tehran. Iran is not prohibited from enrichment under its obligations to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. But for months, it has faced international pressure to suspend such activities as a good-faith gesture. Suspicions that the Iranian government might be striving to produce atomic weapons have risen since it was revealed almost two years ago that it had run a clandestine enrichment program for 18 years. In announcing that his country had started conversion into uranium hexafluoride gas, Aghazadeh said the U.S.-led international pressure was meant to deny Iran access to nonmilitary nuclear technology. "Tests are going on successfully" to make uranium hexafluoride gas, Aghazadeh said. IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said the agency had been "notified for some time about the conversion test" and was monitoring activities at Iran's Isfahan site. She said, however, that IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei "continues to call on Iran, as did the board, to suspend such a test as part of their confidence-building measures." Aghazadeh did not detail the stage of conversion, or the amounts involved. A senior diplomat familiar with Iran's nuclear activities, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told The Associated Press that Iran apparently began conversion in late August but had stopped at a precursor of uranium hexafluoride. He suggested the pause could be linked to indecision within Iran's leadership on whether to defy the IAEA board or give in and freeze all enrichment-related activities, including conversion. Aghazadeh suggested Iran's course remained open, saying his government "will decide on the basis of our national interests" what to do. Even before the comments by Aghazadeh, the large scale of Iran's project had heightened concerns that it was preparing for full uranium conversion at its Isfahan facility, going beyond laboratory testing. The resolution passed Saturday by the IAEA's governing board demanded that Iran freeze all work on uranium enrichment. It specifically expressed alarm at the conversion plans involving the more than 40 tons of raw uranium. Converted into uranium hexafluoride and repeatedly spun in centrifuges, more than 40 tons of raw uranium could yield more than 200 pounds of highly enriched, weapons-grade uranium. Experts say that would be enough for five crude nuclear weapons. The IAEA resolution, suggesting Iran may have to answer to the U.N. Security Council if it defied the demands, said the next board meeting, in November, would "decide whether or not further steps are appropriate" in ensuring Iran complied. Iran says it is stopping short of enrichment. But the resolution also calls for a halt of related activities, including making, assembling and testing centrifuges - and producing uranium hexafluoride. The resolution also recognized that nations have a right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. -- ***************************************************************** 5 BBC: Iran converting nuclear material Last Updated: Tuesday, 21 September, 2004 [Preliminary installation of a turbo generator at Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant] Iran says it will continue with or without inspections Iran has begun converting raw uranium into gas which can be used in the process of making nuclear weapons. Iran's atomic energy chief said 37 tons of uranium mineral were converted into fuel used in nuclear centrifuges. The move defies calls by the UN's nuclear watchdog for Iran to suspend all enrichment-related activities. Iran's president said his country will continue developing nuclear technology, even if it leads to international inspections being cut off. Tests 'to continue' Reza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, told reporters in Vienna the conversion process will continue. "Some of the amount of 37 [metric] tons has been used. The tests have been successful but these tests have to be continued using the rest of the material," he said. Converted uranium is the fuel used in nuclear centrifuges, machines which enrich uranium. Enriched uranium can be used for civilian reactors, but also serve as the explosive core for atomic bombs. Mr Aghazadeh said his country is willing to take measures to increase confidence in Iran and will continue to co-operate with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) At the weekend, the IAEA passed a resolution urging Iran to suspend uranium enrichment and grant access to IAEA inspectors. The United States has accused Iran of seeking to build nuclear weapons, but Iran has insisted its nuclear programme is solely for peaceful purposes. Speaking at a military parade on Monday, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami said Iran had made its choice to pursue nuclear energy, even if that meant an end to international supervision. ***************************************************************** 6 Las Vegas SUN: Khatami: Iran Will Pursue Nuclear Program ASSOCIATED PRESS TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - President Mohammad Khatami said Tuesday Iran will continue its suspect nuclear program even if that means ending inspections by the U.N. nuclear agency. "We've made our choice: yes to peaceful nuclear technology, no to atomic weapons," Khatami told a military parade in Tehran. "We will continue along our path even if it leads to an end to international supervision" of nuclear activities, the president said. The International Atomic Energy Agency has demanded that Iran forgo uranium enrichment and answer all questions about its nuclear activities within two months. Failure to do so could result in the agency referring Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which could impose sanctions. "They have to explicitly recognize our natural and legal right (to peaceful nuclear energy) to open the way for greater understanding and cooperation," Khatami said. "We've made our choice. Now it is up to others to make their choice," he added. Iranian officials have rebuked the IAEA for demanding that Iran cease enrichment, a process that can produce fuel for both power stations and nuclear weapons. While critics have said that Iran could import enriched uranium for power stations, Iran insists on developing its own supplies. -- ***************************************************************** 7 Las Vegas SUN: Iran Defies Demand of Nuke Watchdog Agency By GEORGE JAHN ASSOCIATED PRESS VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Defying a key demand set by 35 nations, Iran announced Tuesday that it has started converting raw uranium into the gas needed for enrichment, a process that can be used to make nuclear weapons. "Tests are going on successfully" to make uranium hexafluoride gas, the feed stock for enrichment, said Iranian Vice President Reza Aghazadeh. Of the more than 40 tons of raw uranium being mined for conversion, "Some ... has been used," he told reporters. His comments, outside the general conference of the 137-nation International Atomic Energy Agency, were the latest sign that Iran was ignoring demands made on the weekend by the agency's board of governors to suspend all enrichment and related activities and banish international fears the technology could be used to make weapons. Iran, which insists it needs enrichment to generate power, announced months ago that it had planned to "test" conversion techniques. Even before Tuesday's announcement, the large-scale of the project - involving more than 40 tons of raw uranium - had heightened concerns that Iran is preparing for full uranium conversion at its Isfahan facility that goes beyond laboratory testing. A resolution passed unanimously Saturday by the agency's governing board demanded for the first time that Iran freeze all work on uranium enrichment and expressed alarm at Iranian planned conversion of the raw uranium. Suggesting that Iran may have to answer to the U.N. Security Council if it defied the demands, the resolution said the next board meeting in November would "decide whether or not further steps are appropriate" in ensuring Iran complies. The resolution specifically expressed alarm at Iranian plans to convert the more than 40 tons of raw uranium into uranium hexafluoride. Iran's present suspension of enrichment falls short of international demands. It says it is honoring a pledge not to put uranium hexafluoride gas into centrifuges, spin it and make enriched uranium. But the resolution calls for a stop as well to related activities, including a halt to making, assembling and testing centrifuges, and to producing the uranium hexafluoride. Iran is not prohibited from enrichment under its obligations to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. It has for months faced international pressure to suspend such activities as a good-faith gesture, but the resolution went further by actually demanding a stop to enrichment and related activities. While demanding Iran suspend all uranium enrichment activities, the resolution also recognized nations' right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy - leaving some wiggle room for the Islamic Republic . Aghazadeh repeated Iran's view that - because its suspension is voluntary and not governed by agreements with the IAEA - his country was free to enrich no matter what the board demanded. "We believe that what was decided by the board of governors is unjust," he said. He suggested Iran's course of action remained open between full suspension as demanded by the board and full enrichment, saying Tehran "will decide on the basis of our national interests and not subject to pressures" what do. Iran's secretly developed enrichment program - undetected for 18 years until it was unmasked almost two years ago - has been the focus of increased world concern because of suspicions Tehran may not be telling the truth when it says it is interested in the technology only to generate power. On Monday, the first day of the general conference, IAEA director general urged Iran to heed the board's call for a full freeze of enrichment and linked activities - a message also enforced by U.S. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham and the European Union. -- ***************************************************************** 8 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: N.Korea Claims Foundation for Multilateral Talks Has been Updated Sep.21,2004 15:08 KST North Korea has revealed its disregard for the multilateral approach to address its nuclear intentions. In a rare interview with the foreign media, a government spokesman declared the foundation of the six-party talks had been destroyed. Recent remarks by North Korea's Foreign Ministry Spokesman are heightening fears that multilateral negotiations aimed at resolving nuclear tensions on the Korean peninsula have hit a stumbling block. "Our position is that we can only come to the next round of six party talks if the foundation for the talks is rebuilt, because the foundation for talks has been destroyed," said the spokesman. A fresh round of 6-party talks, which involves the two Koreas, the U.S., Japan, China and Russia, was initially slated to take place later this month in Beijing. The multilateral framework is considered the best option in persuading Pyongyang to give up its nuclear ambitions, though there was little progress in the three previous rounds. "The United States took issue with our non-existent enriched uranium and connived with the secret nuclear experiments in South Korea which really took place. This is clear proof that the United States has applied double standards regarding the nuclear issue." While accusing Washington for applying double standards in dealing with the nuclear issue, Pyongyang also said that it does not have a very good impression of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which lost its impartiality by digesting fabricated information provided by the U.S. Arirang TV ***************************************************************** 9 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: IAEA Inspectors Investigate South Korea Updated Sep.21,2004 11:09 KST U.N. inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency are continuing their work in South Korea after the government in Seoul admitted to clandestine nuclear programs. Details of the follow-up inspection are not being disclosed until the delegation makes its final report. The inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency immediately went to the Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute, about 150 kilometers south of Seoul, after they arrived Sunday. The team's eight-day itinerary is being kept secret. The delegation will carry out more checks of government-run nuclear research facilities where unauthorized experiments were conducted, some more than 20 years ago. They will also question the scientists involved. IAEA inspections in late August and early this month showed that South Korean government facilities had made unauthorized nuclear experiments. South Korea admitted experimenting with traces of plutonium in 1982 and uranium enrichment in 2000. Myongji University professor Lee Dong-bok, in Seoul, says he thinks the IAEA will find that South Korea does not have a weapons program. Professor Lee says the amount of nuclear material involved in the experiments was too small and not of weapons-grade quality. "This enrichment was part of the scientific experiment, in the framework of the nuclear fuel cycle, rather than enrichment for some military purpose," ssaid Professor Lee. The team, headed by Finland's Saukkonen Heikki Antero, will refer its findings to the UN Security Council, which could impose sanctions if South Korea is found in violation of its international nuclear agreements. The revelations about the South Korean programs have complicated international efforts to get communist North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons development. Pyongyang's news agency said South Korea's clandestine nuclear experiments prove that the United States has a double standard when it comes to nuclear proliferation on the Korean Peninsula. The report also said the communist state will never dismantle its nuclear deterrent force until Washington changes its hostile policy. VOA News ***************************************************************** 10 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: IAEA Chief Appeals to North Korea to Allow in International Updated Sep.21,2004 00:19 KST Mohamed ElBaradei/AP The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency is calling for North Korea to allow international experts into the country to completely verify that a large cloud recently spotted over the country was not caused by a nuclear explosion. IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei pointed to conclusions by U.S. officials and others that a huge cloud spotted earlier this month over North Korea was not caused by a nuclear event. But he told CNN's Late Edition he feels Pyongyang should allow international experts into the country to make an absolute verification of North Korea's claim that the cloud was not caused by any nuclear explosion. "I think I would like to go there. Our experts would go there. If North Korea would like to exclude that possibility [of a nuclear blast] completely, they would be well-advised to allow us and other experts to go and inspect that," he said. "As long as we are not there, I cannot exclude that possibility 100 percent." Mr. ElBaradei said he could not confirm whether North Korea has conducted a nuclear weapons test. But he added that he has no doubt that North Korea has the ability to produce nuclear weapons. "They have the fissile material. They have the industrial infrastructure," said Mr. ElBaradei. "Whether they need to go for a test, or whether they do a computer simulation, the fact remains that they are a nuclear capable country." The IAEA head said he wouldn't be surprised if Pyongyang has produced nuclear weapons, especially since IAEA inspectors were kicked out of North Korea in 2002. "I know for sure that North Korea has the plutonium that they need for a nuclear weapon," he said. "I know for sure that we have been away for two years, without any inspection in North Korea. so I do not exclude at all that they have assembled a nuclear weapon, or more than one nuclear weapon." Besides calling for international experts to return to North Korea, Mr. ElBaradei threw his support behind the multilateral diplomatic efforts to resolve the North Korean nuclear crisis. These six-nation talks include the United States, North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan, and Russia. Meanwhile, IAEA inspectors are in South Korea, for follow-up inspections into clandestine and unauthorized nuclear programs. South Korea admitted experimenting with traces of plutonium, in 1982, and with uranium enrichment, in 2000. VOA News ***************************************************************** 11 JoongAng Daily: South's secret tests linked to atomic talks September 22, 2004 KST 11:14 (GMT+9) China's Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said yesterday that South Korea's recently disclosed nuclear experiments can be discussed in the six-party talks. Mr. Kong said, "South Korea must abide by the provisions of the International Atomic Energy Agency and this issue [experiments with nuclear materials] can be discussed at the six-party talks." This is the first time China has linked the issue of Seoul's secret nuclear tests with the multilateral negotiations to resolve Pyeongyang's nuclear arms issues. A source in Beijing said, "This may be a shift in position by China to bring North Korea to the negotiating table." The North has criticized the South's nuclear tests and demanded their linkage to the six-party talks. The latest round, originally slated for the end of September, has been delayed. 2004.09.22 [http://joongangdaily.joins.com/faq.html] ***************************************************************** 12 Straits Times: Fears of nuclear test by North Korea rise - SEPT 22, 2004 Recent blast creates suspicion that Pyongyang may raise the stakes by holding a nuclear test before the US presidential election on Nov 2 By Joo Sang Min SEOUL - A mysterious explosion in North Korea's remote north-east has sparked fears that the region could be in for an 'October surprise' before the US presidential election in November. Although the North said the blast was part of demolition work for a hydroelectric project and even led a group of foreign diplomats to the site to prove its case, the incident has led to suspicions that Pyongyang could raise the stakes next month in a bid to gain more concessions from Washington. North Korea and the United States are the main protagonists in the long-running nuclear crisis. Three rounds of six-party talks have yielded no progress and a fourth round is not likely - at least before the Nov 2 ballot in the US. Fears of a nuclear weapons test by the North first arose after a South Korean opposition lawmaker, who attended the US Republican convention this month, said US officials had told him of a possible North Korean nuclear test next month. According to Mr Park Jin of the main opposition Grand National Party, the Pentagon might then consider military action against the secretive regime. Indeed, Pyongyang is well aware that such an extreme measure could bring the regime into a military showdown with the Pentagon, officials and analysts in South Korea told The Straits Times. 'North Korea is well aware that such a provocation would only bring about a military showdown with the US, putting its regime on thin ice,' said Mr Yoo Jay Kun of the ruling Uri Party. He is chairman of the National Assembly's defence committee which deals with issues regarding the military and overlooks the Defence Ministry and its subordinate groups. Conducting a nuclear test ahead of the US polls would take away the only bargaining chip the reclusive nation still possesses in negotiating for more oil shipments, food aid and security guarantees from the US and the rest of the world. Mr Yoo said North Korean leader Kim Jong Il has appeared willing to give up missile and nuclear programmes in exchange for money. General Cho Myong Rok, the second-highest ranking military official in the North, once told then US president Bill Clinton in 2000 that North Korea would suspend missile technology sales in return for monetary compensation, Mr Yoo explained. Some analysts say the North may stage a provocative act before the US election to harm President George W. Bush's re-election chances, believing that his Democratic challenger John Kerry would take a more lenient stance towards the North if elected. But such talk is rejected by Professor Ryoo Kihl Jae at the Graduate School of North Korean Studies in Kyungnam University. 'Such a provocation will only stir more anti-Pyongyang sentiment among the US public and lead to calls for a pre-emptive strike, even though the possibility of a nuclear weapons test by Pyongyang cannot completely be ruled out yet,' Prof Ryoo said. When Pyongyang sees no signs of a compromise from the Bush administration, Prof Ryoo said the North - short of a nuclear weapons test - could engage in acts such as a missile test or transporting of nuclear materials from one location to another to signal its ability to build nuclear bombs. The top US military official in South Korea said there has been no indication the North is planning to conduct a nuclear weapons test. As to whether the communist regime has the ability to do so, the US Forces' Korea commander General Leon LaPorte told reporters last week: 'Only North Korea could answer that question.' The Straits Times ***************************************************************** 13 Xinhuanet: IAEA inspection continues in S. Korea www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-09-21 13:01:22 SEOUL, Sept. 21 (Xinhuanet) -- International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors conducted their investigation over South Korea's past controversial nuclear experiments for a second day on Tuesday,reported South Korean national news agency Yonhap. The five-member IAEA inspection team kicked off the investigation Monday at the (South) Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) in Daejeon city, about 160 kilometers south of Seoul. Details of the IAEA probe were not available as officials at the institute refused to comment. Access into the research center was blocked, said Yonhap. However, Yonhap quoted unnamed officials at the South Korean Science and Technology Ministry as saying the IAEA team's main mission may be to take a sample of plutonium extracted in the 1982 experiment. Another IAEA inspection team, which was in South Korea during late August and early September, have already took half of the 0.2gram of the enriched uranium produced in the 2000 experiment for analysis. The IAEA inspectors were reportedly planning to check out of their hotel in Daejeon on Wednesday, which means that they would travel to Seoul to investigate another nuclear center located in anorthern part of the capital city. The second nuclear center in Gongneung-dong houses two small research reactors, and one of them was used in the 1982 experiment to extract a small amount of plutonium. The aged reactors in Seoulare now at the final stage of dismantlement. The inspection was also reportedly to focus on allegations that South Korea produced 153 kilograms of uranium metal in 1982 at one of the three nuclear facilities undeclared to the IAEA and that asmuch as 15 kilograms of the metal remain unaccounted for. The South Korean government admitted earlier this month, two groups of scientists at the KAERI conducted the plutonium- and uranium-based experiments respectively in 1982 and 2000 without reporting to the government. The acknowledgment aroused international suspicions over Seoul's nuclear activities. South Korea has repeatedly stressed that the two one-off experiments were purely academic activities that had nothing to do with nuclear weapons. The IAEA officials are scheduled to leave South Korea on Sunday. Last week, the UN agency's board of governors discussed South Korea's alleged violation of its non-proliferation obligations. IAEA Director-General Mohamed El Baradei has expressed "serious concern" over South Korea's experiments at the first day of the meeting. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 Korea Times: 6-Way Talks to Address Seoul's Nuclear Tests: China Hankooki.com > The Korea Times By Ryu Jin Staff Reporter South Korea¡¯s past nuclear activities will be on the agenda of the next round of the six-party talks aimed at ending the longstanding international stalemate over North Korea¡¯s nuclear weapons program, a senior Chinese official said Tuesday. With Seoul trying hard to dispel nuclear doubts among some of its allies about what it calls ``purely academic research experiments,¡¯¡¯ China¡¯s move will likely stir up another controversy in the already stalled dialogue on the North¡¯s nuclear crisis. ``The upcoming six-way talks will address South Korea¡¯s nuclear experiments,¡¯¡¯ China¡¯s Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said at a news briefing. ``The purpose of the negotiations is the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.¡¯¡¯ Kong said Beijing is deeply interested in South Korea¡¯s nuclear experiments, adding it has closely monitored Seoul¡¯s cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog in its investigation. An inspection team from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been investigating South Korea¡¯s extraction of plutonium in 1982, in addition to the 2000 uranium-based tests. At their last talks in late June, the two Koreas, the United States, Japan, Russia and host China agreed to meet again by the end of this month to take up the North Korean nuclear impasse. However, doubt has been mounting over the prospects for such negotiations as North Korea has issued a series of statements questioning the need for further nuclear talks. Pyongyang said last week it will not return to talks on its own nuclear program until the U.S. drops its ``double standards¡¯¡¯ on nuclear proliferation in the region. Lee Soo-hyuck, South Korea¡¯s chief negotiator in the six-nation talks, flew into Japan yesterday as Tokyo, one of the three negotiation partners along with Washington, has shown doubts about its nuclear transparency. jinryu@koreatimes.co.kr 09-21-2004 22:16 ***************************************************************** 15 Carlyle Stealth Takeover of US Nuclear Weapons Labs Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 01:55:32 -0500 (CDT) http://www.fredsakademiet.dk/library/stealth.htm The Danish Peace Academy Nuclear Weapons Stealth Takeover : 5 Admirals, U.C. Regents, Carlyle Group, and Rand by /Leuren Moret/, September 2004. "/I think some of these folks would put nuclear tips on ice cream cones if they could./" U.S. Representative Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.) on efforts by Bush Administration officials to repeal a research ban on low-yield nuclear weapons. /*Global Security*/ Newswire ?Quote of the Day? May 19, 2003 Introduction: UC and nuclear weapons: the kiss of death The top-secret Manhattan Project was laid out by Robert Oppenheimer the night Ernest Lawrence took him to the Bohemian Club during WW II. It was a part of California?s brutal rise to economic and political power, described in /IMPERIAL SAN FRANCISCO: Urban Power, Earthly Ruin/. In 1939, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Niels Bohr had argued that building an atomic bomb "can never be done unless you turn the United States into one huge factory." Years later, he told his colleague Edward Teller, "I told you it couldn?t be done without turning the whole country into a factory. You have done just that." That was after Edward Teller had stuck the knife in Oppenheimer?s back, and pulled his clearance. Teller (also known as ?Dr. Strangelove?), went on to promote a grandiose US nuclear weapons program for decades at the nuclear weapons labs: Berkeley, Livermore and Los Alamos. The program remained under a no-bid University of California management contract for 61 years. In a stealth takeover by the Carlyle Group, facilitated by 5 Admirals, the management contract will be transferred next year to the University of Texas where the military and the Carlyle Group will have control. A new ?ramping up? of the nuclear weapons program is underway, with program funding at the highest level ever - even higher than during the Cold War ? extending nuclear weapons into outer space, into the very atmosphere that makes life on earth possible, and with no "real" enemy in site. stimating the Cold War Mortgage In 1995 dollars, according to the Department of Energy (DOE) the US spent approximately 300 billion dollars on nuclear weapons research, production, and testing. Today in the nuclear weapons complex there are 10,500 contaminated sites, 2.3 million acres under DOE ownership, and 120 million square feet of buildings. The 1995 high base cost, estimated by the DOE Environmental Management program, to clean up the environmental legacy is $350 billion. That excludes the Nevada Test Site, Hanford, the Savannah and Clinch rivers, and the Columbia river which are considered to be "national sacrifice zones" because the technology does not exist to clean them up. That was the cost for cleaning up the environment. The damage to the human health not only of Americans, but also to the global population, was predicted by the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR), in a 2003 independent report on low level radiation for the European Parliament, to be 61,600,000 deaths by cancer, 1,600,000 infant deaths, and 1,900,000 foetal deaths. "In addition the ECRR committee predicts a 10% loss of life quality integrated over all diseases and conditions in those who were exposed over the period of global weapons fallout." The cost to the predominantly black community at Hunter?s Point Naval Shipyard in San Francisco is much greater. Navy ships brought back to Hunter?s Point shipyard for decontamination by the Navy, after the first atmospheric tests in the Pacific, led to the establishment of the secret Naval Radiological Defense Lab (NRDL) which operated at the shipyard into the 1970?s. Secret experiments exposing animals, plants, soldiers, prisoners, and local residents to radiation were conducted at the NRDL, where 550 civilian scientists worked with 65 Naval officers to study the biological effects of ionizing radiation. The radioactive waste and dead animals from the lab were dumped at the shipyard, filled a back bay, and sunk off the Golden Gate bridge in a battleship and 55 gallon drums, contaminating one of the richest fisheries in the world. The community today has the highest rates of breast cancer in women under 40 in the US, as well as high rates of other radiation related diseases. A former City of San Francisco coroner found that every Hunters Point resident he had done an autopsy on, had cancer no matter what the cause of death. Even worse, the Radiation and Public Health Project (RPHP), while conducting studies on infant mortality and cancer around nuclear power plants, discovered that milk contaminated with radiation has been shipped into black inner city communities ? a genocidal plan which explains why blacks have the highest cancer rates, infant mortality, and asmtha (/Gotham Gaz./May 2003) in the US, which has been blamed on poverty. The studies using US govt. data on radiation in milk revealed that at the time of Chernobyl the Pennsylvania Milk Board had been selectively shipping radioactive contaminated milk from dairies around the Three Mile Island and Peachbottom reactors into eastern black inner city communities (see Jay Gould, /Deadly Deceit: Low Level Radiation, High Level Coverup/). In an RPHP study on health improvements by race in San Francisco County, after the shutdown of the Rancho Seco nuclear power plant in 1989, health improved for all ages, diseases and races except for blacks. Black infant mortality also increased after startups and accidents, but unlike improvements for whites and Asians which decreased after the 1989 shutdown, black infant mortality reflected startups and shutdowns at other nuclear power plants in California. UC Regents Meeting - May 15, 2003: The Point Man One year ago Admiral Linton Brooks, Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) under DOE, informed Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante and the UC Regents that the management contract for the nuclear weapons labs would be put up for competitive bid for the first time, with the award made in 2005. When a Regent asked if it would be for all the labs or just Los Alamos, he replied that "it would be for Los Alamos". Later another Regent questioned him again, and this time he said "it would be inconceivable for just one lab". He requested a competitive bid from UC, but the Regents were now leery of the politics involved, and Brooks was challenged by a fiery Bustamante. The Lt. Governor demanded to know why UC should waste millions of dollars preparing a bid when the University of Texas was the most favored institution to get the award, and had a member of the University of Texas on the blue ribbon panel making the award decision. Admiral Brooks also informed the Board of Regents that "we?re back in the bomb business" because Los Alamos had just produced the first plutonium "pit" since Rocky Flats closed down. He indicated that they would be making "mini-nukes" only, and nuclear weapons testing would start at the Nevada Test Site in 2005. An hour later, and 45 miles away, he announced to Livermore employees that "we?re back in the bomb business" and they would be making big ones, little ones, and more. By this time it seemed to me that Admiral Brooks was a slippery character and I began to wonder why an Admiral was involved. UC Regents Meeting - August 17, 2004: Two Admirals Stage "The Setup" On August 4, 2004, UC President Dynes, a physicist and consultant to Los Alamos and former Chancellor of UC San Diego, and Gerald Parsky, Chair of the UC Regents, visited Los Alamos and met with employees over recent security and safety lapses repeated at the lab. Parsky told them: "The regents will be left with no choice about the contract competition if we do not feel confident that you understand the importance of security, procedures and safety at the lab. If we feel that you understand this and that steps are being taken to address these issues, the regents will not only endorse competing for this contract ? we will compete to win." During three minutes of public comment before the Regents on August 17, I informed them that the lab contract was going to the University of Texas, it was a ?done deal?. I told them that the management contract change was a chess move the Carlyle Group was making to privatize the nuclear weapons program, and owned 70% of Lockheed Martin Marietta, and that Lockheed a year ago had bought Sandia Labs (they make the trigger for nuclear weapons). When "Carlyle" was mentioned I noticed that the Chair, Gerald Parsky and Vice Chair Richard Blum (married to Senator Diane Feinstein) started shifting around in their chairs. Body language can say a lot. They began a disruptive and loud conversation carried on through the rest of my comments. As a Livermore whistleblower, I commented that the loss of computer discs with classified information and missing keys had happened practically every day for 61 years under sloppy UC management, and that science fraud as well as health and safety violations had been just as bad. [During my week of security briefing at Livermore in 1989 we were told that a scientist taking classified material home in his briefcase did not notice it had fallen off the back of his bike. A merchant found the battered briefcase in an intersection, and several days later a horrified lab security employee found that every page of a lengthy report with "CLASSIFIED" stamped on each page had been taped in the window of the merchant?s shop hoping the owner would claim his lost secret documents.] What was even more egregious I pointed out, was an article in the July 10, 2004, issue of the /Daily Mirror/ about the murder by the Mossad of Robert Maxwell, a British publisher. It revealed that Maxwell, who was the former owner of the /Daily Mirror/, was a high level Mossad agent, and had sold PROMIS software to Los Alamos with a back door for the Mossad to spy on the lab. In closing, I told the Regents that no matter who got the contract award, "the University of California would forever be known as the University that poisoned the world?" As Admiral George P. Nanos, Director of the Los Alamos lab (appointed Jan. 2003), and Admiral S. Robert Foley Jr., UC vice president for laboratory management (appointed Nov. 2003), sat down at the table where the Regents waited, I began to wonder how many more Admirals were involved and why. It did not take long to find out. Admiral Foley informed the Regents about the missing CREM, computer storage devices with classified data, and acknowledged that the security lapse damaged the university's chances of retaining its Los Alamos contract. "This erodes your position, without any question at all. It's about as bad as it could be when you're trying to prepare for a re-competition". He announced that Jack Killeen had been appointed to the UC Presidents Office as special assistant for Los Alamos security: "Jack?s our guy, he was with Wackenhut and he?s our guy?". Among lab employees Wackenhut was better known for ?wacking? lab whistleblowers like Karen Silkwood, attempting to run people like Dr. Rosalie Bertell off the road, and has a well-deserved reputation for being a nasty outfit. President Bush and his brother, Governor Jeb Bush, are known to spend time together hanging out with cronies at the Wackenhut "country club" in Florida. Admiral Nanos continued and complained that employees would not follow the security and safety rules. When Foley chimed in that there were going to be more security incidents and lapses at the lab in the future before they got it straightened out, it began to look like a setup. Regents Blum, Parsky, Connerly and a few more leaned forward and demanded to know how it was possible, and stated it was unacceptable, that there would be more security lapses. Foley should have been fired on the spot for falling down on the job. It was obvious that Nanos and Foley were there to blame the employees, justify the management change, and discourage the Regents from competing for the contract. And justification for "cleaning house" and removing the "old guard" who would stand in the way of a takeover and for what is planned for ramping up the program. An Editorial in the /Oakland Tribune/ the day before remarked that the NNSA was established in 1991 after the Wen Ho Lee scandal, but had failed to address real security lapses since. NNSA is in bed with the lab administrators which it supposedly is overseeing. This had been exactly my experience at Livermore in 1991 when I reported graft, fraud, corruption, contractor overcharges, and health and safety violations on the Yucca Mountain Project and Superfund Project to Richard Berta, the Western Regional Inspector in the DOE Inspector General?s office for the nuclear weapons labs, Site 51, and the Nevada Test Site. After bringing two inspectors to my house and taking my testimony, he reported to Duane Sewell, the "secrets keeper" at the lab, and Bert Hefner, lab PR person. When I called a month later to talk to Berta about the outcome, he said "we found no basis to your allegations? and I got a new office with a view and new oak furniture from Sewell?". My allegations had been reported many times to the FBI by other more senior lab staff? and they were ignored as well. The Editorial concludes: "NNSA failed miserably in its policing responsibilities. It should be reorganized or axed, and Brooks and other top officials should be replaced with more independent, less-compromised leadership." The meeting ended before Dr. Walter Kohn, a physicist representing the UC Faculty opposed to UC management of nuclear weapons labs, was able to speak before the Regents. Regent Sherry Lansing, CEO of Paramount Pictures, stood up and announced in a loud voice "?oh Walter, I want to hear your presentation [at a future meeting]? but I have a plane to catch?", and crossed the room to give him a big kiss. By this time I had decided to investigate the UC Regents and their ties to the defense industry. Later that evening, a friend told me "?they ARE the Carlyle Group?". *UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS STUDENTS ? The FIAT PAX Website* Right after the Regents meeting I contacted a group of students and a Texas State Representative Lon Burnam, opposed to the Univ. of Texas bid for the nuclear weapons management contract. A student told me about FIAT PAX, a website put together by UC Santa Cruz students listing the top 50 University recipients of defense funding for research (see below), and their ties to corporations (see below). The UC Regents with ties to the defense industry were listed with detailed bios. Parsky, the Chair, was the top fundraiser for Bush (after Ken Lay) in both Presidential election bids, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Vice Chair Blum was tied to the Carlyle Group, invested in URS Corporation (leading contractor with DOD), Korea First Bank [Carlyle is moving into Korea and taking over banks], and sits on the Board of Northwest Airlines. [A FOIA document revealed in 2001 that Northwest was the first airline to collaborate with NASA to install mind-reading technology in US airports to catch "terrorists".] Regent Lansing was a trustee of the RAND Graduate School, a branch of the RAND Corporation which had been involved in war-gaming nuclear wars between the US and the USSR, and acts as a bridge between US universities and the military. I also learned that the Carlyle Group managed large amounts of endowment funds for the University of Texas, and that CALPers, the State of California workers pension fund which is the largest in the nation owns 5.2% of Carlyle. FIAT PAX sums it up: "The University of California's system wide finances are incredibly entangled with weapons manufacturers. The UC's retirement plan portfolio is invested in dozens of military-industrial contractors through stock purchases. At least five corporations within the UC retirement portfolio conduct virtually no business other than weapons manufacturing and military subcontracting, these are: General Dynamics with a UC investment of $21,471,120, Northrop Grumman for $16,125,200, Raytheon for $16,818,200, TRW for $8,327,650, and Lockheed Martin for a staggering $33,046,370." "It is through these informal personal, formal institutional, and financial exchanges that universities serve the warfare state and its corporate allies. Personal relationships connect military, corporate, and university personnel while bridging the divide between these institutions. Formal institutional links establish cooperation and coordination across the military-industrial-academic complex. Be they research institutes, labs, and centers, or personal relationships spanning industry-university-military, the web of connections far exceeds any attempts to quantify." /And then I knew that the Admirals, and vested Regents, were the kiss of death to the UC bid./ Admiral Vishnu Baghwat, Former Chief of the Indian Navy On July 17, 2004, Admiral Vishnu Baghwat replied to my question "Why are so many Admirals involved with the nuclear weapons contract bid?": "The reason why the Navy and the Admirals are predominantly involved in the weapons is that until the Space military launch posts are ready and positioned with the minimum degree of reliability, the US Navy has more than 70 % of the first and second strike capability on its boats and hence an equivalent amount of the budget earmarked for strategic systems." His comments made the link for me between the nuclear weapons program, the Navy, NASA, and other types of directed energy weapons developed in nuclear weapons labs intended for space. Marion Fulk, a former Manhattan Project scientist and retired Livermore nuclear physical chemist told me that nuclear weapons cannot be used in space without contaminating the atmosphere, and laser weapons will not work because there is too much space trash already up there which will impede the effectiveness of the lasers. Wars in space will create more space trash until it is impossible to leave the earth, which already according to Astronaut Edgar Mitchell, is very dangerous now since a paint chip nearly took out the windshield of the space shuttle. The US plans to weaponize space are a violation of the United Nations 1967 Outer Space Treaty: /Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies/. The intent was "to promote international co-operation in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space" and specifically prohibited the weaponization of space with ANY weapons, including nuclear weapons. The 2001 Space Preservation Act, HR 2977 which was introduced by Congressman Dennis Kucinich, let the cat out of the bag and revealed under the "Definitions" in the bill, that directed energy weapons which can target individuals and populations from space for the purposes of psychotronics, mind control, and mood control, are clearly the new space weapons intended to establish global dominance by the New World Order. Directed energy weapons developed in the nuclear weapons labs have been used on nuclear weapons lab whistleblowers, UC students, handed over to the EPA to use on environmentalists, and to the FBI to turn over to local law enforcement. These weapons are now land, air, and sea based. Space is the last frontier. Admiral Bobby Ray Inman ? Spooks-R-US Admiral Bobby Ray Inman Tipped off by a journalist in Washington DC, my investigation of Admiral Bobby Ray Inman revealed that he was THE Admiral at the center of the spider web. A look at his social network (see Namebase.org - /opens in new window/) helped put the ?puzzle palace? together, and I discovered he was National Security Advisor to five Presidents, Director of the NSA, Deputy Director of the CIA under William Casey, Vice Director of the DIA, Director of Naval Intelligence, President of SAIC, Chair of the 1985 Congressional ?Inman Commission' on Terrorism, affiliated with the Carlyle Group, on the advisory boards of Tufts and the University of Texas, represents SBC Communications Corporation at Cal Tech, Chairman Dallas Federal Reserve Bank, and a member of both the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. And, Admiral Bobby Ray Inman is a member of the University of Texas faculty. One could say he is a dangerous man. One job he didn?t get was Secretary of Defense under Clinton: *"1994:* Former admiral Bobby Ray Inman, stung by press and Senate criticisms of his record, asked President Clinton to withdraw his nomination as secretary of Defense. A Clinton aide, George Stephanopoulos, later wrote that Inman had held back information during his White House background check." A look at Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) reveals just exactly what kind of activities are undertaken in a spook shop where there is no accountability, and what business Inman was conducting at SAIC under his leadership. SAIC is one of the largest private employee-owned corporations, and like the Carlyle Group, escapes scrutiny (because it is privately owned) despite annual revenues of more than $5.9 billion. In 1990 it was indicted and pled guilty to ten felony counts of fraud on a Superfund site, called "one of the largest [cases] of environmental fraud?" in Los Angeles history. DOE contracted SAIC to manage and operate the Yucca Mountain Program, which I worked on as a scientist at the Livermore Lab. I became a whistleblower at Livermore in 1991 because of my knowledge of the extent of science fraud on the most important public works project in US history. SAIC?s control over internet domain names, gained when they purchased Network Solutions Inc., caused a furor and identified the ties in SAIC to "the shadow ruling-class within the Pentagon". Basically SAIC is a private spook corporation, involved in voting machines (SEQUOIA etc.), controlling the internet (Network Solutions), training foreign militaries, and the contractor that set up global communications for the US military. The internet is being changed from a public resource to a lucrative operation influenced by spooks and former Pentagon officials. The internet was a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) project to begin with. One of SAIC?s prime clients is DARPA (DOD), which recently employed 5-time convicted felon Admiral Poindexter, an associate of Inman?s going back to Iran-Contra. Poindexter was forced to resign over his involvement with PAM, a "terrorism futures market" DARPA project which predicted assassinations, terrorism and other events in the Middle East. His earlier controversial program TIPS ? the Total Information Awareness Program ? was set up to spy on Americans. He was also involved in creating large information databases on Americans which are now being used to track citizens. SAIC also had contracts to develop information systems for the Pentagon, FBI and IRS. Police can now legally stop a person on the street, ask their name, type it into a palm pilot and come up with detailed personal information in a few seconds. An Associated Press story on Sept. 9, 2004, "Conn. City Uses Scanners to Nab Criminals" revealed that police in New Haven, Connecticut, are now driving around in police cars with infrared scanners connected to databases which they are using on license plates to hunt for "criminals", tax delinquents, and parking ticket violators. Some of the $25,000 scanners were paid for in one month from collected revenues. A military project, the real purpose of the internet is revealing itself: "The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities." - Zbigniew Brzezinski. The association of Admiral Inman, the Bush crime syndicate, Texas oil companies, and the Carlyle Group with the University of Texas explained why an advanced 4^th generation nuclear weapons research program is there. And it explained why the University of Texas is so eager to take over the nuclear weapons labs. But this takeover resembles Inmans involvement with a stealth takeover of the Mars program transferring it from JPL management and control to NASA. The NASA Deep Space Program was started at JPL to do space exploration more efficiently with lower costs. Criticism of NASA/JPL Mars mission failure problems in the Thomas Young Report released on March 28, 2000, revealed that the supposedly public space program had been hijacked into secrecy and that the military was calling the shots. NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin on March 29, 2000, revealed at JPL the day after release of the report, just who was in control and the existence of an oversight committee that nobody at JPL knew existed: "I'd also like to acknowledge Admiral Inman, head of the JPL Oversight Committee at Cal Tech. He couldn't be here today, but I talked to him by phone. His commitment to the team here is also unwavering. And I thank him for that." Goldin was there "to address beleaguered personnel, scientists and engineers of the Nation's premier unmanned center for planetary exploration, and to somehow advise them of the new political and engineering realities, while simultaneously exhorting them to continue to new heights but now under more stringent NASA management". The real question is what was Admiral Inman doing as chair of a committee in a private university overseeing all civilian unmanned exploration of the planet Mars without the knowledge of anyone at JPL? In two years Admiral Bobby Ray Inman took over the space program, and in another year from now he will have succeeded in taking over the nuclear weapons program. When /Newsweek/ called him "a superstar in the intelligence community", it was for good reason. A Naval officer I interviewed later replied when I asked him if he knew Inman "?oh yeah? he?s one of the players?". Depopulation: 4^th Generation Nuclear Weapons and Depleted Uranium The development of 4^th generation nuclear weapons is now underway in the US (in first place), Germany and Japan (tied for second place), followed by Russia and other nuclear and non-nuclear States. As an expert witness on the environmental and health effects of depleted uranium (DU) weaponry for the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan held in Japan in 2003, I discovered that there was a connection between the use of depleted uranium by the US since 1991- in the Middle East, Yugoslavia, and Central Asia - and 4^th generation nuclear weapons. [Carlucci, former Chairman of the Carlyle Group (1989-2003), sat on the Board of Directors of General Dynamics (1991-97) which is one of the main manufacturers of DU weaponry in the US.] International scientists, Drs. Andre Gsponer, J.-P. Hurni, and B. Vitali, watch-dogging nuclear weapons developments globally, pointed out that DU weaponry is being used to study the radiobiological effects of the new nuclear weapons now under development: "It is shown that the radiological burden due to the battlefield use of circa 400 tons of depleted-uranium munitions in Iraq (and of about 40 tons in Yugoslavia) is comparable to that arising from the hypothetical use of more than 600 kt (respectively 60 kt) of high-explosive equivalent pure-fusion fourth-generation nuclear weapons." The use of weapons in war are most effective when the weapons do not kill, but create long-term health and environmental consequences such as lingering illnesses which slowly destroy the health of the environment and productivity of a nation and the economy. The use of Agent Orange in Vietnam is a good example of an environmental disaster with lingering and long-term health effects on a population, as well as causing trans-boundary contamination. DU is a permanent terrain contaminant with a half-life of 4.5 billion years, forms immense volumes of nano-sized particles (smaller than bacteria or viruses) which are lofted permanently as components of atmospheric dust traveling around the world until they are rained or snowed out of the air. There is no possible protective clothing, air filters, or treatment for internal exposure to this form of a poison radioactive gas. It was proposed as a military poison gas weapon in 1943 under the Manhattan Project. Even worse, uranium targets the DNA, and the Master Code (histone) which controls the expression of the DNA, and slowly destroys the genetic future of exposed populations. The US CODE, TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 40 > Sec. 2302 , defines a Weapon of Mass Destruction as: The term ''weapon of mass destruction'' means any weapon or device that is intended, or has the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to a significant number of people through the release, dissemination, or impact of - (A) toxic or poisonous chemicals or their precursors; (B) a disease organism; or (C) radiation or radioactivity. The US has staged four nuclear wars since 1991 using illegal DU dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets as radiological weapons and released an amount of radiation into the atmosphere which is at least ten times more radiation than the equivalent of 40,000 Hiroshima bombs, released during atmospheric testing. In June 2003, the WHO predicted in a press release that cancer will increase 50% globally by the year 2020, which can only be from an environmental cause. Already medical and scientific journals are reporting mysterious increases of infant mortality in 20 regions of Europe (/Lancet/ Jan. 2004), the UK (/Guardian/ Aug. 2004), and the US (/New Scientist/ Feb.2004). Infant mortality should be decreasing now as a continuing trend for more than a century because of improved education and prenatal care, instead it is increasing in the US for the first time in 45 years with no identified cause. For radiation specialists, infant mortality is the most sensitive indicator of radioactive pollution, a response researchers have identified as a result of exposure to low level radiation from atmospheric testing and nuclear power plant accidents, releases, and startups. The global pollution from thousands of tons of DU in nano-size particles traveling around the earth and being deposited in the global environment will have a devastating long-term effect. Not only will it cause illnesses and genetic mutations in the future generations of those internally exposed, but it will have a depopulating effect long proposed by the US military. DU is the perfect weapon delivering nanoparticles of poison, radiation, and nano-pollution - the real killer ? directly into living cells where they cause the cells to go haywire and dysfunctional: "Should humans be so stupid as to continue both technological escalation and wars between nation-states, radiological warfare might well be a far more safe and humane way to conduct extermination of large numbers of people, or the emptying out of troublesome political centres, than any of the various biological alternatives." More-4-US Research on population control is now being carried out secretly by biotech companies. Dr. Ignacio Chapela, a University of California microbiologist discovered that wild corn in remote parts of Mexico is contaminated with lab altered DNA. He was denied tenure at UC Berkeley when he reported this to the scientific community, despite the embarrassing discovery that the Chancellor denying him tenure was getting large cash payments from a biotech company each year. Chapela revealed that a spermicidal corn developed by a US company is now being tested in Mexico. Males who unknowingly eat the corn produce non-viable sperm. Depopulation is quite another thing. It is killing off large segments of living populations. Even Prince Philip of Britain, a member of the Bilderberg Group, is in favor of depopulation: "If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels." - Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund - quoted in 'Are You Ready For Our New Age Future?', / Insiders Report/, American Policy Center, December '95) Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has been proposing, funding, and building BioWeapons Level 3 and Level 4 labs at many places around the US ? even on university campuses and in densely populated urban locations. In a BioWeapons Level 4 facility a single bacteria or virus is lethal. For what purpose are these labs being developed, and who will make the decisions on where BioWeapons created in these facilities will be used and on whom? More than 20 world-class microbiologists have been murdered since 2001, mostly in the US and the UK ? nearly all were working on developing ethnic specific BioWeapons. Citizens around the US are frantically filing lawsuits to stop these labs on campuses and in communities where they live. Despite the opposition of residents living near UC Davis, where a BioWeapons Level 4 lab was planned with the support of the town Mayor, she suddenly reversed her position after a monkey escaped from a high security primate facility. When residents claimed that if UC Davis could not keep monkeys from escaping from their cages, they certainly could not guarantee that a single virus or bacteria would not escape from a test tube. The escaped monkey killed the project. The extreme secrecy surrounding the takeover of nuclear weapons, NASA and the space program, and BioWeapons labs is a threat to civil society, especially in the hands of the military and corporations. The Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission The New World Order can be described as a network of members of the Bilderberger Group, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and the Trilateral Commission. The membership in both the CFR and the Trilateral Commission by Admiral Bobby Ray Inman is of particular interest in light of the developments surrounding control by the military of the US nuclear weapons program and the NASA space program. "The Council on Foreign Relations is the American Branch of a society which originated in England? (and)?believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established?. "The Trilateral Commission is international?(and)?is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States." /With No Apologies/ (1979) by former Senator Barry Goldwater "The interests behind the Bush Administration, such as the Council on Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission - founded by Brzezinski for David Rockefeller - and the Bilderberger Group, have prepared for and are now moving to implement open world dictatorship within the next five years. They are not fighting against terrorists. They are fighting against citizens." - Dr. Johannes B. Koeppl, Ph.D., former German defense ministry official and advisor to former NATO Secretary General Manfred Werner. The Media At this time in history, it is incomprehensible how a nation can enjoy the benefit of the most sophisticated communications technology in world history and remain so uninformed? or dumbed down. The policies being carried out by the US government that are destructive, both domestically and around the world, are being conducted under a veil of secrecy. The only possible way this dumbing down or control of information could occur is that it has been socially constructed. It is a conspiracy of lies, manipulation and disinformation which increasing numbers of Americans are aware of and should be calling it treason: "The Rockefeller family has always taken a lead role in the CFR. In the 1960s, while American men and women were dying in the jungles of Vietnam and while the military/industrial complex was sucking trillions of dollars out of American taxpayers' wallets, the Rockefeller dynasty was financing Vietnamese oil refineries and aluminum plants. If there had ever been a formal declaration of war, the Rockefellers could be tried for treason. Instead, they reaped dividends. These are just a few of the abuses of power which demonstrate the results of the power elite's manipulations of our destiny as a society. If you've ever wondered why you don't hear about this network of power, just take a look at the CFR's membership roster. Many of the chief executives and newspeople at /CBS, NBC/RCA, ABC/, the /Public Broadcast Service/, the /Associated Press/, the /New York Times/, /Time Magazine/, / Newsweek/, the /Washington Post/, and many other key media outlets are CFR members. International power orgs depend on the masses remaining ignorant for their plans to come to fruition." David Rockefeller, a member of the Bilderberger?s, thanked the media facilitators: "We are grateful to the /Washington Post/, the /NY Times/, /Time Magazine/ and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years....It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries." - David Rockefeller speaking at the Bilderberger meeting in June 1991 in Baden Baden, Germany *MEDIA MEMBERSHIP: Council On Foreign Relations (CFR) Trilateral Commission (TC)* *CBS* Laurence A. Tisch, CEO CFR Roswell Gilpatric CFR James Houghton CFR/TC Henry Schacht CFR/TC Dan Rather CFR Richard Hottelet CFR Frank Stanton CFR * NBC/RCA* John F. Welch, Jr., CEO CFR Jane Pfeiffer CFR Lester Crystal CFR/TC R. W. Sonnenfeldt CFR/TC John Petty CFR Tom Brokaw CFR David Brinkley CFR John Chancellor CFR Marvin Kalb CFR Irving R. Levine CFR Herbert Schlosser CFR Peter G. Peterson CFR John Sawhill CFR * ABC* Thomas S. Murphy, CEO CFR Barbara Walters CFR John Connor CFR Diane Sawyer CFR John Scali CFR Public Broadcast Service (PBS) Robert MacNeil CFR Jim Lehrer CFR Charlane Hunter-Gault CFR Hodding Carter III CFR Daniel Schorr CFR Associated Press (AP) Stanley Swinton CFR Harold Anderson CFR Katherine Graham CFR/TC *Reuters* Micheal Posner CFR * Baltimore Sun* Henry Trewhitt CFR * Washington Times* Amaud de Borchgrave CFR * Children's TV Workshop (Sesame Street)* Joan Ganz Cooney, Pres. CFR * Cable News Network (CNN)* W. Thomas Johnson, pres. TC Daniel Schorr CFR * New York Times* Richard Gelb CFR William Scranton CFR/TC John F. Akers, Dir. CFR Louis V. Gerstner, Jr., Dir. CFR George B. Munroe, Dir. CFR Donald M. Stewart, Dir. CFR Cyrus R. Vance, Dir. CFR A.M. Rosenthal CFR Seymour Topping CFR James Greenfield CFR Max Frankel CFR Jack Rosenthal CFR John Oakes CFR Harrison Salisbury CFR H.L. Smith CFR Steven Rattner CFR Richard Burt CFR Flora Lewis TC *Time, Inc. *Ralph Davidson CFR Donald M. Wilson CFR Henry Grunwald CFR Alexander Heard CFR Sol Linowitz CFR/TC Thomas Watson, Jr. CFR Strobe Talbott TC * Newsweek/Washington Post *Katherine Graham CFR N. deB. Katzenbach CFR Robert Christopher CFR Osborne Elliot CFR Phillip Geyelin CFR Murry Marder CFR Maynard Parker CFR George Will CFR/TC Robert Kaiser CFR Meg Greenfield CFR Walter Pincus CFR Murray Gart CFR Peter Osnos CFR Don Oberdorfer CFR Who Should Control the US Nuclear Weapons Program? "Some people say Domenici is a sucker for big science. And they may be right." -Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), when asked at a press conference last week if his vigorous support for his state?s Los Alamos National Laboratory had helped create a culture of complacency that contributed to last month?s security and safety lapses. In 1991, Richard Berta, the Western Regional Inspector for the Department of Energy at the nuclear weapons labs and the Nevada Test Site, told me: "The nuclear weapons labs exist for the Pentagon? and the Pentagon exists for the oil companies?" It is inappropriate for a university to be in control of nuclear weapons research and management. University of California faculty have long opposed UC management of the labs, supported by a majority of the students. UC is now in the position of managing, developing, proliferating, investing in, and profiting from Weapons of Mass Destruction. The fact that UC investments of $33,046,370 in Lockheed Martin Marietta (70% owned by Carlyle), and $21,471,120 in General Dynamics ? one of the two biggest US manufacturers of DU weaponry which has been sold to 29 countries, make UC complicit in war crimes. Students and faculty should be informed of this. The State of California employee pension fund owns 5.2% of the Carlyle Group. The military, should NEVER be in control of ANY nuclear weapons program, it should ALWAYS be in civilian hands. And the Carlyle Group, a private corporation with vested interests and ties to oil companies, has NEVER been investigated or subjected to ANY oversight whatsoever, and for that reason should not have any control or influence over US nuclear weapons policy and development. Admiral Bobby Ray Inman and his associates in the intelligence business have demonstrated their systematic abuse of the internet, voting machines, and American civil liberties. Should we give them the trigger, the nukes, the budget they want, and the cover of secrecy? I don?t think so. Management and oversight of the nuclear weapons labs belongs at the National Science Foundation, a US government agency, with the resources to make rational decisions and reign in the planned unlimited proliferation of nuclear weapons on earth and in space. "There is a toxic quality to war that affects the inner life of individuals and, as a collective consequence, the society itself. In the degradation and dehumanization of the individual lies the destruction of all mankind." - Butler Shaffer ALL governments are terrorist organizations?and for that reason Humanity is on the brink of extinction. References /IMPERIAL SAN FRANCISCO ? Urban Power, Earthly Ruin/ by Gray Brechin, UC Press January 1999. "Estimating the Cold War Mortgage: The 1995 Baseline Environmental Management Report" US DOE Office of Environmental Management Executive Summary, March 1995. "Closing the Circle on the Splitting of the Atom: The Environmental Legacy of Nuclear Weapons Production in the US and What the DOE is Doing About It" US DOE Office of Environmental Management, January 1996. "ECRR: 2003 Recommendations of the European Committee on Radiation Risk ? Health Effects of Ionizing Radiation Exposure at Low Doses for Radiation Protection Purposes, Regulator?s Edition: Brussels, 2003".http://www.euradcom.org/ "Asthma; Infant Mortality; Recruiting Foster Parents" by Lynda Crawford /Gotham Gazette/ May 05, 2003. http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/children/20030506/2/379 /Deadly Deceit: Low Level Radiation, High Level Coverup/ by Jay Gould and B. Goldman (1990). Letter to Employees of University of California-managed National Labs /Today at Berkeley Lab/ August 6, 2004 http://www.lbl.gov/today/2004/Aug/06-Fri/letter-jump.html "A Career in Microbiology Can Be Harmful to Your Health: Death Toll Mounting as Connections to Dyncorp, Hadron, PROMIS Software and Disease Research Emerge", Michael Davidson and Michael C. Ruppert, February 14, 2002. http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_14_02_microbio.html Media coverage of Los Alamos security lapse, July 2004. http://www.4law.co.il/lanl1.htm "NASA plans to read terrorist?s minds at airports" by Frank J. Murray 8/17/02, Washington Times. http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020817-704732.htm Air Travel Privacy FOIA Documents: "NASA Ames Research Center Northwest Airlines Briefing December 10-11, 2001", Electronic Privacy Information Center. http://www.epic.org/privacy/airtravel/foia/foia1.html Stop Carlyle! website http://isuisse.ifrance.com/stopcarlyle/enindex.htm "Our Opinion: NNSA must share blame for Los Alamos mistakes" August 16, 2004, /Oakland Tribune./ http://ucnuclearfree.org/articles/2004/08/16_oped_nnsa-must-share-blame.htm FIAT PAX ? Let There Be Peace: A Resource on Science, Technology, Militarism and Universities http://www.fiatpax.net/ "Defense Funding at 50 Universities" http://www.fiatpax.net/profiles.html "The University Web of Corporate Power" http://www.fiatpax.net/dohe/universitynetwork.htm "UC?s retirement fund investments" http://www.fiatpax.net/iilinks2.html United Nations 1967 Outer Space Treaty http://www.oosa.unvienna.org/treat/ost/outersptxt.htm HR 2977 Space Preservation Act of 2001 http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/hr2977.html Social Network Diagram for Admiral Bobby Ray Inman http://www.namebase.org/cgi-bin/nb06?_INMAN_BOBBY_RAY *"1994:* Former admiral Bobby Ray Inman" http://www.appointee.brookings.org/sg/a2.htm "Pentagon scheme for a futures market in terror" by Berry Grey, July 31, 2003, /World Socialist Web Site/ http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/jul2003/fut-j31_prn.shtml "BEST GUESS: Economists explore betting markets as prediction tools" by Erica Klarreich, /Science News/ Oct. 18, 2003, V. 164 p.251-253. http://www.sciencenews.org/ "Conn. City Uses Scanners to Nab Criminals" by Diane Scarponi, Sept. 9, 2004. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040909/ap_on_re_us/scanning_for_scofflaws Summary of Thomas Young Report released on March 28, 2000 http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msp98/news/news71.html "When The Best Must Do Even Better" remarks by NASA Admin. Dan Goldin at JPL on March 29, 2000. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/ftp/Goldin/00text/jpl_remarks.txt International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Afghanistan-Criminal-Tribunal10mar04.htm http://afghan-tribunal.3005.net/english/ /Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons: The Physical Principles of Thermonuclear Explosives, Inertial Confinement Fusion, and the Quest for Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons,/ by Andre Gsponer and J.-P. Hurni (1999). http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/News/INESAPTR1.html /A comparison of delayed radiobiological effects of depleted-uranium munitions versus fourth-generation nuclear weapons/ by A. Gsponer, J.-P. Hurni, and B. Vitale, _ 4^th International Conference of the Yugoslav Nuclear Society_, Belgrade, September 30-October 4, 2002. http://arXiv.org/abs/physics/0210071 "Letter to Congressman McDermott from Leuren Moret ? February 21, 2003." http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/Leuren-Moret-Gen-Groves21feb03.htm "Preferential Staining of Nucleic Acid-Containing Structures For Electron Microscopy" by Huxley and Zubay, /J. Biophysical and Biochemical Cytology/ (J. Cell Biol.) 11 (2): 273. http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/Huxley-Zubay-Staining1nov61.htm (Nov 1961) "Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War" by Leuren Moret, /World Affairs Journal/ August 2004. http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm "Depleted uranium: Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets - A death sentence here and abroad" by Leuren Moret, Aug. 18, 2004, /San Francisco Bay View/. WHO press release 03/09/08: "Global cancer rates could increase by 50% to 15 million by 2020" http://www.mindfully.org/Health/2003/Cancer-Rates-15M3apr03.htm "Sudden unexplained infant death in 20 regions in Europe: case control study" R.G. Carpenter et al, /Lancet/ January 17, 2004, V.363, p.185-191. "Rise in stillbirths prompts inquiry" by John Carvel, August 20, 2004, /The Guardian/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1287041,00.html "US infant deaths rise for first time in 45 years" by Shaoni Bhattacharya, Feb 12, 2003, /New Scientist/. http://www.newscientist.com/news/print.jsp?id=ns99994675 "Three Mile Island: Health study meltdown" by Joseph Mangano, /Bulletin of the Atomic/ Scientist, September/October 2004, Volume 60, No. 5, pp. 30-35. http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/2004/so04/so04mangano.html "Smart dust, roboflies, microbugs: UC is spying on you" by Leuren Moret February 26, 2003, /San Francisco Bay View/. http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2003/Berkeley-Library-Classified22feb03.htm Statement by Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh http://homepage.mac.com/kaaawa/iblog/C337802379/E1557478132/ Statement by Dr. Johannes B. Koeppl, Ph.D. http://homepage.mac.com/kaaawa/iblog/C337802379/E1557478132/ Statement on role of Rockefellers on Council of Foreign Relations http://isuisse.ifrance.com/emmaf/base/cfrnwo.html Statement by David Rockefeller at Bilderberger meeting June 1991 http://homepage.mac.com/kaaawa/iblog/C337802379/E1557478132/ MEDIA MEMBERSHIP: Council On Foreign Relations (CFR) Trilateral Commission (TC) http://www.freedomdomain.com/neworder/connections.html Leuren Moret is a geoscientist who has worked around the world on radiation issues, educating citizens, the media, members of parliaments and Congress and other officials. She became a whistleblower in 1991 at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab after experiencing major science fraud on the Yucca Mountain Project. An environmental commissioner in the City of Berkeley, she can be reached at leurenmoret@yahoo.com. Top <#GlossTop> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Go to the peace academy's front page <../index.htm> eck to Index ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Danish Peace Academy <../index.htm>. Opdated Sun, 12 Sep 2004 17:49:33 GMT ***************************************************************** 16 The Bulletin: Missile defense: Winning minds, not hearts | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists [http://www.thebulletin.org 2004, Volume 60, No. 5, pp. 48-55 By Nicole C. Evans The U.S. plan to build a global missile defense has been gaining international support, but not because other governments believe it will make their countries safer. Missile defense is a complex and often misunderstood subject that tends to evoke strong emotional responses, and many continue to feel that missile defense poses a serious risk to international security. Nevertheless, there has been a surprising international movement toward supporting and cooperating with the Bush administration's global missile defense (GMD) project. Earlier versions of missile defense maintained the distinction between national missile defense (NMD) and theater defenses. NMD is an antiballistic missile defense system that provides protection for a country as a whole against ballistic missile attack. Theater defenses provide protection in a theater of operation, countering missiles with a range of less than 3,500 kilometers. The distinction is important because national defenses may undermine strategic stability by threatening the ability of other countries to retaliate, which is the core of their deterrence. Theater defenses do not pose this danger. George W. Bush's administration has changed all this, though, severely complicating an already intricate situation. Since 2002, Bush's version of global missile defense has effectively collapsed national and theater defenses together by envisaging the protection of the American "homeland" with NMD and the protection of American troops, bases, and allies abroad with theater missile defenses (TMD). Long-term American missile defense plans envision a layered system using land, sea, and air platforms to neutralize incoming missiles. The result has been to create a definitional and policy haze. Countries that once supported only theater defenses now find themselves tacitly supporting global defense by association, while claiming that they are only participating in non-destabilizing forms of missile defense. Russia's previous policy of supporting TMD but vigorously opposing NMD has been compromised. Overall, this strategy has paid off for the Bush administration, as more and more countries hop aboard the GMD train. The first rudimentary parts of the American missile defense system will be deployed this fall with the basing of interceptor missiles in Alaska and California. Why some support missile defense The turning point for those countries wavering in their support of missile defense came in December 2001, when Russia seemingly acquiesced in the American abandonment of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, thus removing other nations' earlier fears that cooperating with U.S. missile defense plans would jeopardize relations with Russia and undermine arms control regimes. Four key factors led to the apparently increasing support for American plans. First, most states recognized that the Bush administration was resolutely determined to proceed with its missile defense project regardless of whether it had international support. It was not surprising that countries began deciding they would prefer to be inside the tent, where they could have some policy input, rather than outside the tent and out in the cold. Second, cooperation with the United States was seen to offer political gains. President Vladimir Putin probably calculated that Russia was more likely to curb its biggest concern--unbridled American unilateralism--through limited cooperation rather than condemnation of missile defense. For other states, a good relationship with the United States is of paramount concern. Third, there is a strong belief that significant financial, technical, and industrial gains will emerge. The United States suggested that Russian firms would be able to bid for lucrative missile defense orders, while European and Asian partners have already received profitable contracts. Finally, there are clear military gains for some states from missile defense cooperation, most notably in troop protection. The state of play Cooperation on missile defense by North American and European nations has largely occurred within existing security architectures. In April, Canada agreed to an early warning system for North America to be operated by the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). Canada had little choice; if NORAD were sidelined, Canada would abdicate its control over continental air defense. This would be a significant loss--through NORAD, Canada has been able to exercise disproportionate influence in relation to its military expenditures and resources. At the Prague summit in November 2002, NATO member states agreed to initiate a missile defense feasibility study to examine options for a layered TMD. The successful bidders for the study were announced in September 2003, and work is slowly progressing. Several member states are developing their own missile defense capabilities, which may later be integrated with a NATO system. Germany has several American Patriot I TMDs and is developing the Medium Extended Air Defense System in conjunction with the United States and Italy. Britain has finalized an agreement with the United States to upgrade the Fylingdales early-warning radar, and has created the British Missile Defence Centre to interface with its American sister agency. However, Britain continues to insist that missile defenses need to be balanced with global nuclear deterrence, focusing its efforts on TMD and the protection of troops. The British government is also optimistic about the potential benefits for its defense industry. In contrast to popular perception, Paris does not fully reject missile defenses. French and Italian firms are jointly developing the Aster TMD system. France's view is similar to that of Russia: TMDs are useful, but NMD is destabilizing. France's main objections to global missile defense are driven by a concern, shared by the British, that it will replace cooperative diplomacy and produce a spiralling arms race in a futile search for invulnerability. In Asia, cooperation on missile defense is built on long-standing friendships with the United States. Japan has joint TMD programs with the United States, although Japan's Patriot IIs and Aegis destroyers operate independently. Tokyo's interest was catalyzed when North Korea lobbed a Taepodong-1 missile across the Sea of Japan in 1998. Japan also realizes that the United States, its only alliance partner, would regard failure to cooperate on missile defense to be a deal breaker. In December 2003, Japan announced that it would construct a layered missile defense system, using both Aegis destroyers and Patriot III missiles. Japan's gradual move away from its traditional pacifist stance is also seen in its March 2003 launch of two military satellites. Another piece of the GMD puzzle fell into place in December 2003, when Australia announced its participation. The move was primarily justified in terms of the North Korean threat, and the Australian government insists there will be substantial economic dividends. In response, Indonesia issued a strongly worded warning that Australian-backed GMD could trigger an arms race and undermine regional stability. Indo-American cooperation also threatens the precarious regional balance by menacing both China and Pakistan. The U.S.-India Defense Policy Group meets regularly and in March held a simulated missile defense exercise. In January, the United States announced that it would give India access to sensitive space, nuclear, and missile defense technology. But this cooperation may now be downgraded, as the newly elected Congress Party and its leftist allies have been critical of India's unambiguous support for GMD. Finally, Israel is the only Middle Eastern country cooperating on missile defense. American Patriot missiles were deployed in Israel during the first Gulf War and Israel subsequently developed its indigenous Arrow system with the United States. The Arrow was first deployed in 2002 and operates alongside Patriot III installations, but it has not been tested in combat. Russia's conditions for cooperation In both Europe and Asia, Russian theater defense policy is driven by three aims: to be a key player in the development of regional security structures; to ensure that regional structures are not directed against Russia; and to foster a multipolar international system, curbing perceived American unilateralism. Russia sees theater-defense cooperation as part of the global war on terror and as potentially yielding dividends for its defense industry. The idea of a limited European TMD was first mooted in 1994, but a framework for cooperation was not developed until the NATO-Russia Council was established in May 2002. Under its auspices, NATO and Russia conducted groundbreaking exercises in Colorado from March 8 to March 12 to ensure that they can quickly and effectively work together to counter a missile threat against troops deployed on a joint mission. Russian TMD efforts in Asia have been more restrained. In 2002, Russia proposed a regional missile defense system that would encompass Russia, China, the United States, and Japan, as well as bilateral cooperation with Japan and Pakistan. But attempts to propose an alternative to U.S. global missile defense have not been successful due to long-standing American missile defense interests in the region. The only concrete outcome is that in June Russia finalized the sale of S-300 surface-to-air missiles to China. Beginning in September 2002, statements by Russian deputy foreign and defense ministers revealed a willingness to cooperate with Washington on missile defense. President Vladimir Putin explicitly backed this approach in late January 2003. The development was foreshadowed in May 2002, when the United States agreed to assist Russia in improving its early warning system through the establishment of a joint ballistic missile launch information-sharing center. But pledges to continue developing the Russian-American Observa-tion Satellite warning system ended in February, when the system was dropped from the U.S. defense budget request for fiscal 2005. In April, a draft agreement called for establishing a missile attack early warning system and other land components of missile defense that do not involve the potential militarization of space. However, this attempt harks back to a failed 1998 Clinton-Yeltsin plan to develop a joint warning system in Moscow, for which there proved to be a significant lack of political will. It is difficult to imagine that meaningful progress will occur when even mundane and noncontroversial plans cannot be brought to fruition. Russia has attached clear conditions to its cooperation with the United States on missile defense. First, GMD cannot threaten Russian national interests. Deputy Chief of the Russian General Staff Yury Baluyevsky has repeatedly said that the goal of Russian cooperation is to create systems that can defend against single missile launches by accident, by a rogue state, or by terrorists. Russia does not believe that current missile defenses threaten its nuclear forces, nor that defenses will be able to neutralize its large strategic offensive arsenal for the foreseeable future. Second, cooperation needs to occur on the basis of equality, which reflects Russia's desire to be perceived and treated as an equal partner. Third, Russian technologies and intellectual property must be protected from cunning Americans who may steal Russian ideas under cover of cooperation. Russia has operated an area missile defense around Moscow since the late 1960s, and Russians believe that defense has bequeathed them a legacy of potentially valuable experience and technology. The Kremlin is keen to protect and promote this potentially profit-making element of its defense sector. Fourth, space must be demilitarized and GMD prevented from extending into space. Finally, cooperation should be built around a legal framework. Russia has said that an agreement on missile defense is a precondition of cooperation. Moscow has persisted in attempting to encourage the United States to agree to a substitute for the now defunct ABM Treaty, but has been repeatedly rebuffed. Russia aims to maintain the link between offensive and defensive weapons with a view to protect strategic stability within a legal framework clearly delineating Russia and the United States as equal strategic partners. Russian and Chinese concerns Russia and China share two key concerns about American missile defense plans: that their nuclear deterrent is threatened and that American missile defense plans will destabilize arms control. The threat posed is far more immediate for China, whose nuclear forces are Lilliputian in comparison to American and Russian nuclear arsenals. Both Russia and China have responded actively to the American abandonment of the ABM Treaty by developing asymmetrical measures to neutralize any potential threat. By withdrawing from START II, Russia was able to continue deploying multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs) on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). Putin announced in October 2003 that Moscow intends to place on combat duty dozens of MIRVed SS-19s, and Russia has also extended the service life of its SS-18 heavy ICBMs. Russia has begun building the fourth-generation Borey class of submarines, is MIRVing its silo-based Topol-M, and is finishing testing the mobile version of the Topol-M. Russia regards its new Topol-M ICBMs, originally designed in the 1980s as a counter to Reagan's Star Wars, as a "silver bullet" against American missile defenses. During Russia's nuclear military exercises in February, most attention focused on the failure of two submarine missile launches, with little attention paid to the successful testing of a new hypersonic "Crazy Ivan" warhead that follows a nonclassical scenario, changing flight altitude and course repeatedly, making it nearly impossible to track and target. Putin declared Russia able to penetrate any missile defense system with ease. With characteristic khitryi (sly) wit, Putin commented that just as the Americans insisted that their decision to withdraw from the ABM Treaty was not directed at Russia, Russia's modernization of its nuclear arms and other new weapons developments is not directed at the United States. Russia has also upgraded the A-135 strategic single-site ABM system covering Moscow, the only such system currently in operation. In 2002, Russia began working in earnest on TMD and is currently developing several advanced missile interceptors, such as the S-500, which would add to its current arsenal of S-300 and advanced S-400 interceptors. Russia has also successfully tested ship-based interceptors. But the Kremlin has clearly indicated that it has no intention of keeping up with the Joneses on missile defense. Putin had said that while he does not rule out the development of a national missile defense at some point in the future, deployment would depend on how work moves ahead in other countries. Russia also continues to rebuild its ailing early warning system and to bolster its military satellite constellations. Since 2002, Russia has indulged in numerous military exercises, each increasing in size and ambition. The May 2003 exercises even involved hypothetical nuclear strikes on the United States and the neutralization of American satellites to blind Pentagon planners. All these measures have been buttressed by a steady increase in defense spending. Senior Russian figures, including Putin, have increased the frequency and import accorded to their visits to strategic military installations. z Both Russia and China appear unconvinced by American assurances that global missile defense is not directed against them, despite echoing American rhetoric about the need to defend against the terrorist threat. Senior Russian military and foreign affairs officials have argued that while the United States proclaims its partnership with Russia, its actions show anything but that. In January 2003, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov expressed particular concern about U.S. plans to enhance radar stations in Britain and Greenland, as the likely routes of missile launches from rogue states do not cross those areas. Washington's plans to develop "bunker buster" nuclear weapons only add to Moscow's and Beijing's unease. They are seen as having the potential to disrupt the existing parity of nuclear deterrence and drastically alter the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons. General Baluyevsky, commenting on such developments, said: "It's very scary, extremely scary." [1] Russian concerns are further aggravated by America's stated intention not to cut its nuclear arsenal to levels designated by the Moscow Treaty of May 2002--instead moving the missiles as well as the warheads into storage as a hedge against an uncertain future. Beijing's distrust of American intentions is fueled by its belief that global missile defense is yet another manifestation of American unilateralism and a key component of an American attempt at worldwide domination. U.S. efforts to sharpen its swords and expand its shields are seen as posing a significant threat to China's nuclear deterrent. China's nuclear strategy is one of minimum deterrence--that potential enemies will be deterred as long as uncertainty remains about China's ability to launch retaliatory action. China remains one of the few countries adamantly opposed to TMD. The U.S. decision to sell Patriot III missiles to Taiwan further destabilized the region. China remains fearful of nuclear blackmail on the Taiwan issue, and the deployment of TMD could encourage China to adopt a preemptive escalatory posture. China is also concerned that an American-Taiwanese missile defense would subsume Taiwanese military forces under American command. Japan and the United States already have a military alliance, and command integration for Taiwan could mark the beginning of an explicit U.S.-Taiwanese alliance against the mainland. Taiwan, which appears sensitive to the implications of such a move, appears to be gently stepping backward on missile defense by canceling maintenance contracts for its Patriot IIIs. While China has been modernizing its forces since the 1980s, it has also been influenced more recently by projected American missile defense plans. Not surprisingly, Beijing is moving toward a more diversified, invulnerable, and combat-ready operational nuclear triad. China's current strategic deterrent consists of 20 silo-based Dong Feng-5 ICBMs, which are liquid-fueled and thus kept at low readiness with their warheads stored separately. China's newest intermediate-range ballistic missiles are solid-fuel mobile Dong Feng-21As, and China is developing mobile ICBMs as well. If China believes that American global missile defenses are undermining its nuclear deterrent, it could MIRV and attach decoys to its ballistic missiles. In a tense situation, as exists in the Taiwan Strait, missiles on high alert only aggravate the possibility of escalation or accidental or preemptive war. z Having identified America's military Achilles' heel--its increased dependence on vulnerable space-based assets--China has also accelerated its military space program, exploring ways to neutralize American military satellites in the event of conflict. Second, Russia and China are very concerned that American missile defense plans will destabilize existing arms control regimes and forestall future agreements. Russia has repeatedly argued that GMD diverts resources from the war against terror and runs counter to the Bush-Putin commitment to reducing nuclear arsenals. China has declared that Japan's missile defense plans could undermine the regional balance and trigger a new arms race. It is not clear whether this is a threat or a prediction. Russia, China, and other states express deep concern about the weaponization of space. In 2003, Russia and China proposed an agreement for the non-weaponization of space, and negotiations continue at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva. Both Moscow and Beijing maintain that nonproliferation measures and policing regimes are a better way of dealing with weapons of mass destruction than attempts to develop missile shields. The bottom line The U.S. pursuit of global missile defense has some international support. But that support is not attributable to a shared commitment to America's strategic vision. Rather, it results from pragmatic calculations on how to engage with the world's only remaining superpower. In some ways, it is almost as if countries are simply waiting for the GMD storm to pass. The real danger lies in the potential of GMD to disrupt delicate regional balances and to encourage the further development and deployment of nuclear weapons. The United States, China, and Russia have all stepped up their offensive weapons programs since the dissolution of the ABM Treaty. The danger has been succinctly summarized by Mohamed El Baradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency: "If we don't stop using double standards, we shall be piled high with an even greater number of nuclear weapons." [2] That would create the exact opposite of the professed objective of global missile defense: security for all who want it. Nicole C. Evans, a retained lecturer at Wadham College, Oxford, is completing her doctorate in international relations at St. Antony's College, Oxford. 1. Vladimir Isachenkov, "U.S. Nuke Development Concerns Russia," Associated Press, November 26, 2003. 2. Vladimir Simonov, "Commentary: The USA Should Not Be a Nuclear Club of One," RIA Novosti, September 1, 2003. © 2004 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 17 Atomic Bulletin: U.S. nuclear reductions September/October 2004 Vol. 60, No. 5, pp. 70–71 On June 1, National Nuclear Security Administration chief Linton F. Brooks submitted a classified report to Congress detailing the plans that have been agreed to by the Energy and Defense Departments regarding reductions in the nuclear stockpile. Brooks said the stockpile would be reduced by "almost half" but declined to provide details about its new size or composition, citing classification reasons. Such regrettable secrecy stems from ingrained practices developed during the Cold War. Greater stockpile transparency could help advance certain arms control and disarmament agreements and encourage measures to secure fissile material and warheads in Russia and elsewhere. We estimate the current size of the U.S. nuclear stockpile, at the end of fiscal 2004, to be 10,350 warheads. To decipher the size and composition of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile is difficult, though not impossible. Having closely followed stockpile trends for more than two decades, we feel confident in our estimates. Useful declassified information has been released over the years; one such source is an Energy Department table that provides the number of warheads in the stockpile, the number of warheads built each year, and the total megatons each year from 1945 to 1961. A second source of official information has been charts provided by the Energy Department to Congress over the years that show the size of the stockpile through the decades. The charts were released without the number of warheads in the left-hand column, but they were easy to fill in (see graph, below). Another source (until 1999 routinely supplied by officials) was detailed figures on the number of disassemblies being carried out at the Pantex Plant. These figures revealed that about 11,000 warheads had been dismantled during the 1990s. In 1999, the Energy Department reversed its policy and classified dismantlement figures. U.S. nuclear stockpile, 1945--2004. By our count, the United States produced some 70,000 nuclear warheads from 1945 to 1990. At its peak in 1967, the operational stockpile held about 32,000 warheads. A dramatic rise took place from the mid-1950s to the mid-1960s, when each military branch of service wanted a nuclear weapon for practically every mission. In 1955, there were about 3,000 warheads in the stockpile; 10 years later there were more than 30,000. To the military, nuclear weapons were the things to have. Fueled by an intense interservice rivalry and by the fierce competition between Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore design labs, the stockpile grew by leaps and bounds. During the two peak production years, 1959 and 1960, warheads came off the assembly line at a rate of 27 a day--about 600 a month. The nuclear weapons included air-to-air Falcon and Genie missiles; many types of anti-submarine weapons (some dropped from planes or helicopters, others launched from ships or submarines); atomic land mines; artillery shells; surface-to-surface missiles in all ranges; air-to-surface missiles; surface-to-air missiles; and every size of gravity bomb for a dozen types of nuclear-capable bombers and three dozen types of nuclear-capable tactical aircraft. Beginning in the 1970s, the military's enthusiasm for nuclear weapons began to wane. Many nuclear missions were dropped or replaced with conventional weapons. (An interesting study would be to document the military's role in unilaterally giving up these missions, which resulted in the retirement of thousands of nuclear weapons, all without an arms control treaty.) Another spate of nuclear weapons production occurred in the late Carter--early Reagan years. An estimate at the time calculated that all the proposed weapon systems would require some 17,000 new nuclear warheads to be built. Later, several programs were cancelled and others were cut back. For example, the Defense Department planned to build 200 of the controversial MX missiles, each to carry 10 warheads. The program was later reduced to 100 missiles, and in the end, only 50 MX missiles were fielded. Still, the 1980s saw substantial warhead production until 1989, when safety and environmental concerns at several Energy Department weapon complex facilities brought production to a halt. Much of the current stockpile was built in the 1980s, including warheads for the MX and Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), Trident submarine-launched ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and new or modified bombs. As the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union dissolved, a September 1991 initiative from President George H. W. Bush reduced the stockpile approximately by half. A parallel way to track the history of the stockpile is to examine where the United States deployed its weapons. For most of the Cold War, U.S. nuclear weapons literally encircled the globe. Basing them was a key issue, and nuclear deployments affected foreign policy and military plans. The United States deployed nuclear weapons in 17 countries and seven territories, two of which (Alaska and Hawaii) later became states. The peak deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons in NATO countries in Europe was in 1971, with approximately 7,300 weapons in seven countries. In 1967, the United States stored some 3,250 weapons in Okinawa, Korea, Guam, the Philippines, and Taiwan. Significant numbers of nuclear weapons--in 1975, approximately 7,400--floated in the Atlantic, Pacific, and Mediterranean on various types of surface vessels and submarines. Today, the United States is the only nation to deploy nuclear weapons outside its borders--excluding warheads on submarines (see "U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Europe"). If the United States cuts its total nuclear stockpile by "almost half," some 4,300 warheads (or 42 percent) of six types will be retired and disassembled (see "Warheads Likely Slated"). Also, a few warheads of each type will be removed periodically as a part of routine surveillance. By 2012, approximately 6,000 warheads of seven types will remain in the U.S. stockpile (see "Projected Nuclear Stockpile, 2012"). This will reduce the size of the stockpile to the early 1958 level, with a total yield of 1,800 megatons--less than one-tenth the historic high in 1960. Of the almost 6,000 warheads, all but about 700 may be active, either "operationally deployed" or part of the active "responsive force." With additional tritium available from the retired warheads, it will be possible to keep a substantial portion of the total stockpile in an active status. The Moscow Treaty limits the number of operationally deployed warheads to 2,200; this could include warheads carried on 500 Minuteman III ICBMs, 12 (of 14) Trident submarines, 76 B-52 bombers, and 21 B-2 bombers. In 2012, there will also be 580 nonstrategic bombs available for F-16, F-15E (later the Joint Strike Fighter), and Tornado aircraft, as well as about 265 warheads for nuclear-armed submarine-launched cruise missiles for attack submarines. Nuclear Notebook is prepared by Robert S. Norris and Hans M. Kristensen of the Natural Resources Defense Council. Inquiries should be directed to NRDC, 1200 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 400, Washington, D.C., 20005; (202) 289-6868. U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile, 1945-2004 see website graphic U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe Location Warheads Kleine Brogel Airbase, Belgium 20 Buchel Airbase, Germany 20 Ramstein Airbase, Germany 130 Aviano Airbase, Italy 50 Airbase, Italy 40 Volkel Airbase, Netherlands 20 Incirlik Airbase, Turkey 90 RAF Lakenheath, Britain 110 Total 480 Warheads likely slated for retirement or disassembly Warhead type Number W62 (MM III ICBM) 730 W78 (MM III ICBM) 425 W76 (Trident I SLBM) 1,350 W80-1 (ACM/ALCM) 1,000 W84 (GLCM) 380 B61-3 200 B61-4 210 B61-10 30 Total ~4,325 ACM: advanced cruise missile; ALCM: air-launched cruise missile; GLCM: ground-launched cruise missile; ICBM: intercontinental ballistic missile; MM: Minuteman; SLBM: submarine-launched ballistic missile; SLCM: submarine-launched cruise missile. Projected nuclear stockpile, 2012 Warhead type Number W78 (MM III ICBM) 400 W87 (MM III ICBM) 545 W76 (Trident I/II SLBM) 1,840 W88 (Trident II SLBM) 400 B61-3 200 B61-4 200 B61-7 430 B61-10 180 B61-11 35 B83-0/-1 625 W80-1 (ACM/ALCM) 825 W80-0 (SLCM) 265 Total 5,945 ACM: advanced cruise missile; ALCM: air-launched cruise missile; GLCM: ground-launched cruise missile; ICBM: intercontinental ballistic missile; MM: Minuteman; SLBM: submarine-launched ballistic missile; SLCM: submarine-launched cruise missile. © 2004 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 18 The Bulletin: A not unreasonable failure? | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists [http://www.thebulletin.org/issues1/2004/so04/so04toc.html] 2004, Volume 60, No. 5, pp. 72-73 By Christopher Paine From day one, the conservative officials who were swept into power at the CIA by the "Reagan revolution" made clear their view that the Directorate of Intelligence's tradition of rigorously objective independent analysis was impeding a deeper understanding of the true nature of the Soviet threat to Western civilization. Determined to make intelligence more responsive to the political-military agenda of the administration, in 1982 Reagan's CIA Director, William Casey, abolished the directorate's existing organizational structure and promoted a relatively young and inexperienced executive assistant, Robert Gates, to fill out a new organizational chart. Gates soon seeded the analytical division with like-minded allies, who came to be known as "Gates Clones." One of them, John McLaughlin, rose to become deputy, and in July 2004, acting director. The practice of threat inflation became so endemic that the analytical division missed the gathering signs of the Soviet Union's economic, technological, and political decline, and failed to predict its impending disintegration. By the time Bill Clinton arrived in Washington in 1993, the new corporate culture of politicized, heavily massaged and bureaucratically coordinated analysis was firmly entrenched. A national security neophyte and self-conscious centrist like Clinton was neither prepared nor inclined to do anything about it. There are direct links between this earlier era and the current Iraq intelligence debacle. When the first Bush administration nominated Robert Gates for the directorship in 1991, for the first time ever a number of veteran CIA analysts publicly opposed the appointment, tagging Gates as one of those most responsible for destroying the ethic of rigorous, impartial analysis. Others questioned Gates's nomination on the basis of the misleading testimony he had given on the Iran-contra scandal and his alleged involvement in a covert scheme to funnel support to Saddam Hussein's regime. While Gates had solid Republican backing, the Democrats were in the majority and the first President Bush needed to secure the support of the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Sen. David Boren of Oklahoma, for the nomination. Working behind the scenes to limit the investigation of Gates was Boren's staff director, George Tenet, and with Boren's support, Gates was confirmed. While Gates's tenure as director was brief, Tenet proved his bona fides to the Bush national security team, and his favor would be remembered when Bush the Younger came to town nine years later and elected to keep Tenet on as CIA director. (Tenet reciprocated, and further politicized the agency, renaming the Langley headquarters the "George H. W. Bush Center for Intelligence.") The brief and unsuccessful tenures of Clinton's first two CIA directors, Jim Woolsey and John Deutch, assured that the managerial influence of the Gates Clones at CIA remained intact. The CIA Tenet took over in 1997 did not differ substantially from the politicized body the Republicans had bequeathed to Clinton in 1992. There was one crucial difference, however. The forces mobilized by the CIA's anti-Soviet Islamic jihad of 1980-1992 had spiraled out of control, gone global, and morphed into a virulent anti-American, anti-Western crusade. It was a massive textbook case of "blowback," and a lesson in the law of unintended consequences. Yet no senior CIA officials or their political bosses have ever taken responsibility for aiding and abetting the forces of Islamic terrorism in general and Al Qaeda in particular. Even after the threat was finally recognized in the mid-1990s, the intelligence community failed to turn off the Saudi and Pakistani export of Islamic militancy that had once been their joint project. Similarly, the agency now refuses to accept responsibility for the train of destruction that was set in motion by the faulty assessment of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Skipping lightly over the problem posed by the agency's erroneous and spuriously confident conclusions, Acting Director McLaughlin argued in several interviews that if members of Congress had only read the agency's entire October 2002 estimate on Iraq "cover-to-cover," they would have found in it "ample material for serious debate" about whether or not aluminum tubes ordered by Iraq could have been used as components of centrifuges to secretly enrich uranium for weapons. McLaughlin was clearly seeking to distract the media's attention from the main political consequence of the agency's estimates. While not providing a compelling rationale for prompt preemptive action, the CIA's erroneous assessments and fraudulent aura of certainty made it far more difficult for opposition legislators to brake the Bush administration's feckless stampede to invade Iraq. The path to war was already on a downhill slope. The phony intelligence estimate made it slippery, leaving few places for the opposition to gain traction. In response to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence's withering critique of the CIA's pre-war intelligence, McLaughlin told the press, "We get it." Yet he immediately followed with a self-serving caveat: "Although we think the [intelligence] judgments were not unreasonable when they were made nearly two years ago, we understand with all that we have learned since then that we could have done better." "Not unreasonable"? A major burden of the committee's analysis is precisely that many of the judgment's arrived at in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq were not reasonable inferences from the intelligence available at the time, and cannot be explained or excused on those grounds. McLaughlin sought to rationalize his apparent inability to read this way: "The very people who ask us to not be risk-averse are frequently the ones who criticize mistakes that are made in the course of our duties. If you stop and think about it, to take a risk by definition means there's a high probability of a mistake. We risk our lives around the world every day, our analysts here in Washington risk their reputations every day by taking positions on issues on which the evidence is thin and uncertain. So there's always a possibility of a mistake. That's built into our business." What a preposterous argument! It suggests the existence of a management culture in which senior CIA officials can no longer distinguish between the agency's operational and analytical roles. There is no compelling need for analysts to take "risks" with their analytical judgments, even less so when many thousands of lives hang in the balance and the underlying evidence is "thin and uncertain." In this circumstance, caution and circumspection are much to be preferred over pseudo-"gutsy" extrapolations that give rise to baseless fears, preemptive war, and a tragic, avoidable loss of human life. Who's asking for analytical heroism? Who demands that CIA analysts "risk their reputations" by climbing out on analytical limbs? The Select Committee traced many of the CIA's failings to a "broken corporate culture," which, it now appears, also includes lying to Congress. Tenet appears to have lied, not once, but twice to a congressional committee, telling Sen. Carl Levin on February 13, 2003 that the agency had briefed U.N. inspectors on all 105 "high value and moderate value" weapons sites in Iraq, a claim he reiterated in writing on March 6, 2003. In January 2004, after a year of resistance, the CIA finally declassified the number of sites that had been shared with the inspectors. In doing so, they quietly acknowledged that 21 of 105 sites had not been shared with the United Nations before the war. One can only speculate as to Tenet's motives for purveying misinformation at that particular time. But one can easily imagine that any admission from him that one-fifth of the high-and medium-priority sites had not been shared with U.N. inspectors would have reinforced demands that the inspectors be allowed to complete their work before launching the first undeclared preventive war in American history, with all the potential for death and destruction that such a step implies. Tenet's veracity has likewise been questioned in the context of his now infamous statement to the president that the intelligence case for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction was a "slam dunk." Asked to comment, McLaughlin told the press on July 4: "That's just a relationship we don't discuss for obvious reasons. It's a privileged relationship and our advice must remain confidential." As I write, more than 1,000 coalition personnel, including more than 900 U.S. soldiers, and some 12,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Iraq's new interim prime minister is a former secret policeman-for-Saddam-turned-CIA-informer with a penchant for personally carrying out summary executions, and the CIA stands accused of torturing and even murdering terrorist suspects during interrogations. In Langley, it's all just part of the "privileged relationship." McLaughlin is right about one thing. When legislators and commentators try to lay all the bodies on the CIA's doorstep, he points a finger at Capitol Hill and says, in effect, one measly erroneous document could not by itself have pushed the country into war. And he has a point. Equally culpable are the legislators who said they opposed giving Bush a blank check for war, but when faced with a choice between risking their seats in Congress in the mid-term election, or risking the lives of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, they chose the latter, voting for a joint resolution giving the president unfettered discretion to begin the country's first preventive war on a date of his own choosing. It was a simple resolution. There was no ambiguity about what it said, or what it meant. Now that this fraudulent imperial adventure has gone sour, many of these worthies are pointing their fingers at the White House and saying, "George did it." Not so. They let George do it. Christopher Paine (chrispaine@earthlink.net) is a senior analyst in the Natural Resources Defense Council's nuclear program. © 2004 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 19 The Bulletin: Intelligence: No easy fix | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists [http://www.thebulletin.org/issues1/2004/so04/so04toc.html] 2004, Volume 60, No. 5, pp. 17-19 OPINION By John Prados A struggle by entrenched parties is likely to torpedo genuine intelligence community reform; the next CIA will not differ much from the old one. As you read this, the U.S. media is most likely reporting on a stormy debate about the very structure of the U.S. intelligence community. Release of the 9/11 report by the National Commission to Study the Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States will help to crystallize the debate already set off by the appearance of the Iraq intelligence report of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), driving citizen fury at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and its brethren. The dust barely having settled on the resignation of CIA Director George J. Tenet, the Bush administration has already seized on the debate to divert attention from its own actions and to confine the controversy to the esoteric and technical issues of intelligence community structure. The Senate intelligence committee rendering shows a highly selective intelligence process in which an "assumptions train" drove the most pessimistic judgments about the possible existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. On issue after issue, assumptions substituted for paltry evidence in drawing the most dire conclusions. The new acting director of the CIA, John E. McLaughlin, defended his agency at a July 12 press conference, arguing that "if it was an assumption train, we were not the engine. I'm not even sure we were the coal car." In a corollary reprised with glee by President George W. Bush, McLaughlin went on to say, "People all around the world made the assumption that this country [Iraq] had weapons," and that the assumptions were long-standing and "held almost universally." Of course, that is not exactly the truth. In fact, the universe of believers boils down to intelligence services that relied on raw data supplied by the United States, which has been brought out by investigations of pre-war intelligence conducted in both Britain and Australia. Bush has disingenuously added the United Nations itself to that universe, even though the U.N. weapons inspectors in several public reports explicitly declared they had found no evidence for the U.S. claims about Iraq. Even the public doubted the CIA version of reality, as readers of the Bulletin should be aware. The lack of substance to the U.S. claims was noted before the war, and on all the very issues that lay at the heart of the U.S. intelligence case for action. The 9/11 Commission final report only adds to the building dissatisfaction with U.S. intelligence. Missed signals before the terrorist attacks, poor cooperation among agencies, a lack of follow-up on information that was in the system, and other factors all contributed to the 9/11 failure. Demands for reform are already out there and will intensify. Yet even before the debate is done it is a fair bet that the next CIA will not differ much from the old one. In the past, with great legerdemain, the CIA has often succeeded in converting major challenges into fresh bids for more resources. This is likely to happen again. The groundwork is already in place for that play. George Tenet, his director for operations, the chief of the agency's Counterterrorism Center, all made the argument before the 9/11 Commission that the CIA found it impossible to plan for steady growth--or to conduct a coherent "war" against the Al Qaeda terrorist group--due to uncertain budget requests during the 1990s. The new debate will include a strong demand for increasing intelligence spending over the long term and at some defined pace. The net result will be a CIA juggernaut stronger than before. It is true that in the immediate aftermath of the Cold War there was great uncertainty about the direction of U.S. intelligence. The roles and missions of intelligence seemed to blur after the demise of the Soviet Union. As far as the business of spying and clandestine operations is concerned, views in the early 1990s ranged from demands to abolish the CIA to recommendations for abolition of the Directorate of Operations (the main espionage and covert operations entity) at the agency, to notions of accomplishing a divorce another way, by moving the business of intelligence analysis to a new organization or even directly into the White House as some form of staff agency serving the National Security Council. Advocates of some of the more extreme measures included certain of the CIA's own officers. The Directorate of Operations (DO) sustained budget and staffing cuts into the mid-1990s, though they were not as severe as the cuts elsewhere at the agency. But a presidential commission at that time recommended against all of the proposals and no changes were made. Starting in the mid-1990s the debate shifted. Now the accusation was that the CIA was somehow "risk averse"--a charge leveled against George Tenet himself by some insiders when he came up for confirmation as CIA director--but that argument was really about unleashing the spooks. The question of missions withered away after the embassy bombings in Africa in August 1998. Before that year was out, Tenet had issued a directive effectively declaring war on terror and spoken out publicly in favor of building up the clandestine service. By 1999, budgets passed by Congress already acknowledged the purpose of expanding the operations directorate. Tenet would take considerable flak in 2003-2004 for testifying to the Senate intelligence committee and the 9/11 Commission that it would take five years to build up the clandestine service, but he really meant the process of putting a cadre of experienced mid-career officers into the field, not simply recruiting new people. Also, the process had already begun--in 2004 CIA training schools graduated the largest class of operations officers in the agency's history. Given the time required to process recruits, to complete their background investigations, and the length of the training programs themselves, this move had to have been under way before September 11. In any case, 9/11 settled for the present any question of the utility of the clandestine services. The new debate will not be about them. Intelligence analysis failures figured in both the tragic 9/11 attacks and the prelude to the Iraq war. Despite that fact, there is no talk of abolishing the Directorate of Intelligence (DI), the CIA's key analytical unit. The more typical complaint is that there are not enough analysts to interpret all the information being pulled down by the intelligence community's mass of satellites, technical collection mechanisms, and spies. Reforms that are on the table involve changes in the way information is handled and sourced, making analysts more aware of the origins of intelligence they interpret. These expectations for change were enunciated explicitly to DI officers at a February 2004 briefing by the current deputy director for intelligence, Jami Miscik. Actually, the DI could do more about reforming analysis. In particular the CIA could step back from its creeping predilection for hypothetical analysis and similar inductive methods that work backward from conclusions, substituting wishful thinking for deductive reasoning. As was mercilessly driven home in the SSCI report on Iraq, the role of assumptions in intelligence analysis must be reexamined in the wake of that fiasco. The high ratio of managers to line analysts, which some argue makes the CIA more vulnerable to political pressures, also deserves attention. But there can be little question that the next CIA will feature a larger analytical component, possibly one with closer integration of the DI with the DO. The recent trend has been to combine personnel from both sides of the agency in fusion centers that focus on issues, such as the Counterterrorism Center, the Counternarcotics Center, and others. The use of this approach can be expected to increase. The top level is where the main changes will take place. Proposals for a "director of national intelligence" have been floating around for some time. The 9/11 commission recommended the idea of an intelligence czar in its final report, and the Senate committee may do the same (the SSCI's first-stage report contains substantive conclusions but no recommendations). The White House panel under Gen. Brent Scowcroft, which carried out the Bush administration's initial review of intelligence organization in 2001, reportedly recommended the establishment of this post. The director of national intelligence would be a cabinet-level official responsible for the entire intelligence community. According to this concept, a national director would have complete budget authority over all national intelligence agencies, hire and fire officials at will, and set collection and production goals. How military and Energy and State Department staffs in this area would be affected is unclear. It is important to understand that from the beginning the existing director of central intelligence (DCI) position has had the same formal responsibility for the community as a whole. But DCIs have lacked the authority to go with the role. Tenet and his predecessors set goals under what is called the National Foreign Intelligence Program, and they approved long-term budget plans. But the defense secretary actually programs, budgets, and spends the money, which amounts to more than 85 percent of the annual intelligence budget, and the people in most of the agencies work for him. Agencies operating under the defense secretary include the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Reconnaissance Office, and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. Together they dwarf the CIA in size and overshadow it even more in budget. Removing these agencies from the Pentagon would, in an instant, take away roughly a tenth of the defense secretary's budget. If related units like the electronic intercept components of each of the armed services, the Defense Human Intelligence Service, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and the military intelligence staffs were included, the budget slice would be even bigger and the percent of personnel loss to the Pentagon would come close to its loss in budget. Also at stake would be technology development programs for some of the most sophisticated space systems, which the present defense secretary is particularly enamored of. The Pentagon can be expected to fight these changes. There are a host of unexamined issues related to the larger moves. Could the intelligence czar promote, fire, or hire military personnel? If so, why would a defense secretary assign people to the director of national intelligence's (DNI) agencies? But if not, what would a DNI's power amount to? Would civilians at the national agencies work for the DNI, and would these agencies then convert to an all-or mostly civilian cadre? Could the DNI cancel air force technology programs? What about Energy's intelligence initiatives? Or NSA computer upgrades? Would the DNI's budget authority mean he/she would have complete authority to set budget requests, with the defense secretary (and others) merely rubberstamping them, or would the role be limited to stapling together Pentagon submissions and forwarding them to Congress? If the latter, what would that authority amount to? And would the program justification process exist within the DNI's office, or would the Pentagon (and other) requesters present proposals that the DNI would then reject or approve? Many more questions of this sort lurk in the wings. A different set of arguments applies from the CIA side. Agency officers object that taking the CIA away from the director would be like leaving a general with no troops. Absent any direct means for action, the DNI would be dependent on a set of agencies with their own bureaucracies, roles, and missions. If a director had the kind of real control implied by the term "intelligence czar," and could fire at will those who defy him, this objection would lose much of its strength. Former directors of central intelligence are divided on the notion of an intelligence czar. All agree that leadership of a "community" is among their key tasks. George Tenet and Stansfield Turner, who led the CIA under President Jimmy Carter, believe they did pretty well on the community side, but Tenet opposes proposals for a director of national intelligence while Admiral Turner has believed in them since his own time at the helm. Robert Gates, CIA director during the presidency of George Bush's father, sides with Tenet, arguing the DCI already has the mission, and all that is needed is to perfect its official powers. William Webster, the first Bush's other DCI, would not mind the increased power of a czar but does not want the CIA taken away from any DNI. John McLaughlin opposes creation of the position of DNI. A number of other past CIA directors, including James R. Schlesinger, John Deutch, and R. James Woolsey, all favor the establishment of the post of intelligence czar. Recent press reporting portrays George Bush as being on both sides of the issue. Given the wide variations in opinion and the fact that such a change would require legislation, the likelihood is that demands for reform will lead to yet another study group, not to actual change. Kicking the can down the road is preferable, at least for this president, to doing the hard work of leading the nation into an era of intelligence reform. There may be a next CIA, but its advent is still some ways away. John Prados, a senior analyst with the National Security Archive in Washington, D.C., is the author most recently of Hoodwinked: The Documents That Reveal How Bush Sold Us a War (2004). © 2004 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 20 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Said to Sell Smart Bombs to Israel From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday September 22, 2004 1:01 AM By LAURIE COPANS Associated Press Writer JERUSALEM (AP) - The United States will sell Israel nearly 5,000 smart bombs in one of the largest weapons deals between the allies in years, Israeli military officials said Tuesday. The deal will expand Israel's existing supply of the weapons, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Israel's announcement came after the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress of a possible military sale to Israel worth as much as $319 million. The agency said in a June 1 press release that the sale ``will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country that has been and continues to be an important force for political stability and economic progress in the Middle East.'' The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported on Tuesday that funding for the sale will come from U.S. military aid to Israel. Disclosure of the deal comes amid escalating Israeli worries over Iran's nuclear development program. Israel and a number of Western countries fear that Iran is trying to produce nuclear weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is for generating electricity. Defying a key demand set by 35 nations, Iran announced Tuesday that it has started converting raw uranium into the gas needed for enrichment, a process that can be used to make nuclear weapons. The Israeli military officials would not say whether the bombs might be intended for use against Iran. But they ruled out the possibility that they could be used against Palestinian targets. Israel drew heavy criticism after a one-ton smart bomb meant for a senior Palestinian militant also killed 15 civilians in an attack in the Gaza Strip in July 2002. The bombs Israel is acquiring include airborne versions, guidance units, training bombs and detonators. They are guided by an existing Israeli satellite used by the military. As part of the deal, Israel will receive 500 one-ton bombs that can destroy two-yard concrete walls, 2,500 one-ton bombs, 1,000 half-ton bombs and 500 quarter-ton bombs, the military officials said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004 ***************************************************************** 21 Greenpeace International: Nukes On Vacation Nuclear Shipment Crosses Atlantic Tue 21 September 2004 UNITED STATES/Charleston Thanks to the Bush Administration's disregard for global concerns about nuclear proliferation, two ships carrying some 150kg of weapons-grade plutonium are en route from Charleston, South Carolina, to Cherbourg in France. The two lightly armed UK-flagged commercial nuclear ships, the Pacific Teal and the Pacific Pintail, left Charleston under a wave of protest from both local groups and our activists. The US lacks a suitable nuclear facility for converting this potential weapons material into experimental plutonium fuel (MOX) - so it the Bush Administration is allowing it to be shipped around the world. The shipment began its journey at the US Department of Energy's Los Alamos nuclear weapons facility in New Mexico, and covered almost 2,500km before arriving in Charleston. Now that the ships have left North Carolina, they will pass close to the Irish coast on its way to Cherbourg. Then the shipment will cover a further 1200km of roads before arriving at a closed plutonium fuel fabrication facility in Cadarache, in the south of France. Earlier this month, two workers were contaminated during a nuclear accident involving plutonium at the Cadarache facility, which is operated by the state-owned nuclear company Areva/Cogema. As for the Los Alamos National Laboratory - operations there were recently suspended after classified data 'went missing'. The total journey for the plutonium shipment? A ridiculous 6589km! In both the US and France, local groups have mounted strong opposition to shipments, including the Nuclear-Free Atlantic Flotilla and Citizens Against Plutonium. "This shipment sends the strongest signal that the US holds little regard for global efforts to keep nuclear weapons materials out of commerce," said Tom Clements of Greenpeace International. "It is the height of arrogance to conduct a shipment like this while demanding other nations refrain from proliferating nuclear weapons materials and technologies." In Charleston, Citizens Against Plutonium (CAP) was formed in response to the nuclear shipment, and to the refusal of the US Department of Energy to prepare an Environmental Impact Assessment on it. "How sensible is it to sail a ship carrying plutonium round the world at a time when world security is volatile? Whenever such a deadly substance is moved, there will be a risk of accidents or terrorist attacks. In the event of an incident, plutonium could be dispersed into the ocean, poisoning people and the marine environment on which we depend," said local Charleston resident Merrill Chapman of Citizens Against Plutonium. The US Department of Homeland Security wrote to Representative Ed Markey on September 8, telling him that "Coast Guard cutters, boats, aircraft and other local law enforcement and Navy assets" would be involved securing the passage of the ship. While the same letter admitted that no "formal threat assessment" had been prepared on the shipment, it seems that the Coast Guard had prepared "a field intelligence report" on environmentalists. "This transport is part of a misguided plan to put weapons plutonium into commercial use by converting it into MOX fuel for use in nuclear reactors. This is an expensive and dangerous way to dispose of plutonium. All existing plutonium should be secured and mixed with nuclear waste and vitrified in robust containers, " concluded Clements. Read the Letter to Rep. Markey [http://www.house.gov/markey/Issues/iss_homeland_resp040908.pdf] (pdf) Visit the Stop Plutonium website Read about the Nuclear-Free Flotilla Visit the Citizens Against Plutonium (CAP) in South Carolina [Despite growing public and political concern about nuclear proliferation, a lightly armed UK-flagged commercial nuclear ship left Charleston, South Carolina carrying 150kg of weapons-grade plutonium for transport to France.] Despite growing public and political concern about nuclear proliferation, a lightly armed UK-flagged commercial nuclear ship left Charleston, South Carolina carrying 150kg of weapons-grade plutonium for transport to France. Join discussions in the Action Centre [http://act.greenpeace.org] [http://archive.greenpeace.org/feeds/] ***************************************************************** 22 Scotsman.com: UK Contributes £1.1 Million to Iaea Nuclear Safeguards Activities Tue 21 Sep 2004 DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY News Release (P/2004/350) issued by the Government News Network on 21 September 2004 The UK Government today announced it is providing further backing for international efforts to combat the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons with a £1.1 million donation to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The funding will be used to help re-engineer a comprehensive computer-based management support system, known as the IAEA Safeguards Information System (ISIS), which will significantly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the IAEA’s safeguards activities. DTI Minister Nigel Griffiths said: “Countering the proliferation of nuclear weapons is a key priority for the Government and international community. The IAEA has a central role in this area, in particular through continued effective and efficient safeguards work. This is why the ISIS re-engineering project is so important. “Earlier this year the Foreign Secretary made a statement to Parliament, where he stressed the importance of providing adequate financial support for the IAEA’s safeguards activities. Today’s announcement delivers on this commitment“. “I very much hope that this donation will encourage other countries to come forward with funding to support the Agency’s work in this area.†Notes For Editors 1. Rob Wright, the UK Governor to the IAEA, will make a formal announcement of this donation on 21 September at the IAEA’s 2004 General Conference. 2. Nuclear safeguards are measures to verify that states comply with their international (ie Treaty) obligations not to use nuclear material for explosives purposes. Global recognition of the need for such verification is reflected in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). All non-nuclear weapon states (NNWS) signatories of the NPT are required to agree a safeguards agreement with the IAEA that applies safeguards to all of their nuclear material. The UK, in common with other Nuclear Weapons States, has a Voluntary Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA. The UK has also adopted an Additional Protocol to its IAEA Safeguards agreement, which entered into force on 30 April 2004. The Additional Protocol is aimed at helping to improve the IAEA safeguards system by strengthening the Agency’s ability to detect undeclared nuclear material and activities in NNWS. The UK protocol provides (among other things) for the provision of information on nuclear fuel cycle-related activities that are conducted in co-operation with, or are otherwise relevant to, a NNWS. Although the UK Additional Protocol only entered into force this year, the UK had already provided the IAEA with voluntary declarations of the type of information required by the protocol since 1999. 3. The IAEA’s safeguards activities require special purpose software and hardware to receive, store, process and analyse, in an accurate, secure and timely manner, data received from states or gathered by its safeguards staff. The use, operation and maintenance of large parts of the current ISIS software infrastructure is becoming increasingly expensive, because the system is based on outdated information technology infrastructure from the late 1970s. Failure to replace the hardware and software now would carry high risks, with the potential for even higher costs to be incurred later. 4. The IAEA is therefore re-engineering ISIS to ensure that its safeguards activities are carried out in the most effective and efficient manner, through the introduction of new hardware and newly developed core applications. The new system will allow inspectors (and other authorised staff) immediate on-line access to all safeguards information in a secure manner. The new system will be flexible and adaptable to accommodate future changes to safeguards processes. 5. The IAEA does not have the funds necessary to complete the ISIS re-engineering project, and has requested financial support from its Member States. To date, only the UK and the US has provided funding for the project. The UK’s contribution will enable the IAEA to engage contractors for the project. 6. Further information about the DTI’s work to help prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction can be found at www.dti.gov.uk/non-proliferation. Further information on the ISIS project can be found at www.iaea.org Department of Trade and Industry 7th Floor 1 Victoria Street London SW1H 0ET Press Enquiries +44 (0)20 7215 5952 (Out of Hours) +44 (0)20 7215 3234/3505 Public Enquiries +44 (0)20 7215 5000 Textphone +44 (0)20 7215 6740 (for those with hearing impairment) Press Office Fax +44 (0)20 7222 4382 www.dti.gov.uk ***************************************************************** 23 Hampton Union Local: NRC to meet with power plant officials Tuesday, September 21, 2004 By Susan Morse smorse@seacoastonline.com SEABROOK - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet with representatives of FPL Seabrook Station on Thursday to determine whether the nuclear power plant was in violation when it removed a drainage system called "scuppers" from its safety report. The public meeting will be held at 9 a.m. in the NRC’s Region I office in King of Prussia, Pa. The NRC will make no determination at this meeting. Whether the issue is one of safety will brought up at the conference, said NRC Senior Resident Inspector Glenn Dentel. "That’s part of what the conference is about, to fully understand the issue, to give the plant an opportunity to say how significant it is," Dentel said. "It was significant enough we decided to raise the issue." "This is not a safety issue, this has to do with procedure and process," said Al Griffith, a spokesman for the power plant. The concern is for internal flooding on the circulating water system in the turbine building, Dentel said. The power plant’s circulating water system draws water from the ocean, circulates it to cool various plant components and then discharges it. This system has the potential to flood the turbine building if one of its lines ruptures and its pumps are not halted, according to a statement released by the NRC. A safety evaluation, issued when the plant was licensed in 1990, said that if the pumps continued to operate, scuppers, or drains and doors that were to be installed in the turbine building, would cause the water to flow out and prevent flooding. The scuppers were not installed, and for good reason, according to Griffith. "This is New England," he said, "You just can’t have openings like that to the outside. We have ways of draining water from the turbine building." To control flooding, Seabrook Station has huge, rollup doors that can open, much like a garage door, said Griffith. Seabrook Station removed scuppers from its Final Safety Analysis Report, under NRC regulations that nuclear power plant operators may make changes to their facilities without prior NRC approval if certain requirements are met. "We did not request prior approval from the NRC to modify plant documents to change the scuppers," Griffith said. The NRC identified the lack of scuppers back in 1997, said Dentel. "We had looked at their initial actions back then," he said. Seven years later, during a June 2004 inspection, the NRC determined Seabrook Station should have come to the NRC for approval first before removing scuppers from its safety report. "The inspection process didn’t identify it until past June," Dentel said. Seabrook Station will be required to present additional information at the conference. NRC staff will take information provided under consideration and render a decision in the near future. Seacoast Online is owned and operated by Seacoast Newspapers. Copyright © 2004 Seacoast Online. All rights reserved. Please ***************************************************************** 24 JOURNAL NEWS: Kelly calls for wiring inspection at Indian Point 2 By ROGER WITHERSPOON THE JOURNAL NEWS (Original publication: September 21, 2004) U.S. Rep. Sue Kelly has asked federal regulators for a visual inspection of the hundreds of miles of wiring at Indian Point 2 to ensure they are properly installed and will not fail following an accident or attack. Kelly, R-Katonah, wants the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to fully examine the plant's cable system rather than rely on a recent sample inspection of about 1percent of the thousands of wiring circuits. "I am very disappointed that, despite repeated requests for a complete walk-down of the plant's cable and raceway system, that this proposal has not yet been supported by the NRC," Kelly wrote in a letter to NRC Chairman Nils Diaz. The cable and raceway are a conduit system. The letter, dated Sept. 17, was released by Kelly yesterday. NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the agency would consider Kelly's request. But he added that regulators "have confidence that what has been done so far has demonstrated the plant can safely operate." Sheehan acknowledged violations of wiring rules have been found at the plant, but he said "all of the concerns identified were of very low safety significance and would not defeat a safety system function." Sheehan said Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns Indian Point 2 and 3 in Buchanan, was spending $42 million on a multi-year project to examine all wiring at Indian Point 2, and any serious problems should be uncovered during that process. A similar project was conducted at Indian Point 3 in the 1980s when the plant was owned by the New York Power Authority. Entergy officials declined to comment on the issue yesterday. The issue of cable integrity has been a critical one for the NRC since a 1975 fire in a room at the Browns Ferry nuclear plant in Tennessee disabled all of the reactor's main and backup safety systems. Since then, the NRC has had a strict cable separation rule requiring individual conduits, or raceways, for each circuit. David Lochbaum, a nuclear safety expert with the Union of Concerned Scientists and a former consultant on the wiring issue at Indian Point 3, said Indian Point 2 shouldn't be allowed to operate with a problem that has existed for more than a decade. "What troubles me is that unless you have some assurance that the few circuits you looked at were the worst, then you really can't say that there are no other problems out there," he said. The NRC's sample inspection at Indian Point 2 was prompted by a formal complaint filed in March by William Lemanski, Entergy's former engineering manager. He claimed that thousands of circuits at Indian Point 2 were in violation of the cable separation rule and that the plant's electronic tracking system was not reliable. Lemanski, now a city councilman and police commissioner in Tuxedo, N.Y., said yesterday that the NRC's sample examination was not sufficient enough to detect problems. "I think they gave Entergy a free pass concerning the magnitude of the issues," Lemanski said. "I am not at all satisfied with the results." Send e-mail to Roger Witherspoon [rwithers@thejournalnews.com] Copyright 2004 The Journal News, a Gannett Co [http://www.gannett.com/] . Inc. newspaper serving Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. ***************************************************************** 25 Xinhuanet: Number of global nuclear power units reaches 439 www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2004-09-22 02:42:18 VIENNA, Sept. 21 (Xinhuanet) -- The total nuclear power units in the world had reached 439 by the end of 2003, according to a press release issued by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Tuesday. "This year marks 50th anniversary of civilian nuclear power. With 439 power reactors worldwide, nuclear energy continues to account for about 16 percent of the world's electricity production, keeping pace with the steady growth in the global electricity markets," the press released said. Their global energy availability factor has risen steadily from 74.2 percent in 1991 to about 84 percent in 2003. This year, China, Japan, Russia and Ukraine each added one new nuclear power plant to the grid, and Canada restarted a third unit that had been shut down -- while in Britain, four small (50 megawatt) units were retired. The current expansion and growth prospects are centered in Asia, said the press release. Of the 26 units now under construction, 15 are located in India, Japan, South Korea, China. Seven units are under construction in Romania, Russia, Slovakia and Ukraine. And a Finnish utility has signed a contract for a new reactor and begun site preparation. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 26 NRC: NRC, Exelon to Discuss Apparent Violation at Oyster Creek Plant News Release - Region I - 2004-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-04-044 September 20, 2004 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: [opa1@nrc.gov] Exelon Generation Company, LLC, will have an opportunity on Sept. 27 to discuss with Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff an inspection finding preliminarily classified as greater than green and a related apparent violation of NRC requirements at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant. The finding does not present an immediate safety concern. The regulatory conference is scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. in the Public Meeting Room at the NRC Region I Office, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. It will be open to the public for observation, and there will be an opportunity for interested members of the public to ask questions of NRC officials before the meeting adjourns. The agency uses a color-coded system to assess the significance of inspection findings, with green considered an issue of very low safety significance, then progressing to white, yellow or red, as safety significance increases. The finding to be discussed on Sept. 27 involves workers not following procedures during maintenance on one of two emergency diesel generators at the plant, which is located in Lacey Township, N.J., and operated by AmerGen, an Exelon subsidiary. (Nuclear power plants not only send power out onto the electric grid, they also take some back to meet their own operational and safety needs. If off-site power is interrupted, emergency diesel generators can be used to power key safety systems.) On May 17, plant operators were performing a routine test on the #1 generator and noted, after the tests successful completion, that the generators cooling fan drive shaft was not properly secured. A review found that recent maintenance on the fan drive shaft had left some holddown bolts loose, raising a question of how long the generator would be able to operate if placed into service. (Other plant equipment was available to provide the necessary margin for safe plant operation.) At the regulatory conference, Exelon will be able to present additional information concerning the ability of the generator to perform its safety function despite the maintenance error. The company will also be able to discuss the safety significance of this condition. No decision will be made at the conference. Rather, NRC staff will take information provided under consideration and render a decision in the near future regarding its significance determination and any related enforcement action. Last revised Monday, September 20, 2004 ***************************************************************** 27 TheStar.com: Nuclear monster on our doorstep Tue. Sep. 21, 2004. | Updated at 07:36 AM TONY O'DONOHUE The Ontario government's decision to invest at least another $1 billion to restart a second ailing nuclear reactor unit at Pickering flies in the face of the reality that, all over the world, the nuclear option is heading for the junk heap. There are 442 nuclear plants in operation on the planet  a far cry from the 2,000 projected in the 1960s. Countries such as Germany, Belgium and Sweden have decided to get out of the business completely. Nearly a quarter of the world's reactors  104 in all  are in the U.S., which has shut down another 19. Only four of the 19 have completed decommissioning and the remaining 15 are in various stages of decommission, which actually means taking the reactor apart piece by piece, and putting all the radioactive components out of harm's way. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's rules make reactor retirement mandatory at age 40, unless an extension is granted. Pickering is nearing that stage. At about 200,000 hours, reactors begin to show middle-age fatigue. From that point on, wear and tear begins to have its impact. As a reactor begins the final phase of its life, management must begin making plans for full decommissioning, as repairs become more expensive and more dangerous. So far, there has been very little evidence of clear thinking about decommissioning in Ontario. And since all existing nuclear reactors are "first generation"designs, it is only through experience that engineers understand the full dimensions of operating them. Aging is further complicated by the risks of deadly radiation contamination and the resulting problems of maintenance and repairs under such dangerous conditions. There is no "off the shelf" repair manual on how to repair a reactor. It costs about as much to decommission a reactor as it costs to build one. And the NRC rules require that a reactor be decommissioned within 60 years of its closure. Both the U.S. and Canada have adopted the same approach, and spent fuel is piling up in water-filled tanks in nuclear plants around North America. And as the tanks become filled, dry storage is used after 10 years of wet storage. At every stage of the process, spent radioactive fuel poses a terrorist risk. U.S. authorities have focused on a burial chamber for 70,000 tons of spent fuel under the Yucca Mountains, 145 kilometres northwest of Las Vegas in Nevada. Canada is examining burial for 20,000 tons of spent fuel under the Canadian Shield in an area of southeast Manitoba and northeast Ontario. Both countries face strong local opposition to these burial sites, where the nuclear fuel will remain radioactive for many thousand years. In 2003 Ontario Power Generation (OPG) began to put aside funds in special segregated accounts for the disposal and management of spent fuel and for the decommissioning of nuclear reactors  "based on internally prepared reference plans, which are prepared with the assistance of external consultants and are based on external practices and benchmarks." Calculations for these contributions have been made without public involvement. That erodes the credibility of those who manage the province's nuclear programs. The public have a very definite role and should participate. There needs to be a more transparent process as OPG and its predecessor, Ontario Hydro, have a horrible track record of underestimating nuclear reactor costs  to the tune of about $38 billion in public debt the taxpayer is already paying. Even the costs of building the reactors were wildly off target  totalling $24.1 billion. Pickering and Bruce cost about $950,000 per megawatt while Darlington cost over $4.1 million per megawatt . And the cost of reactor repairs is a financial nightmare. The billing system must act as an honest information conduit, listing the amount collected for spent fuel and reactor decommissioning and not merely looking for a public hand-out. Those responsible for all decisions on spent fuel and decommissioning must take the public into their confidence to ensure that future generations are not unduly burdened with our miscalculations. It is not good stewardship to bequeath to future generations mounds of poisoned waste and insufficient funds to "babysit" them. It is generally believed that the final cost of de-commissioning all of OPGs reactors will be about $13-$15 billion  or about $1 million per megawatt . That does not include the cost of a perpetual care program. No one really knows what will happen at Pickering in the long term. There is confusion at the political level as the system staggers through a minefield of energy problems. But, we should focus on decommissioning Pickering and the nuclear "clunkers" we have built. Once that decision has been made the future will look a little brighter. At the very least, the 5 million people in Toronto region have a responsibility to take the lead in advocating the dismantling of this deadly menace. If full decommissioning is not planned for and executed, we could have this monster sitting on our doorstep  a pile of decaying radioactive material, for 60,000 years, which is roughly the lifespan of humans on the planet. Tony O'Donohue is a consulting engineer and president of Environmental Probe Ltd., based in Toronto. Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Distribution, transmission or republication of any material from [http://www.thestar.com] is strictly prohibited without the prior written permission of Toronto Star ***************************************************************** 28 Hudson Valley News: Kelly repeats call for Indian Point cable probe Tuesday, September 21, 2004 Copyright © 2004 Mid-Hudson News Network, a division of Statewide News Network, Inc. Congresswoman Sue Kelly continues to pressure the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to fully investigate possible electrical cable separation problems at Indian Point 2 as today she reiterated her call to conduct a complete walk-down of the plant's cable and raceway system. "We must determine that there are absolutely no weaknesses or even potential weaknesses in plant operations, and the most appropriate way to ensure that is to conduct a complete walk-down to substantiate that the plant is entirely safe," Kelly said. On Sept. 17, Kelly wrote the latest in a series of letters she has sent to NRC Chairman Nils Diaz expressing her dismay with the NRC's handling of safety issues regarding the IP 2 cable and raceway system after concerns were raised publicly by former Entergy employee William Lemanski earlier this year. Kelly also has met with Diaz to make the case for a plant walk-down. An August 20 inspection report documents the findings from the NRC's inquiry into Lemanski's concerns. NRC inspectors identified three violations of federal regulations, but characterized each of them as "Green" in the reactor oversight process. Lemanski remains unsatisfied with the level of scrutiny given to his concerns and David Lochbaum, nuclear safety engineer with the Union of Concerned Scientists; last week contacted the NRC to further underscore Lemanski's case. Kelly believes the walk-down has become necessary to ensure the safety of local residents. "At a time when plant security and safety is of paramount concern to communities surrounding the Indian Point Energy Center, it is critically important that the NRC do everything it can to ensure the safe operation of this facility," Kelly wrote to Diaz. "Again, I urge your support for an immediate and thorough inspection of the plant's cable and raceway system." HEAR today's news on [http://www.midhudsonradio.com] , the Hudson Valley's only Internet radio news report. ***************************************************************** 29 NRC: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); Notice of FR Doc 04-21149 [Federal Register: September 21, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 182)] [Notices] [Page 56462-56464] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21se04-83] Acceptance for Docketing of the Application and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing Regarding Renewal of the National Bureau of Standards Reactor (The NBSR) Facility Operating License No. TR-5 for an Additional 20-Year Period The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is considering an application for the renewal of Operating License No. TR- 5, which authorizes the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), to operate the National Bureau of Standards Reactor (NBSR) at 20 megawatts thermal power for an additional 20-year period beyond the period specified in the current operating license. The current operating license for the NBSR (TR-5) expired on May 16, 2004. On April 9, 2004, the Commission's staff received applications from NIST filed pursuant to 10 CFR 50.51(a), to renew the Operating License No. TR-5 for the NBSR. A Notice of Receipt and Availability of the license renewal application, ``National lnstitute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Notice of Receipt and Availability of Application for Renewal of the National lnstitute of Standards and Technology Reactor (the NBSR) Facility Operating License No. TR-5 for an Additional 20- year Period,'' was published in the Federal Register on May 12, 2004 (69 FR 26414). Because the license renewal application was timely filed under 10 CFR 2.109, the license will not be deemed to have expired until the license renewal application has been finally determined. The Commission's staff has determined that NIST has submitted sufficient information in accordance with 10 CFR 50.33 and 50.34 that is acceptable for docketing. The current Docket No. 50-184 for Operating License No. TR-5, will be retained. The docketing of the renewal application does not preclude requesting additional information as the review proceeds, nor does it predict whether the Commission will grant or deny the application. Before issuance of the requested renewed license, the NRC will have made the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. Additionally, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.20(b)(2), the NRC will prepare an environmental [[Page 56463]] impact statement that contains a statement of the license renewal purpose and a description of the environment that is affected. Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.26, and as part of the environmental scoping process, the staff intends to hold a public scoping meeting. Detailed information regarding this meeting will be included in a future Federal Register notice. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this Federal Register Notice, the applicant may file a request for a hearing, and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene with respect to the renewal of the licensee. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852 and is accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] . Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC's PDR reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, or by e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . If a request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene is filed within the 60-day period, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. In the event that no request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed within the 60-day period, the NRC may, upon completion of its evaluations and upon making the findings required under 10 CFR parts 50 and 51, renew the license without further notice. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition must specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors: (1) The nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Atomic Energy Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the requestor/petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases of each contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or the expert opinion that supports the contention on which the requestor/ petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the requestor/petitioner is aware and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The requestor/petitioner must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact.\1\ Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the action under consideration. The contention must be one that, if proven, would entitle the requestor/ petitioner to relief. A requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \1\ To the extent that the applications contain attachments and supporting documents that are not publically available because they are asserted to contain safeguards or proprietary information, petitioners desiring access to this information should contact the applicant or applicant's counsel and discuss the need for a protective order. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- Each contention shall be given a separate numeric or alpha designation within one of the following groups: 1. Technical--primarily concerns/issues relating to technical and/ or health and safety matters discussed or referenced in the applicant's safety analysis for the NBSR license renewal application. 2. Environmental--primarily concerns issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the Environmental Report for the license renewal application. 3. Miscellaneous--does not fall into one of the categories outlined above. As specified in 10 CFR 2.309, if two or more requestors/petitioners seek to co-sponsor a contention, the requestors/petitioners shall jointly designate a representative who shall have the authority to act for the requestors/petitioners with respect to that contention. If a requestor/petitioner seeks to adopt the contention of another sponsoring requestor/petitioner, the requestor/petitioner who seeks to adopt the contention must either agree that the sponsoring requestor/ petitioner shall act as the representative with respect to that contention, or jointly designate with the sponsoring requestor/ petitioner a representative who shall have the authority to act for the requestors/petitioners with respect to that contention. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing, including the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV [HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV] ; or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at 301- 415-1101, verification number is 301-415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene must also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov [OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov] . A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the licensee. The licensee's contact for this is Dr. Seymour H. Weiss, Chief, Reactor Operations and Engineering, Center for Neutron Research, National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. [[Page 56464]] Department of Commerce, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). Detailed guidance which the NRC uses to review applications for the renewal of non-power reactor licenses can be found in the document NUREG-1537, entitled ``Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors,'' can be obtained from the Commission's PDR. Copies of the application to renew the operating license for the NBSR are available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, 20855-2738, and on the NRC's Web page at http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/adjudicatory/hearing-lic ense-applications.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/a djudicatory/hearing-license-applications.html] . The NRC maintains an Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The application also may be accessed through the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html] under ADAMS accession number ML041120161. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, may contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff at 1-800-397- 4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of September, 2004. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Patrick M. Madden, Section Chief, Research and Test Reactors Section, New, Research and Test Reactors Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 04-21149 Filed 9-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 30 Middletown Press: Lawyer explains nuke plant reassessment plan Tuesday 21 September, 2004 BY JOSH MROZINSKI Middletown Press Staff HADDAM -- A lawyer representing Wiscasset, Maine explained how the town is trying to get more taxes from the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant, a sister facility of the Connecticut Yankee Power Plant, at Monday night’s public hearing. The public hearing was scheduled by town officials to give residents an opportunity to learn enough about Wiscasset’s actions so they can decide whether they want to pursue a similar path against Connecticut Yankee. Town officials found out about Wiscasset’s plans when they visited the Maine town in November to look at what was happening to the decommissioned plant’s property. Maine Yankee had been in the process of decommissioning since 1997, gradually paying lower taxes so the payment was reduced to $1 million by 2002 from $12.4 million in 1997. The decommissioning process involves storing spent-fuel and nuclear waste in dry casks on its property. In 2003, though, Wiscasset assessed the power company’s land at a greater value. The power company disputed the assessment, appealing to the Maine Property Tax Review Board in Augusta. Peter L. Murray, the Wiscasset attorney, said he has worked on a team that has had a nuclear power expert, an economist, an appraiser and a real estate appraiser to determine the $135 million to $225 million value of the land. The town will have spend from $250,000 to $500,000 for the entire effort, which could reach the Maine Supreme Court, he said. He said they first determined the highest value and best use of the land. The land, he said, has high value because it is on the state’s coast, is surrounded by fabulous scenery, is on a bay and near the highway and rails. "So you can imagine many commercial and industrial uses that can be used for this land," Murray said. But it’s current use, he said, is to store the spent-fuel rods and nuclear waste. He said they then asked what the property is worth. The storage of the waste is very valuable, he said. He said they chose to use the reproduction cost, less depreciation method to determine the value of the utility’s buildings and improvements. "(You) depreciate it down by a factor to reflect that it is not new," Murray said about the method. The value of the land was determined by the capitalization of income method, which is based on what a person would pay to get the stream of income produced by a property. As part of the capitalization of income method, Murray determined with the rest of the committee how much rent the power company would pay to store waste anywhere by looking at the fuel storage market. Their analysis, he said, showed there is a market and that Maine Yankee would pay $12 million a year to have it stored. The period of time, he said, to have it stored would be at least 10 years, and more than likely 20 years or more. The assessor took the lower number attached to the value of the property -- $135 million -- and added it to the $60 million in reproduction costs to get a total assessment of $195 million. To contact Josh Mrozinski, call (860) 347-3331, ext. 222 or email jmrozinski@middletownpress.com. ©The Middletown Press 2004 ***************************************************************** 31 TheDay.com: Board Rejects Request To Challenge Millstone License Tuesday, Sep 21, 2004 Waterford The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has denied an anti-nuclear activist's renewed request for a hearing to challenge the proposed relicensing of two reactors at Millstone Power Station. In a decision issued Monday, the ASLB, a panel of three judges that hears cases for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, found that Nancy Burton of the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone failed to show how the board erred in denying the group's petition for a hearing in July. Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, which owns the Millstone complex, has applied to extend the licenses of Millstone 2 and 3. If approved, the licenses would remain in effect for 20 more years at each plant, through 2035 and 2045, respectively. The ASLB also denied Burton's motion to amend her petition, finding that she failed to show the information she sought to add was materially different from what she previously presented to the board. Burton also failed to follow many procedural rules in her petition, the ASLB decision said, demonstrating a careless approach that ill serves the coalition or the public at large. The coalition will appeal the decision to the NRC, Burton said.  Patricia Daddona 1998-2004 The Day Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 32 The Bulletin: Three Mile Island: Health study meltdown | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists [http://www.thebulletin.org/clock.html] 2004, Volume 60, No. 5, pp. 30-35 By Joseph Mangano A quarter century after the accident at Three Mile Island, remarkably few questions about the health effects of that near-catastrophe have been asked--let alone answered. ADDITIONAL MATERIAL Pennsylvania counties with increased infant mortality, 1977-1978 to 1979-1980 Deaths among those born near TMI in the late 1970s* March 28 marked the twenty-fifth anniversary of the partial core meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania. A series of events near the plant commemorated the worst nuclear power plant accident in U.S. history, but drew only passing reference in the national media and modest coverage by local reporters. A press conference featuring the University of North Carolina's Stephen Wing and the Union of Concerned Scientists' David Lochbaum merited only a small story in the following day's Harrisburg Patriot-News, and the article failed to acknowledge Wing, who discussed his published findings on cancer rates near the stricken plant. An article and editorial in the March 28 Philadelphia Inquirer completely omitted the topic of health effects. So, 25 years after the accident, the question, "Did anyone die because of Three Mile Island?" remains largely unanswered. Soon after the meltdown, a number of anecdotes about symptoms, disease, and death among local humans, animals, and plants began circulating. And some local citizens conducted door-to-door surveys documenting potential disease clusters, collecting the type of information that may be useful to professional researchers when they structure their study methodology. But the "gold standard" of health research is the publication of articles in professional, peer-reviewed journals. A visit to the National Library of Medicine's Web site shows 121 journal articles in response to the key words "Three Mile Island." The site documents that the initial reaction from the scientific community was swift; just over two years after the accident, 31 articles had already been published. Some discussed attempts to measure the radiation doses to which the local population had been exposed. Others examined emergency preparedness in the area. A few research heavyweights contributed estimates of potential health risks to local residents. These estimates were uniformly low. Arthur Upton, former head of the National Cancer Institute, projected that there might be a single additional cancer death among persons living within 50 miles of the plant as a result of radiation absorbed from Three Mile Island. Shields Warren, a longtime member of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, estimated two additional cancer deaths. The early literature included no articles with data on actual changes in local disease and death rates after the accident. Moreover, six of the 31 articles focused on the topics of stress-related illness and psychological suffering as a result of the accident. The U.S. Public Health Service began a mental health survey of the area. These efforts were bolstered by the conclusion of the Kemeny Commission, which had been established by President Jimmy Carter, that the only health threat Three Mile Island posed to the local population was mental distress. After the meltdown one would have expected to see some articles featuring local health statistics--especially statistics relating to the very young. The developing fetus and infant are much more susceptible than adults to the effects of ionizing radiation. In addition, reports of elevated disease rates in the youngest residents near the plant quickly surfaced. Pennsylvania Health Commissioner Gordon MacLeod publicly stated that downwind from the plant the number of babies born with hypothyroidism jumped from nine in the nine months before the accident to 20 in the nine months after. MacLeod reasoned that the thyroid gland was affected by the large amount of thyroid-seeking iodine 131 released from the plant. He also emphasized the increase in deaths of infants within a 10-mile radius, as did Ernest Sternglass, a University of Pittsburgh physicist. In the six months after the accident, 31 infants living within 10 miles of the plant died, more than double the 14 deaths during the same six-month period the previous year. Vital Statistics of the United States, an annual volume issued by the National Center for Health Statistics, showed that the 1978-1979 rate increase in Pennsylvania exceeded the national increase in three crucial categories: infant deaths, births under 3.3 pounds, and percent of newborns with low Apgar scores. In Dauphin County, where the Three Mile Island plant is located, the 1979 death rate among infants under one year represented a 28 percent increase over that of 1978; and among infants under one month, the death rate increased by 54 percent. But no articles were published. MacLeod was fired by Gov. Richard Thornburgh just six months after taking office; Sternglass was described by health officials as an alarmist. The main debate over health effects focused on persons living close to the plant, but evidence surfaced that releases from the accident traveled long distances. In 1980, Science magazine published an article by New York state health officials who had measured levels of airborne xenon 133 in Albany that were three times above normal for five days after the meltdown (xenon 133 has a half-life of 5.3 days). A University of Southern Maine professor, Charles Armentrout, also documented elevated airborne beta radioactivity in Portland for several days following the accident. Both Albany and Portland lie north/northeast of the plant, about 230 and 430 miles distant. These findings were also largely ignored by health officials, and disease rates in downwind areas farther than 10 miles from the plant were never examined. Much ado about mental health Journals continued publishing research about the Three Mile Island accident through the 1980s. The dominant topic was the impact of stress and other psychological problems suffered by local residents. Publications like the Journal of Trauma and Stress, Psychosomatic Medicine, and Health Psychology pumped out articles, which numbered 31 by late 1990 (the current number is 38). Andrew Baum, a psychologist then working for the Defense Information Systems Agency in Arlington, Virginia, wrote frequently on Three Mile Island's effects on mental health; Baum was the sole author or coauthor of eight articles. By contrast, in late 1990, there had been no peer-reviewed articles that presented any data on rates of cancer or other diseases, save for one short piece on spontaneous abortion. Cancer journals published no studies; epidemiology journals remained silent; and major publications like Pediatrics, the New England Journal of Medicine, and the Journal of the American Medical Association had produced just one short piece (about emergency preparedness) among them. The fight over the radiation-cancer link A settlement of a lawsuit over economic losses from the accident created the Three Mile Island Public Health Fund to commission and underwrite research exploring radiation-cancer links near the plant. In 1990-1991, a team of researchers from Columbia University, supported by the fund, published two articles on cancer rates before and after the accident in the population living within 10 miles of the plant. Using hospital records, the group found that newly diagnosed cancer cases rose 64 percent, from 1,722 in the period 1975-1979, to 2,831 in 1981-1985. Substantial increases occurred in the number of cases of leukemia, lung cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and in all cancers in persons under age 25. [1] However, the group concluded there was no association between radiation dose levels and cancer risk. The researchers, led by epidemiologist Maureen Hatch, assigned an estimated dose to each of 69 portions of the 10-mile radius around the plant. The highest assigned levels were north/northwest of the plant, where the plume initially drifted on the morning of March 28, 1979. No consideration was given to wind direction thereafter. The north/ northeast areas were generally assigned the lowest dose. The articles declared that increases in local cancer rates were unlikely to be explained by radiation, and that "such a pattern might reflect the impact of accident stress on cancer progression," although no reliable measure of stress was included in the article. From mid-1993 to the end of 1996, it appeared that research on Three Mile Island had essentially ended, as only two new papers were published. But in early 1997, the topic reappeared with a flourish. Attorneys representing more than 2,000 area residents with health problems in another lawsuit asked epidemiologist Stephen Wing to examine the work of Hatch and her colleagues. In 1997, Wing (who refused any financial support from the Three Mile Island Public Health Fund) published a paper that used the same data but arrived at different conclusions--namely that there was an association between radiation from the accident and cancer risk. Wing's paper listed some weaknesses in Hatch's work and pointed out that she may have demonstrated bias in stating her assumption that no association could exist at low doses of exposure. To this day, Wing's article remains the only one to present original health data supporting a link between Three Mile Island radiation exposure and cancer. [2] The Columbia researchers did not take Wing's article lightly, responding with two published critiques. Writing in Environmental Health Perspectives, the same journal that carried Wing's study, Hatch's colleague Mervyn Susser accused Wing of a "desire to air controversy." Susser called Wing's article "poor science . . . advocacy parading as science." [3] The article was full of "misconceptions, misinterpretations, mistaken logic, and simple error," declared Susser, and the work had done nothing to further understanding of the Three Mile Island health issue other than to "muddy the waters." Wing defended his work in the same issue and in a subsequent one. The only other reports offering new data on disease rates near Three Mile Island were the work of a team from the University of Pittsburgh, published in 2000 and 2003. [4] This group, also aided by the Three Mile Island Public Health Fund, looked at death rates after the accident, abandoning the "before v. after" approach used by Hatch and Wing. The researchers found no link between radiation and death rates (all causes, heart disease, and various cancers) among 32,000 persons living within five miles of the plant in 1979. As Hatch had done, they assigned the area north/northeast of the plant as the lowest dose area, but for most disease categories, this area had the highest mortality rate. Gaps in the research Twenty-five years after the largest accident in the history of the U.S. nuclear power industry, the research to date is limited. Only the Hatch, Wing, and Pittsburgh studies on patterns of several types of cancer have been published. Nothing exists in the literature on infant mortality, hypothyroidism in newborns, cancer in young children, or thyroid cancer, even though data for all of these were routinely collected in 1979. All of these conditions are especially sensitive to ionizing radiation. Many prominent journals have remained silent. Why? One body of thought is that lack of adequate dose measurements limits research on health effects of the accident. When the core melted, there were only a limited number of radiation monitors near the plant, and virtually none farther from the immediate area. McLeod and others maintained that environmental radiation levels exceeded the capacity of the existing monitors after the accident. There were no attempts to measure in-body radiation levels of persons living near (or far) from the plant; if such levels had been taken, longitudinal studies tracking the future health of high-dose and low-dose residents would have been possible. Another reason is that while much has been made over the large amount of iodine, krypton, and xenon that escaped from the plant, virtually no attention has been paid to other radioisotopes. The reactor core produced dozens of radioisotopes, including strontium and cesium, in addition to iodine, and others. Each affects the body in a different way; for example, strontium is a bone-seeker, iodine attacks the thyroid gland, and cesium distributes throughout the soft tissues. So while the data used by Hatch and Wing on overall body dose is a start, it lacks specificity. Had greater efforts been made to determine more specific radioactivity levels in the environment and in the body, much more productive research would have been possible. But another, perhaps more significant reason may be reluctance to tackle a controversial subject. A similar reluctance, in which researchers shunned evaluation of health consequences of nuclear weapons fallout, was evident during the 1950s and 1960s. This reticence may have limited studies not only of Three Mile Island area residents, but of populations living more than 10 miles from the plant. Post-accident detection of elevated radioactivity in the air to the north/northeast as far away as Albany and Portland should have spurred studies of a broader area. Even if reliable dose data are limited, examining any upwind/downwind differences might be revealing. As an example, the map of Pennsylvania counties shows that from 1977-1978 to 1979-1980 the infant death rate rose in 13 of 19 Pennsylvania counties north/northeast of Three Mile Island, but the rate rose in only 18 of the state's other 48 counties. [5] In New York, only 2 of 27 counties in the New York City area and westernmost part of the state--not downwind of Three Mile Island--experienced increases, compared to nearly half (17 of 35) of the counties located to the north/northeast. Since the fetus and young infant are at greatest risk to the toxic effects of ionizing radiation, health researchers should have analyzed this information as soon as it became available. In theory, the group most affected by Three Mile Island included local downwind residents born in the late 1970s, namely those who were infants or fetuses at the time of the accident. The table below shows that in Dauphin and Lebanon counties, the closest area to the north/northeast, all-cause (excluding accidents, suicide, and homicide) death rates for this birth cohort were 26-54 percent higher than statewide rates through childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood. The childhood cancer death rate in Dauphin and Lebanon counties has been elevated since the accident. From 1979 to 2001, 120 residents of these counties had died of cancer by age 19, a rate 46 percent above that for the rest of Pennsylvania. The degree to which this reflects the latent effects of Three Mile Island should be explored, especially since no other risk factors in these two counties are obvious. The health lessons of Three Mile Island Research conducted on the health effects of the Three Mile Island accident has been rather minimal, even though more than 25 years have passed since the accident. Meanwhile, official bodies like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) still assert that radiation from the accident had "negligible effects on the physical health" of local residents. It is likely that a full accounting of health effects will never be made. Nonetheless, it is critical that efforts to explore any consequences to the public's health continue. Effects of ionizing radiation may take decades to manifest as the onset of a disease like cancer, so monitoring of disease patterns and dose-response comparisons should not cease at the 25-year mark. But understanding the effects of the Three Mile Island disaster carries a much greater value than studying a single historical event. The country's current group of 103 nuclear reactors is aging (more than one-third have operated for 30 years or longer), and the NRC is in the process of extending many licenses for an additional 20 years beyond the current 40. Not only do these reactors have aging parts, they have been operating at greater than 90 percent capacity in recent years, far exceeding earlier rates. While older parts and higher capacity factors do not guarantee another accident, they do raise concern, as evidenced by the near-disaster at the Davis-Besse plant in Ohio two years ago. Expanded research may expand findings. Knowledge about the health effects of low-dose exposure can be increased. For decades, many scientists insisted that fallout from nuclear weapons production and atmospheric nuclear testing did not harm Americans. But in 1997, the National Cancer Institute calculated that radioactive iodine caused or would cause thyroid cancer in as many as 212,000 Americans. In 2000, the Energy Department acknowledged for the first time that research showed a link between radiation exposure and cancer risk among nuclear weapons workers, and instituted a compensation package. Perhaps the same sustained examination of the effects of the country's most serious nuclear power plant accident could alter current thinking. The fact that Three Mile Island health research has proved controversial should not dissuade health and scientific professionals from pursuing answers. Avoiding controversial health topics accomplishes nothing. If the public's health is to be protected to the greatest degree possible from environmental radiation, it is imperative to learn the full lessons of an event like Three Mile Island. Joseph Mangano, the national coordinator for the Radiation and Public Health Project in New York, is the author of 19 medical journal articles and the book Low-Level Radiation and Immune Disease: An Atomic Era Legacy (1998). Kelsey Stratton assisted with data analysis for this article. 1. Maureen C. Hatch et al., "Cancer Near the Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant," American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 132, no. 3, pp. 397-412 (1990); Maureen C. Hatch et al., "Cancer Rates After the Three Mile Island Nuclear Accident and Proximity of Residence to the Plant," American Journal of Public Health, vol. 81, no. 6, pp. 719-24 (1991). 2. Stephen Wing et al., "A Re-Evaluation of Cancer Incidence Near the Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant," Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 105, no. 1, pp. 52-57 (1997). 3. Mervyn Susser, "Consequences of the 1979 Three Mile Island Accident Continued: Further Comment," Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 105, no. 6, pp. 566-67 (1997). 4. Evelyn O. Talbott et al., "Mortality Among the Residents of the Three Mile Accident Area: 1979--1992," Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 545-52 (2000); Evelyn O. Talbott et al., "Long-Term Follow-up of the Residents of the Three Mile Island Accident," Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 111, no. 3, pp. 341-48 (2003). 5. Pennsylvania counties north/northeast of Three Mile Island include Berks, Bradford, Carbon, Columbia, Dauphin, Lackawanna, Lebanon, Lehigh, Luzerne, Monroe, Montour, Northampton, Northumberland, Pike, Schuylkill, Sullivan, Susquehanna, Wayne, and Wyoming. Deaths among those born near TMI in the late 1970s* Age at death Date of death Death rate per 100,000 (Number) Compared to state average 1–4 1980–1982 Dauphin/Lebanon 42.52 (23) +37% Other counties 30.94 (547) 5–9 1984–1986 Dauphin/Lebanon 16.39 (11) +54% Other counties 10.64 (232) 10–14 1989–1991 Dauphin/Lebanon 14.87 (10) +43% counties 10.41 (230) 15–19 1994–1996 Dauphin/Lebanon 19.66 (13) +38% Other counties 14.23 (332) 20–24 1999–2001 Dauphin/Lebanon 29.12 (18) +26% Other counties 23.08 (512) *Excludes deaths from accident, suicide, and homicide. © 2004 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 33 [NukeNet] Global Pact Against Depleted Uranium Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 19:14:58 -0700 Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 11:34 AM To: abolition-caucus@yahoogroups.com Subject: Global Pact Against Depleted Uranium His Excellency Michel Barnier Foreign Minister French Republic 37, Quai d'Orsay 75351 Paris FRANCE FAX: 33-1-43-17-4275 Dear Excellency: The Republic of Freedonia presents its compliments to the French Republic. I have the honor to draw to your attention the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare of 17 June 1925, for which the Government of the French Republic serves as the depositary. The Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibits the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquids materials or devices, as well as the use of bacteriological methods of warfare. Freedonia believes that the Geneva Protocol of 1925 already prohibits the use in war of depleted uranium, uranium ammunition, uranium armor-plate and all other uranium weapons. Freedonia respectfully requests your Excellency to circulate this communication to the other High Contacting Parties to the Geneva Protocol of 1925. Please accept, Excellency, the assurance of our highest consideration. Francis A. Boyle Foreign Minister Republic of Freedonia 21 September 2004 -------------------------------------- you just need to get every Foreign Minister in the world to do the same. fab. _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 34 Depleted Uranium kills forever Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 20:51:23 -0500 (CDT) Ra Energy Fdn. Raleigh Myers Worksheet bio http://www.igc.apc.org/raenergy/bio.html Depleted Uranium kills forever http://www.kucinich.us/dkdu.html GOP Fascism seeking the high moral ground for piracy http://www.igc.org/raenergy/HighMoralGroundforPiracy.html SING THE VOTE http://atomfilms.shockwave.com/contentPlay/shockwave.jsp?id=this_land&preplay=1&ratingBar=off DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE in song is the first step to a fascism free planet "THIS LAND IS YOUR LAND, THIS LAND IS MY LAND, THIS LAND IS MADE FOR YOU AND ME" IMAGINE: WE are children of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; WE ALL have a right to be here START SINGING THE PLANET'S ANTHEM AT ALL EVENTS TO SHOW HOW "WE" HAVE ALREADY VOTED. This would get some air time if we did it at GOP campaign events even in congress this Summer and fall and beyond after all it is the anthem of the Age of Aquarius no. We suggested that "THIS LAND" be the Global Village Planetary anthem at Woodies celebration in San Francisco at the Geary Theater in 1967. It was seconded by three ambassadors and has become the second third fourth etc. anthems to many countries. FOLKSAY(people say) ............ has become Our defacto Global Village Planetary anthem and in essence we voted for citizen empowerment as we sung it. Now let's get it officially on record by singing it everywhere as direct democracy. THE DAWNING OF THE AGE OF AQUARIUS is the reality at hand! The children of the universe, the right to be here generation _ the meek taking their prophetic inheritance out of probate is not a conspiracy. Ra Energy Fdn. Raleigh Myers http://raenergy.igc.org/raenergy.html Worksheet bio http://www.igc.apc.org/raenergy/bio.html Newsgroups beginning in the eighties Call to Action blog http://www.google.com/search?q=Global+Vote+raenergy&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=02Eigc%2Eorg%2Faction%2Ehtml "Raleigh Myers" web http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22Raleigh+Myers%22 "Raleigh Myers" groups sort by date also http://groups.google.com/groups?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22Raleigh+Myers%22 raenergy web http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=raenergy raenergy groups sort by date also http://groups.google.com/groups?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=raenergy ***************************************************************** 35 DU: A WMD (Axis of Logic) Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 01:17:17 -0500 (CDT) >From AxisofLogic.com U.S. Military CLICK ! Well, duhh, no wonder!?! Or, Two Out of Three Ain't Bad. By Bob Nichols, Project Censored Award Winner Sep 19, 2004, 08:08 23 People working at the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant 2000 Pound Penetrator Bomb Line have all of a sudden come down with _acute hemolytic anemia_. This is a serious potentially life threatening illness. They got it from some injury to their bodies. Where did it come from? *US CODE, TITLE 50, CHAPTER 40, Sec. 2302: *The term _*''weapon of mass destruction''* means /any/ weapon or device that is intended, or has the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to a significant number of people through the release, dissemination, or impact of - _(A) toxic or poisonous chemicals or their precursors; (B) a disease organism; or (C) radiation or radioactivity *Two Out of Three Ain't Bad.* There are times in everyone's life when everything fits together in an instant, when everything makes sense. Everything just clicks into place. It is not always for the good. All across America and the world, as more people read about the deliberate poisoning of Iraq with radioactive uranium gas, folks are having one of those fabled moments where everything fits together. /And the bogeymen, every time, are the elected officials of the United States Government/. What's more, everybody in the world who has even sorta managed to get through an 8th or 9th grade science class remembers that chart on the wall with the weird abbreviations. Example: Gold = AU. The one called "The Periodic Table of the Elements." We ALL saw that chart. The experience is universal and includes billions of people, seems like. (There are six billion, or so, people on earth now.) Almost all of us remember that Hydrogen is at the top left of the chart and Uranium and the other 'niums are on the bottom row. Most everybody knows that Uranium is radioactive, it is bad stuff, and it kills people with invisible radiation z-rays, or whatever. Those people who bothered to look it up at all, know that when _uranium is taken out of a nuclear reactor the uranium is a Million times more radioactive than when it went in. _It gets "switched on" forever in the reactor. The used reactor cores are so radioactive a person standing beside one would get a lethal dose in only ten seconds. [Robert S. Kennedy in Oklahoma City.] That means you are dead, quick. Lucky you. Our American Troopers overseas in Iraq are exposed to a possible dose of deadly, poisonous, and radioactive uranium gas each day they are there, and still breathing. Our kids and friends in Iraq for George Bush's Optional Nuclear Radiation War don't get the opportunity for a quick death very often. More than a thousand have had the end come with a bullet or bomb/. For hundreds of thousands of others with radiation poisoning from breathing the radioactive uranium gas, a quick merciful death is not to be theirs. American Troopers did as they were told and camped out for a year in a bombed out Railroad Station in the Iraqi town of As Samawah. The station had already been hit with so called "depleted uranium*" bombs and shells. After a year it was time for the Americans, called the 442nd Police Unit, to move on. _Many were already sick. Nine of the sickest were medically evacuated to New York City._ Among other things, New York City has medical doctors that are specialists in nuclear medicine and the complex machines necessary to find abnormal amounts of uranium oxide in urine. Four of the sickest soldiers, most were New York cops or firefighters, who pissed in a bottle, turned out to have radiation poisoning from uranium oxide from American bombs and shells. Their doctor, Dr. Asa Durokovic told Juan Gonzales of the New York Daily News /"These men were almost certainly exposed to radioactive weapons on the battlefield/." Durokovic is a colonel in the Army Reserves who served in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. *They are doomed to a shortened lifetime of pain and agony as the radioactive uranium trashes their once strong bodies, and then they die. Their cruel VA doctors are told to tell them it is in their heads. Well, at least the slavishly obedient VA doctors' pay is good*. The poisonous uranium oxide is drawn to the men's testicles and the women Troopers' ovaries where it accumulates. Some of their radiation mutated children are monsters that pass quickly from this earth. Others just have fused fingers or no ears. The list is endless. Women in old Baghdad share the American's curse and are afraid to get pregnant; afraid of what they call "the jelly belly."/ Both the Troopers and the Iraqi civilians are irradiated by the same illegal nuclear radiation weapons used by the American government. Oh, but, it gets infinitely worse. Some of the Troopers' come or semen gets "hot" or radioactive. The wonderful refuge of sex from a FUBAR world is denied to these dying men and their spouses or partners. /Yes, their come can blister their sex partners and contaminates them for all time, giving rise to terrible diseases and cancers. The uranium flows from billion dollar American Nuclear Weapons Labs (Factories) and Industrial Bomb Making Operations to bullets and bombs, to the Troopers' lungs, balls, and wombs; and, back home to blister and burn their spouses insides. *Then, it is reported here on the Internet; or, at events like the Project Censored Awards. The word never gets out of a "publishing niche" where citizens are too afraid or intimated to take effective steps against a rogue US government. Meanwhile, the nuclear radiation war bombing and shelling continues. * _This did not happen by mistake and it is not an accident. American political leaders are doing this on purpose and it is premeditated_./ The US government has known all this, and more, since 1943. That's when it was first documented that uranium oxide gas did all these thing as it destroys the bodies of gullible young American men and women; not to mention the helpless, innocent civilians in Iraq. All one has to do is breathe to qualify for potential radiation exposure in Iraq. You take your chances and hope to get home before it gets you. As for the Iraqis, well, you know how that goes. That doesn't matter to "our" governmental leaders, though.* Ever since the days of President Nixon and his helper Henry Kissinger the common soldier is looked down on as a "dumb, stupid animal" to be used as a pawn in proper government foreign policy. Bush and the Neo-Cons are doing this on purpose to kill people and to contaminate their land forever. Vast areas of Iraq are now uninhabitable due to American Radiation Poisoning. Our Troopers are expendable. * It takes a special kind of twisted, sick person to joyfully embrace the everlasting results of the deliberate war time use of uranium oxide gas on trusting civilians._ These war criminals are the leaders of the United States government. They are President Bush and his so-called Neo-Cons in the Executive branch and the Congress. They must be tried promptly as war criminals in Federal, or International Criminal Courts, and the punishment carried out on live TV. _ How many times have you heard the phrase "The United States is the world's only remaining Superpower?" It is endlessly repeated by the Professional Hairdo Anchors on TV. A thousand times? A hundred thousand times? What they mean is that /the US has absolute power over the globe and no country can get in the way of their action arm, the United States Military. The Englishman, Lord Acton , who lived in the 19th Century summed up centuries of military and political history when he said " ...* Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."* Our United States Government, Military leaders, and Big Media are powerful and corrupt beyond imagining. But, like an Achilles' Heel, the source of their own destruction and demise is a part of them; carried into battle and ready to use. *Atomic weapons, thermonuclear weapons, and today's indiscriminate use of Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons generating radioactive uranium gas in Iraq is the/ Achilles Heel/ of the American Superpower War Machine*. In Iraq, American soldiers are the victims of the very weapons they use in a war against the Iraqis, and themselves. /Our own soldiers are maiming and killing our own soldiers in an endless circular firing squad. *All 210 Million adult Americans should seek a Citizen's Arrest of President and the Bushistas in the government at the earliest opportunity. A prompt, fair trial and appropriate levels of punishment can be set. *Above all, we all must push toward resolution of these issues. To delay is a recipe for disaster for humanity. *Nuclear Regulatory Commission licenses authorize the US Army Ammunition Depots to hold a staggering 396 Million Pounds of uranium on hand for uranium bullets, shells, bombs, and missiles. Right now it is used in Iraq. Where will the illegal uranium munitions be used next? * *_This is devastation on a planetary scale_*. The criminal US Government must be stopped, restrained, and it's leaders imprisoned forever. The time for "The Rev-o-lu-tion Now" so often sung and talked about on TV and radio is at hand. *What are YOU going to do about it?* _______________________ *Depleted Uranium is the result of a step in the process of creating enriched uranium for nuclear power plant reactor cores and thermonuclear bombs, commonly called Hydrogen Bombs and Neutron Bombs. The uranium impurity used in bombs and reactor cores is about .711 of one percent of natural uranium, a tiny amount. Like iodine in salt, except it kills everything. Processing natural uranium removes about half of the bomb making material. It is then called Depleted Uranium by the powers that be, because it can no longer be used to make H-Bombs; but, it is used to make uranium bullets, shells, and bombs instead. The Depleted Uranium is fully 88% as radioactive in total radiation as the original uranium. There are an estimated 1.5 Billion Pounds of Depleted Uranium at U.S. Nuclear Weapons Labs and related facilities (Bomb Factories) in the US. The word depleted does not mean the uranium is safe or OK to use, it means it has been processed, that's all. Perhaps a less deceptive name would be "12% depleted uranium." The familiar 60% depleted uranium figure refers to what is called "Alpha" radiation only. Author's Note: Some of the important work consulted in the preparation of this article is below. There are many more brilliant and capable professional people throughout the world that I, and all of us, are indebted to; for it is they who do the scientific research and calculation that made this article possible. The risks they take to continue their crucially important work humbles me. I can only say to you all, if we have a future, it is because of your thankless, courageous work over the years. I thank you for your many kindnesses and patient understanding, with all my being. - Bob Nichols, The United States. Copyright 2004, Bob Nichols. All rights reserved. Permission for reposting is allowed provided the complete text and attribution are kept intact. Bob Nichols writes in Oklahoma City and is a 2004 - 2005 Project Censored Award winner. He occasionally a contributing writer for DissidentVoice.org, LiberalSlant.com, DemocraticUnderground.com, OnlineJournal.com, AmericaHeldHostage.com, and other online dot com publications. Mr. Nichols is a contributor to The Oklahoma Observer newspaper. He is a member of CASE -- Citizens' Action for Safe Energy. CASE has successfully killed two serious, well funded attempts to build Nuclear Power Plants in Oklahoma and several attempts to site what is now known as the "Yucca Mountain Used Reactor Core Dump" in Oklahoma. All these efforts to build nuclear facilities have failed. CASE won every time. 1. Nichols - "There Are No Words" http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Mar04/Nichols0327.htm 2. Nichols - "My God! My Country Is Using Poison Gas In Iraq" http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Aug04/Nichols0807.htm 3. Russell Hoffman "Poison Fire, USA" http://www.animatedsoftware.com/poifu/poifu.swf 4. Moret - Depleted uranium: Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml 5. World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference: http://www.uraniumweaponsconference 6. International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan written opinion of Judge N. Bhagwat: also at http://www.traprockpeace.org/tokyo_trial_13march04.doc 7. Gsponer and Hurni "Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons: The Physical Principles Of Thermonuclear Explosives, Inertial Confinement Fusion, And The Quest For Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons" http://www.inesap.org/publ_tech01.htm 8. Christopher Bollyn, American Free Press, Depleted Uranium: U.S. Commits War Crime Against Iraq, Humanity http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/depleted_uranium.html http://demookie.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=11203 ***************************************************************** 36 [du-list] ABOUT VIEQUES SUPERFUND LETTERS Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 19:15:14 -0700 CORRECTION ON DRAFT LETTER TO EPA ABOUT VIEQUES/SUPERFUND SENT THIS MORNING Greetings again.. from here... BY ERROR WE SENT THIS MORNING A ROUGH DRAFT OF LETTER TO EPA ON INCLUDING VIEQUES AND CULEBRA IN THE SUPERFUND. WE WISH TO CLEAR UP: THESE DRAFTS ARE BEING PREPARED FOR USE FROM VIEQUES... THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE DRAFTS IS FROM THE VIEQUES COMMUNITY... LETTER FROM SUPPORT GROUPS WOULD USE ANOTHER VOCABULARY... ALSO, THESE DRAFTS ARE SUBJECT TO DISCUSSION AT CRPDV MEETING TONIGHT FOR USE TOMORROW AND UNTIL 12 OCTOBER. WE WORK WITH THE COORDINADORA TODO PUERTO RICO CON VIEQUES (ALL PR WITH VIEQUES COORD. GROUP) ON THE PREPARATION OF MODEL LETTER FOR SUPPORT GROUP CALL TO ACTION. HOPE TO GET YOU TEXT FOR THIS LETTER TODAY THANKS AND SORRY FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> $9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 37 [FOODIRRADIATIONCA] Governor Schwarzenegger Vetoes AB 1988 Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 19:15:30 -0700 Friends and fellow opponents of food irradiation: In a blow to California's parents and students, Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 1988, which would have required school board approval and parental notification before irradiated foods can be served in schools. Below is the statement of Public Citizen's California Director, Anna Blackshaw. While this veto is a setback, AB 1988's passage through both houses of the California State Legislature is still a victory, and gives us momentum to bring this bill or a similar one up next year. Please CONTACT the Governor and let him know that his veto is denying parents and students critical information about what is served in school lunches! ** You can send the governor an email through his website at this link: http://www.govmail.ca.gov ** Or you can call him at this number: 916-445-2841 (press #7 to speak to constituent service -- you may be on hold for a few minutes) ** Or send him a letter at this address: The Honorable Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor of California State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 Fax: 916-445-4633 For more information on Public Citizen's campaign to keep irradiated foods out of schools, visit www.safelunch.org Press Release Sept. 17, 2004 Contact: Tracy Lerman (510) 663-0888 x. 103 Anna Blackshaw (510) 663-0888 x. 102 Governor Fails California Students by Vetoing Parents' Right to Know Bill Statement of Anna Blackshaw, Director of Public Citizen's California Office California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's decision to veto AB 1988, which requires school board approval, public disclosure and parental notification before irradiated foods can be purchased for school lunch programs, deprives California's students and parents of valuable information about what is in their school lunches. AB 1988 would have protected parents' right to know what their children eat at school and provided a democratic decision-making process for a highly controversial issue that has parents concerned across the state. The bill required simple actions, such as labeling irradiated food on school menus, that would not be a financial burden on school systems using these foods. For schools choosing not to serve irradiated foods, the bill would not impose any costs. In fact, the irradiated ground beef currently being offered to states through the National School Lunch Program is significantly more expensive than non-irradiated ground beef, ensuring that the increased price of irradiated food would make a much more dramatic impact on school food budgets than any labeling requirement in AB 1988. While the California Department of Education is not carrying irradiated ground beef in its commodity distribution system for this school year, schools can still purchase irradiated foods from other sources. Current regulations on the labeling of irradiated food do not apply to food served in schools because they apply only to food purchased in the grocery story. This means that it is more important than ever for local school districts to follow the example of the six California school districts that have already banned irradiated food from their cafeterias. Given the scientific uncertainty over the safety of irradiated foods and their wide-scale rejection by consumers, it is important to involve parents in decisions regarding food their children will be served. With this veto, Governor Schwarzenegger has failed California's students and parents. ### Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization with an office in Oakland. For more information, please visit www.citizen.org. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tracy Lerman Senior Organizer Public Citizen, California Office 1615 Broadway, 9th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 ph: 510-663-0888 x 103 f: 510-663-8569 tlerman@citizen.org http://www.citizen.org/california Keep irradiated food out of your child's lunch! Visit http://www.safelunch.org to find out more. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ********** If you do not wish to recieve these emails in the future, please send a email to tlerman@citizen.org with "unsubscribe foodirradiationca" in the subject line. ***************************************************************** 38 [DU-WATCH] Gulf War & Birth defects Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 01:20:04 -0500 (CDT) Stephanie et al, FYI, This is a re-post of an email I sent to du-watch in June last year about birth defects. My comments follow the text of the newspaper article: <> ><> <>< <>< From today's Lexington-Herald Leader (6/4/03, Lex., KY, USA) Headline: Gulf War Birth Defects "Children of veterans of the first Gulf Ware are more likely to have three specific birth defects than those of soldiers who never served in the Persian Gulf, a government study had found. Researchers found that infants born to male veterans of the 1991 was had higher rates of two types of heart valve defects. Thye also found a higher rate of a genital urinary defect in boys to Gulf Was veteran mothers." This is the end of this brief article. <> <>< MY INPUT In 1993 I put together a report, working independently, using readily available vital statistics gleaned from Arizona Health Department. "Call for an In-depth Investigation into High Rates of Brith Defects in Arizona Native American Population as Evidence of Undue Genetic Stress and a Violation of These Peoples' Human Rights" This report grew out of my discovery of these grim statistics (covering a period of more than 20 years) while I was searching for other perinatal statistics to use as scientific evidence to object to the siting of various polluters, nuclear and non-nuclear in Arizona. in hearings for sitings of polluter, scientific evidence is the only kind actually accepted. [an aside: Some of this type work did add to the preponderance of evidence that kept a mining chemical company from siting on the only flowing river in southern Arizona, the San Pedro.] Unfortunately I do not have the necessary graphs for this report with me, they are in storage in Tucson. This work was don pre-internet access. However, I do have the text portion of the report and will quote a few paragraphs below. Bear in mind they are the thoughts of one person. I did eventually receive a letter from the International Indian Treaty Council that some of my work had been of value to them at UN/OAS. BACKGROUND 1. We believe there is sufficient evidence to show that the Native Americans of Arizona suffer from undue genetic stress. We believe it is possible to show that this undue genetic stress has been caused by environmental factors: uranium mining and milling, dissemination of radionuclides in tailings and spills into waterways by waters and winds and hence through the food chain, and fallout from nuclear teting in the past; exposures to pesticides and herbicides when Native people sought employment in farmlands due to unnatural economic pressures and forced estrangement from their age-old harmonious approach to living and farming on their aboriginal lands. 2. The Native American populations of Arizona have been forced onto reservations. Many existing indigenous populations have been renewed from the remnants of populations decimated by crulty deeply painful to recount. The result is that we have relatively stable islands of close-knit populations of indigenous peoples continually affected by a floodtide of often hostile, invading,intruding diverse peoples from diverse places. The result is that Native American populations not only have suffered undue genetic stress, but the population dynamics are such that this genetic stress is obviously expressed in individuals of that population. Vital statistics from regional, state, county and racial perspectives indicate that Arizona's idigenous peoples suffer from birth defect rates at a rate substantially higher than other races. .It must be emphasized that these are the most preliminary of data. This effort can est be likened to examing a biological specimen under the lowest power of a microscope in order to determine where it would be most fruitful to look closer... .When we discuss these findings with other professionals, the usual response is that it must be due to alcohol and nutrituion that Native Americans have high rates of birth defects. While these factors cannot be ignored, while it is essential to face the whole truth if a change is the situation is to come about; it is our belief that the effects of US nuclear programs also cannot be ignored..." "Think not forever of yourselves, O Chiefs, nor of your own generation. Think of continuing generations of our families, think of our grandchildren and of those yet unborn, whose faces are coming from beneath the ground." words from ancient times, spoken by the Peacemaker, founder of the Iroquiois Confederacy. Some additional thoughts about birth defects: 1. The sperms of males is the most vulnerable link in the reproductive chain when it comes to environmental pollution. This is because from the onset of puberty male pre-gametes must under go synthesis of new DNA in order to develop into fully developed sperm. This synthesis is, of course, reliant upon what the individual male is ingesting and being exposed to. The ova of females are developed while a female is still in womb and undergo no DNA synthesis until fertilized by a sperm. 2. Though I do not have access to birth defects data for Europe or Asia, it would not surprise me for rates to be higher there than in the US due to: uranium [pitchblende]has been mined in Europe for 400+ years; multiple nuclear bomb test sites: Nova Zemlya, Semipalitinsk [Soviet], Lop Nor [China], Thar Desert[India--only a few tests], there's been at least one test in Aftica [Algeria, I think]. Soviets tested the largest by far all over there own people. Chinese were going to move their test site to Tibet, but I don't think they ever did--but have a waste disposal site there and especially wanted it for uranium mining, too. 3. US experienced increased in deaths due to birth defects during the years thermonuclear weapons were tested above ground. 4. Birth defect rates are now obfuscated, especially in the US, because of prenatal dectection of them so that many defective fetuses get aborted at a time in preganacy such they do not have to be recorded as an official death. 5. Please bear in mind that generally thermonuclar weapons contain a DU jacket as a neutron deflector giving far more bang for the buck, and a lot of DU at that. Though this adds a cloud to the DU muntions concern, it's important not to ignore this reality. Elaine [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/Sj.0lB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-watch/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-watch-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 39 PRAVDA.Ru: Depleted Uranium, weapons of war - the Pandora's box - 09/21/2004 18:38 The US is the largest single user of depleted uranium (DU) in weaponry. It is also the largest seller and exporter of depleted uranium weapon technology. DU is used in smart bombs, bunker busters, anti-tank weapons, and the tow missiles. All very highly effective. As we saw in Gulf War I, the US bunker buster bombs tipped with DU were penetrating concrete shielding up to 10 feet thick. The bunker buster"s effectiveness is that it can penetrate and then explode - raising the destructiveness and a higher body count than convention bombs. Cruise missiles can penetrate deeper before the explosion happens. As an anti-tank weapon, rounds tipped with DU can penetrate the tank"s hull and then do its dirty deed. Deplete Uranium is actually a misnomer. It is uranium, incredibly hard and a very dense metal, yes. But it is still very much radioactive. The US is quick to defend the use of DUs and scorns all scientific finds that indicate there might be serious lingering problems. Weapons using DU can be rightfully called a "dirty bomb". The US classifies a "dirty bomb" as an explosive device that permeates the surrounding area with radioactive/biological/chemical material. Such is the fears of the US homeland Security. The bomb itself is not the object of fear; it is the spread of the radioactive/biological/chemical material that encases the bomb that brings Homeland Security the night sweats. In the mechanics of DU tipped weapons when the device explodes, the force of the blast breaks the DU tip into a cloud of dust that coats everything within the target, and as with all explosions, there is the dust and debris that is jettisoned outward - this includes the dust from the DU. As the dust settles, the contaminated material also settles to earth or becomes airborne and drifts to other parts of that country. Now we have radioactive material spreading over a large area. The US has moved away from the term DU, and has come up with a more polite term of "dense metal" - but it is still DU and still a dirty bomb. On March 14, 2003, Colonel Jim Naughton from Army Materiel Command, took the podium and tried to justify the use of DU weapons. He stated: "During the Gulf War, we fired ammunition weighing approximately 320 tons" and while he down played the amount of DU unleashed, he took note that if taken together, the amount of DU would be a cube about eight feet on the side. A radioactive brick the size of 512 cubic feet - no smaller matter. A United Nations study found DU contaminating air and water seven years after it was used. A study that the US denies and marks as hysterical. Ray Bristow of the Canadian military said: "I remained in Saudi Arabia throughout the war. I never once went into Iraq or Kuwait, where these munitions were used. But the tests showed, in layman's terms, that I have been exposed to over 100 times an individual's safe annual exposure to depleted uranium." Natural occurring uranium does not give off the amounts of radiation that would cause this type of exposure. The question is how Mr. Bristow was exposed. One educated guess would be airborne radiation from the usage of DU. Several essays of interest can be found at http://www.miltoxproj.org/DU/dupd.htm [http://www.miltoxproj.org/DU/dupd.htm] . This site also provides a better description that I can of the mechanisms of using DUs in a battlefield setting. I quote: "DUP's are effective antitank weapons, but when DU bullets strike, they ignite, forming fine particles of toxic and radioactive dust which can be inhaled or swallowed. DU can cause lung and other cancers, damage to the kidneys and liver and congenital malformations and genetic damage". Dr. Zenad Mohammed, of Basra, has been documenting suspect birth defects and parts of her journal read: "August -- we had three babies born with no head. Four had abnormally large heads. In September we had six with no heads, none with large heads and two with short limbs or other types of deformities." When did all this start? Just after the US used DUs in Iraq. Dr. Ashahine, a senior gynecologist in southern Iraq, has noted: "If it is not a child without a brain, then maybe it's one with a giant head, stumpy arms like those of a thalidomide victim, two fingers instead of five, a heart with missing valves, missing ears. The deformities have one thing in common: they are congenital". When did all this start? Just after the US used DUs in Iraq. February 1991, coalition planes fired at least 1 million rounds of ammunition coated in a radioactive material known as depleted uranium, or DU. "We know that depleted uranium is toxic and can cause diseases," says Dr. Howard Urnovitz, a microbiologist who has testified before the Presidential Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses. There has been a clear increase in birth defects, ranging from thalidomide-type deformities to entire villages where the children of different families are being born blind or with internal congenital defects in the heart and lungs. The Guardian, independent foreign newspaper, said, and I quote" Using simple radiation Geiger counters, we measured high levels of radiation in the destroyed tanks and in the desert that surrounded them. The source of the radiation was a substance that had never been used in the battlefield before the Gulf War. Iraq became the laboratory for an untested and unknown material -- DU." Arjun Makihani, the president of the US Institute for Energy and Environmental Research says of DU: "Once released, the particles can be directly inhaled, can pollute the water table and enter the food chain, spreading radioactive pollution over thousands of square miles. Exposure to this kind of radiation, as well as to the chemical pollution, can cause genetic damage because of the ease with which the uranium can cross the placenta to the fetus. (From research carried at Oak Ridge National Laboratories which controversially used uranium to trace the passage of calcium from the placenta to the fetus.) According to the US Department of Defense, at least 40 tons of DU were left on the battlefields of southern Iraq." "Battlefields littered with the residue of spent DU bullets remain radioactive almost indefinitely." Christian Science Monitor, 4/30/99. A single charred DU bullet found by US forces was emitting 260 -270 millirads per hour. The current limit of exposure for nonradiation workers is 100 millirads per year. 1991 U.S. Army Safety Memo (DU Case Narrative 9/98 , p.183, available - Military Toxics Project) In 1991, DU penetrators were first used in the Gulf War. No information about protection was given to our soldiers. The DUs were used with no regard for the lives of the civilian population. In 1995, DU weapons were used in Bosnia. In Dec. 1995 and Jan. 1996 the US Marine Corps fired 1,520 DU rounds near Okinawa, Japan. In Feb., 1999, the US Navy dropped 267 rounds of DU on the Puerto Rican island of Vieques. In April of 1999, DU weapons were used in Kosovo. In September of 1999, it was reported by the Canadian Broadcasting Co. TV that over the years from 1991 until about 1998, the Canadian navy fired six tons of depleted uranium shells, mostly into a fishing area off Halifax harbor. Lt.-Cmdr. Bill McKillip "said there are no plans to either clean up the slugs or test to see if radioactive material has entered the food chain." The United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities voted a resolution which included the following: "Convinced that the production, sale and use of such weapons are incompatible with international human rights and humanitarian law". Enraged, the United States voted against the resolution - the only dissenting vote. On one hand, the US strenuously counters all scientific works that point out the clear and present dangers of DU, while on the other hand talks about the dangers. What is the reader supposed to understand from such an obvious contradiction? "If DU enters the body, it has the potential to generate significant medical consequences. The risks associated with DU in the body are both chemical and radiological." "Personnel inside or near vehicles struck by DU penetrators could receive significant internal exposures." From the Army Environmental Policy Institute (AEPI), Health and Environmental Consequences of Depleted Uranium Use in the U.S. Army, June 1995 "Short-term effects of high doses can result in death, while long-term effects of low doses have been implicated in cancer." "Aerosol DU exposures to soldiers on the battlefield could be significant with potential radiological and toxicological effects." From the Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) report, included as Appendix D of AMMCOM's Kinetic Energy Penetrator Long Term Strategy Study, Danesi, July 1990. This report was completed six months before Desert Storm. "Inhaled insoluble oxides stay in the lungs longer and pose a potential cancer risk due to radiation. Ingested DU dust can also pose both a radioactive and a toxicity risk." Operation Desert Storm: Army Not Adequately Prepared to Deal With Depleted Uranium Contamination, United States General Accounting Office (GAO/NSIAD-93-90), January 1993, pp. 17-18. The US position, as perceived by itself, is best summed up by Colin Powell when the US bombed Iraq"s two nuclear reactors. I quote: "no member nation of the UN, no member of the U.S. Congress, no international leader, none of the media said a mumbling word in protest." The UN, on December 4, 1990, decided that the United States was determined to attack Iraq and that it was powerless to prevent the attack, resolved that no attack should be made on any nuclear reactor-an inherently dangerous facility. The vote on this resolution was 144 to 1. Foul screamed the US and the US vetoed the vote against US action. It is not a matter that the protests were not there, they were, but the US had muffled, gagged, and censored them. In the article "DU: Cancer as a Weapon -- Radioactive War" by Alexander Cockburn & Jeffrey St. Clair, they assert that we are discovering that leukemia is on a sharp incline in Iraq. I quote: "Since 1990, the incident rate of leukemia in Iraq has grown by more than 600 percent". "We have proof of traces of DU in samples taken for analysis and that is really bad for those who assert that cancer cases have grown for other reasons," says Dr. Umid Mubarak, Iraq's health minister." Already medical teams in the region have detected cancer clusters near the bomb sites. The leukemia rate in Sarajevo, pummeled by American bombs in 1996, has tripled in the last five years. But it's not just the Serbs who are ill and dying. NATO and UN peacekeepers in the region are also coming down with cancer. As of January 23, eight Italian soldiers who served in the region have died of leukemia." "Thousand of acres of land in the Balkans, Kuwait and southern Iraq have been contaminated forever." The late Terry Riordon, a member of the Canadian Armed Forces, serving in the Gulf War, rotated back after displaying the symptoms of loss of motor control, chronic fatigue, respiratory difficulties, chest pain, difficulty breathing, sleep problems, short-term memory loss, testicle pain, body pains, aching bones, diarrhea, and depression. During his autopsy, Depleted Uranium (DU) contamination was discovered in his lungs and bones. Mr. Riordon is not the only one either. Dr Asaf Durakovic, of the Veteran's Administration Hospital in Wilmington, Delaware, in his analysis the urine samples of 24 men sent to him observed: Serious health imbalances were found involving immune system, respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts, and severe kidney problems. Serious Long-Term Effects Include: Compromised immune system, metabolic, respiratory and renal diseases, tumours, leukemia, and cancer. We are seeing an upwards spike of leukemia in the citizens of Iraq. Doctors without Borders have pulled out of Afghanistan and we cannot continue to study the after effects of DU there. However, it is reasonable to rightfully conclude that there are parts of Afghanistan, and the Afghanistan-Pakistan border that a nuclear hot zones that will continue to spread their lethal atoms of death for thousands of years. In a feature article in the Daily News, "Four soldiers from a New York Army National Guard company serving in Iraq are contaminated with radiation likely caused by dust from depleted uranium shells fired by U.S. troops." "Sgt. Hector Vega, Sgt. Ray Ramos, Sgt. Agustin Matos and Cpl. Anthony Yonnone - are the first confirmed cases of inhaled depleted uranium exposure from the current Iraq conflict". Darrell Clark, a gulf war veteran, returned to the states in hopes of settling down and getting on with his life. He and his wife became the parents of a baby girl who was born without a thyroid. She also has hemangiomas, benign tumors made of tangled blood vessels. Born with only hands, no arms, and stumps for legs. Darrell, tested positive for radiation exposure. Paul Hanson, returned home from the gulf war and he and his wife wanted a child. Their son, was also born with no arms, just hands, and stumps for legs. What do the two children have in common? Fathers who served in the Gulf region and had exposure to the aftermath of DU. Neither couple is getting any assistance from a "grateful nation". Nor are the returning troops who have been exposed to a nuclear nightmare caused by their own government. The US is engaging in a nuclear war minus the mushroom cloud. And maybe we have found the true cause of "Gulf War Syndrome" and we will refuse to recognize it. While doing discovery for this article, I can across another article that indicated the use of the Atomic bomb is considered as a viable means of subduing Iraq if things get too out of hand. In June 2005, the Selective Service is scheduled to resume full operation. With declining enlistments and soldiers mustering out, plus the number of soldiers who are being evacuated for non-combat related health issues have all taken their toll to the troop strength of the US. The Individual Ready Reserve has already been exploited to its fullest. The only way to offset this reduction is through forced military service, a.k.a. "The draft". As with the draft of Viet Nam era, the only complete exemptions will be the family and friends of the President, the Vice President, the white house cabinet, and family and friends of the members of congress. The age groups that will be considered eligible are people 18 - 34. Women will be included in this new draft. Conscientious objectors will be drafted into internal service in one of the national defense industries located in any part of the country - provided they meet the qualifications outlined for conscientious objector status. Because of the racial inequality in the last draft, there will be no deferments awarded. Being a full time student will not be of any benefit in avoiding being drafted. One of the new changes is that because of the number people who fled to Canada in the last draft, the US and Canadian governments have signed off on an agreement - if you are of draft age, crossing the Canadian border will result in arrest, and extradition to the United States for immediate induction into the armed forces or imprisonment. As with the last draft, a two year obligation to the active service is required, but it is reasonable to assume that once a person"s two year obligation is up, one will be required by law to report to the active reserve components. Of course, reserve units will be subject to activation and rotation into regular service and overseas deployments. With the talk now turning towards military intervention in Iran and the Sudan, a larger sustainable military force will be required. A larger force is also necessary to offset the number of countries that are withdrawing from the Middle East conflict, the president of the US has committed the US to "going it alone" in the conquest of the Middle East and surrounding countries. There are no indications that the GI Bill will be afforded to those inducted. This country can ill afford the additional strain on an already back breaking deficit. The downsized, and under funded, VA hospitals will probably be able to administer only to those whose battle injuries and disease are going to result in death. There also exists the very real possibility that US troops will be introduced into the conflict in Israel. The US might act as the buffer zone between Israel and Syria, the west bank and possible the Gaza strip. A seriously large military force would probably be stationed at the Mountain of Megiddo. The US will probably become embroiled in Chechnya, fighting what Bush and the US Government has deemed human rights violations. Despite what the US public has been told, the Russian military is still very strong and Russia is still very capable of stopping US global military presence. Russia also has something the US wants - oil. Oil in quantities that far exceed that of the Middle East oil producing countries. It is also estimated that there is more gold underneath the Russian soil and for a cash strapped US, the temptations might prove to be too much. The potential for the US disassembling Russia is not unlikely. There are elements within the US who are convinced that the US flag should fly over the Kremlin. Russia has also adopted the use of DU as a weapon. However, if attacked, we cannot rule out the possibility that Russian tactical nuclear weapons will be used. With indicators are pointing to an aggressive American stance, the role of securing the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan become paramount. Using Pakistan and Afghanistan as launching points, the US would have a straight shot at the Russian under belly. The US would need to secure the border between Russia and China should China elected to intervene. The US would also need to secure the border between Tajikistan and China. Increased US troop strength will be needed to both fight in Sudan, and to hold Chad, Libya, and Egypt in check. These countries will not sit idly by with US military involvement so close to their sovereignty. The US will have to have absolute control over the Suez Canal and a heavy military force will be needed on both sides of the cancel along with heavy US navel warships patrolling the entrances. The US will not be able to count on Nato for assistance as the number of US supporter is dwindling quickly. Nato might find itself now on the defensive. The massive manpower of the US and the seizure of all Hispanics crossing the Mexican/US border to be immediately handed over the US military will be able to supply enough manpower for at least a two generation war. Mexican"s impressed into service for the US might be offered a green card in exchange for their service. Bush has outlined a very aggressive US global presence and there are far right religious organizations that are pushing Bush to initiate such actions to hasten the war of Armageddon. Bush also shares in the religious beliefs of the extreme right wing and he, in all reality, probably sees bringing Armageddon to fruition as his holy mission. The UN has already resigned itself to the fact the US cannot be controlled any longer, and the US fits squarely into the category of a "rouge" nation. The survival of the US depends on an unlimited amount of free oil, and staggering amounts of gold to balance the budget, pay off the cost of war, and to refill the empty coffers of the depleted social security. There are some who believe it is imperative that the US gains total control of the world to continue our way of life. Michael Berglin Pravda.Ru L1999-2002 "PRAVDA.Ru". When reproducing our materials in ***************************************************************** 40 The Herald: Words of hope for Kazakh nuclear victims Web Issue 2098 September 21 2004 MARTYN McLAUGHLIN September 21 2004 A SCOTTISH MEP has won $50,000 (about £30,000) in a worldwide essay competition for highlighting the humanitarian suffering in Kazakhstan. Struan Stevenson, the Tory MEP, won the prize for his essay, Crying Forever, written following his frequent visits to Kazakhstan. He has worked to highlight the suffering of the people of Semipalatinsk, who were subjected to more than 600 nuclear tests during the Soviet era. The contest was sponsored by the John Templeton Foundation, an organisation that aims to explore the relationship between theology and science. It was set up by multi-millionaire Sir John Templeton, a naturalised British citizen who was knighted in 1987 for his services to British charity. Mr Stevenson has campaigned for the past five years to raise awareness of the problems facing the people of Semipalatinsk, where cancer rates are five times the national average and girls as young as 12 develop breast cancer. The average life expectancy is 52, and birth defects among babies and farm animals are three times higher than elsewhere in the former Soviet republic. The MEP is to donate the prize money to the Mercy Corps, which carries out screening and helps local people set up businesses. Mr Stevenson said: "It is a bitter-sweet moment. $50,000 is a huge sum of money and will make a real difference to the people of Semipalatinsk, but they still need much more help. "My only purpose has been to do the right thing by the forgotten victims of the cold war by not abandoning them. While it is a poor country, I have asked the Kazakhstan government to match this funding and make a similar donation. It would be a noble gesture if they would." Recalling a meeting with a group of village elders during one visit, Mr Stevenson added: "They told me they received frequent visits from politicians from the West. They said these politicians came to gape and stare and promised to help, but were never heard from again. They begged me not to be one of these 'disaster tourists'." In Crying Forever, Mr Stevenson details five decades of Soviet nuclear testing in the Polygon area, a region the size of Wales. Its legacy is ill-health and death. Last year, 14 young people in the village of Karaul committed suicide. Mr Stevenson was the first foreigner in Kazakhstan's history to be given the freedom of the city of Semipalatinsk last year. In his most recent visit, he toured villages with Kimberly Joseph, the Cold Feet actress. A fundraising exhibition of their photographs has been shown at the Scottish Parliament and will be displayed in London at the end of this month. The MEP's essay was praised by Sir John, 91, who launched his foundation in 1987. Born in Tennessee and now resident in the Bahamas, Sir John made his fortune through his mutual funds empire, but devotes about $40m a year to encouraging scientific study into spiritualism. He established Templeton College in Oxford. The foundation's best-known project is the annual £725.000 Templeton Prize for Progress Towards Research or Discoveries about Spiritual Realities. Since its inception more than 30 years ago winners of the prize have included the Very Rev Lord MacLeod of the Iona Community, who won it 1989, and Professor Thomas Torrance, president of the International Academy of Religion and Sciences, who won in 1978.   Extracts from struan stevenson's essay "Kizat Kuzembayev stands proudly to attention as we enter his tiny cancer ward in the hospital in Semipalatinsk. Medals are pinned to his dressing gown indicating his status as an important war hero. "He is 79 years old and suffering from terminal stomach cancer. He recalls the nuclear blast in vivid detail. He saw the sky turn red as if a huge fire had engulfed the landscape from horizon to horizon. "As the ground trembled beneath his feet and the hellish roar of the atomic weapon swamped Karaul, he watched the fiery sky turn black, then grey, with piercing white and red spirals of flame shooting skywards, while the writhing stalk of the monstrous mushroom cloud unfolded. "Later, KGB officers told his group that they would now have 'no worries from the USA' as the Soviets had perfected their own atom bomb. Mr Kuzembayev feels fortunate to have lived to see his 80th year. He is the only surviving member of this group of nuclear guinea pigs. The other 41 each died of cancer." Copyright © Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights [http://www.pressnow.co.uk/] :: About Us :: Terms of Use ***************************************************************** 41 Paducah Sun: Honeywell, NRC to meet again over December gas release [http://www.paducahsun.com/] Paducah, Kentucky Tuesday, September 21, 2004 BizBriefs METROPOLIS, Ill. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet from 2 to 4 p.m. Sept. 30 with Honeywell International officials to discuss the company's long-term improvement plan after a Dec. 22 release of uranium hexafluoride gas into the environment at the Metropolis plant. The meeting, set for the Community Center at 516 Superman Square, is public and observers will be able to talk with NRC officials after the business portion. A copy of the NRC letter inviting Honeywell officials to participate is available at NRC Public Affairs, Region 3, 61 Forsyth St. SW, Atlanta, GA 30303, or on the Web at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams. html. Help in using the ADAMS records system is available at the NRC Public Document Room at 800-397-4209, toll-free. Honeywell shut the plant on U.S. 45 North down for nearly four months making improvements after the toxic release, which threatened neighbors. Since the release, Honeywell has added sirens and an automated phone system that, in an emergency, calls people living within 1.3 miles of the center of the plant notification zone. Tractor Supply plans opening for new store in November Tractor Supply Co.'s new store on U.S. 60 a half-mile west of Olivet Church Road will be open in mid-November and afford more than 19,000 square feet of showroom, said manager Chalon Lassiter. Construction continues on the building, which will replace a 12,000-square-foot store at 3500 Hinkleville Road. Lassiter said the new store is projected to increase sales by 25 percent. The company also hopes to add to the staff of 13. The new store will have larger hardware, clothing, bird-feeding and equine sections, and broader overall inventory, he said. New stores in Paducah and Hopkinsville, and one planned later for Princeton, are part of plans to double the number of Tractor Supply stores to at least 1,000 nationwide in the next three to four years, Lassiter said. All outdated stores are being replaced by new ones. ***************************************************************** 42 WIVB TV4 Buffalo, NY: Schumer to Fight for Nuclear Workers' Compensation September 21, 2004 (Town of Tonawanda, NY, September 20, 2004) - - Hundreds of local industrial workers or their survivors are still waiting for Uncle Sam to pay compensation for illnesses suffered working on America's nuclear weapons programs. News 4's Marie Rice reports that Senator Chuck Schumer is joining the fight. The government must conduct a site profile first. Then it makes a determination as to whether a worker deserves compensation for an illness. Democratic U.S. Senator from New York Charles Schumer, standing outside the former Linde plant on Woodward Avenue in the Town of Tonawanda on Monday, said he's learned that the processing of claims for hundreds of workers who handled radioactive materials has virtually stopped. Schumer said, "You'd hate to think this. I hope it's not so. But, I hope someone there in Washington isn't thinking, 'Well, people are dying off. The longer we wait, the less it's going to cost us.' " Senator Schumer says the government has yet to conduct site profiles at Linde Air and Linde Ceramics in the Town of Tonawanda, Hooker Electrochemical in Niagara Falls, Simonds Saw & Steel in Lockport, and Bliss and Laughlin Steel in Buffalo. The claims of 525 workers are languishing in Washington. The government did conduct a site profile for Bethlehem Steel in Lackawanna. But, former workers accuse it of using unscientific methods. Ed Walker a former Bethlehem Steel worker, said, "They never came up and visited the site. They never talked to any of the people that worked there to find what we were exposed and what the conditions were. And many of us [are] alive, myself being one of them." Ed Walker's request for compensation for his bladder cancer was denied. Cynthia Livingston's stepfather died from pancreatic cancer. The government also turned down that claim. Livingston said, "I feel, if you worked here, it doesn't matter what kind of cancer you got; you should be paid. Because they didn't say, 'We rolled this type of uranium.' It was one uranium." Senator Schumer is calling on the government to complete site profiles at the 5 former nuclear facilities in Western New York. He also wants the site profile at Bethlehem Steel to be re-done. [http://www.worldnow.com] All content © Copyright 2000 - 2004 WorldNow and WIVB. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 43 [NukeNet] Fall Gathering and Gov't Nuke Waste Meetings Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 20:05:37 -0700 ************Action Alert. Please Forward and Distribute Widely************ U.S. Government Nuke Waste Panel Follows Skull Valley Environmental Justice Gathering October 2004 A Panel representing the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) will be in Salt Lake City, Utah, for two days of meetings- Tuesday, October 13th, and Wednesday, October 14th, 2004. The NWTRB is an independent agency of the U.S. Government. Its sole purpose is to provide independent scientific and technical oversight of the U.S. program for management and disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel from civilian nuclear power plants. The purpose of these meetings is to discuss issues related to planning for the potential transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to a proposed repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, and to the proposed temporary storage facility on the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation in Utah. Opportunity for public comment will be available. These panel meetings come on the heals of the three-day Nuclear-Free Great Basin fall gathering scheduled for the prior weekend on the Skull Valley Goshute reservation. The Skull Valley gathering will be hosted October 8th-10th, 2004, by Margene Bullcreek on her family's reservation land. It is organized with the cooperation of the Shundahai Network. The purpose of the Skull Valley gathering is to provide opportunity for Goshute opponents of the Private Fuel Storage nuclear waste project to share their experiences and information, for related concerns to be shared and discussed by allied indigenous activists, and for other concerned interests to share experiences and to demonstrate solidarity in support of environmental justice. These events are organized independently of each other by seperate entities. As such, this announcement should not be costrued as endorsement of each other's events by either organizing party. However, Shundahai Network invites our friends and supporters to participate in both the weekend gathering in Skull Valley and the Technical Review Board discussions two days later in Salt Lake City. ***************************************************************************** Event Information: ****************** 1. Nuclear Free Great Basin Fall Gathering- October 8-10th, 2004. Location: Skull Valley Goshute Reservation- near the home of Margene Bullcreek. Directions to Gathering Site: From Salt Lake City, UT Take I-80 West Toward Wendover, NV- Drive 43 miles Take Exit # 77 (Rowley/Dugway Exit) Turn Left on the Skull Valley Road- Drive 26 miles Follow Signs to Gathering Location Gathering Schedule: Friday, Oct. 8th- Sunrise Ceremony led by Corbin Harney, Western Shoshone Spiritual Leader Breakfast Greeting- Event protocols discussion Issues Orientation-Update Lunch Formal Orientation/Protocols Review- Issue Update/Discussion Of Weekend Itinerary. Dinner Talent Show (Bring your instruments, poetry and voice!) Camping Saturday, Oct. 9th: Sunrise Ceremony led by Corbin Harney Breakfast Work/Infoshops/Prepare for Hearing Lunch and Traditional Native Dancers Press Conference People's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Hearing Men's and Women's Sweat Lodges Dinner Concert- David Rovics Camping Sunday, Oct. 10th: Sunrise Ceremony led by Corbin Harney Men's and Women's Sweat Lodges Breakfast Indigenous Presentations Lunch Goshute-led Spirit Run from Camp to proposed PFS Site- Rally and March from Camp to Skull Valley Road (tentative) Camp Break-Down Dinner For Remaining Participants/Event Staff Be prepared for high desert camping, where the weather can be either hot or cold, dry or wet. A $10.00 per day registration donation is requested. Meals and all events are included with Registration. No one will be turned away for lack of funds. NO Alcohol, Drugs, or Weapons. This event is hosted by Ohngo Gaudedeh Devia Awareness and organized by The Shundahai Network. For more information about the Nuclear Free Great Basin fall gathering, please call 801-533-0128 or email shundahai@shundahai.org ************************************************************************** 2. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) Panel Discussions- October 13-14th, 2004. Location: Sheraton City Center Hotel 150 West 500 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 (tel.) 801-401-2000 (fax) 801-534-3450 Public Panel/Hearing Schedule: Wednesday, October 13th 2004 8:00 a.m.- 5:30 p.m. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the DOE¹s transportation planning and the experience of regional groups involved in transporting spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. October 14th 2004 8:00 a.m.- 12:00 noon The purpose of this meeting is to review the experiences of Private Fuel Storage, LLC, in planning for transportation of spent nuclear fuel to its proposed facility in Utah. The panel also will review issues of risk perception in the transportation planning process. Agenda details will be confirmed approximately one week before the meeting dates. Copies of the agendas can be requested by telephone or obtained from the Board¹s Web site at www.nwtrb.gov. Transcripts of the meetings will be available on the Board¹s Web site, by e-mail, on computer disk, and on a library-loan basis in paper format from Davonya Barnes of the Board¹s staff, beginning on November 29, 2004. This event is organized by the US Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board. For more information about these NWTRB Meetings, contact the NWTRB: Karyn Severson, External Affairs; 2300 Clarendon Boulevard, Suite 1300; Arlington, VA 22201-3367; (tel.) 703-235-4473; (fax) 703-235-4495. _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 44 [NukeNet] Expert Faults Court's Ruling About Waste From Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 19:15:18 -0700 September 21, 2004 New York Times Expert Faults Court's Ruling About Waste From Reactors By MATTHEW L. WALD ASHINGTON, Sept. 20 - The court that derailed the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in July, concluding that the government had not set strict enough rules on radioactivity leakage, based its decision on an incomplete reading of a National Academy of Sciences study, the chairman of the committee that wrote the study said on Monday. The judges, on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, decided that Congress had intended the rules governing the repository to be in accordance with a 1995 National Academy of Sciences study that said they should cover the period of peak risk, which would be hundreds of thousands of years. The Environmental Protection Agency had written a rule that the repository must meet release standards for only 10,000 years to be licensed. The court told the agency to rewrite the rules. The E.P.A. has not decided what to do and has asked Congress to override the ruling. But at a meeting of a National Academy of Sciences committee on radioactive waste, Robert W. Fri, who led the group that wrote the 1995 study, said on Monday that it had based its exposure estimates on the probability that people would live in the places most polluted by the repository, while the E.P.A. had made "extreme assumptions" that people were certain to live there, and to draw polluted water from wells for drinking and for irrigating the crops they would eat. "That is a place where the committee specifically decided they did not want to be," Mr. Fri said. The fate of the repository is now before a Congress that is unlikely to take up the issue before the November elections, and depending on their results, may not do so afterward, participants at Monday's meeting of the Academy's Board on Radioactive Waste Management said. The discussion at the meeting reflected the repository's highly uncertain future. Mr. Fri said that concluding that Yucca Mountain could not meet federal standards would not make the waste disappear, and that if placing the waste there was better than leaving it where it is now, perhaps the repository should be built anyway. But Judy Triechel, an official with the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force, a state agency, said: "Supposing the best solution isn't good enough, that's easy. The answer is, You're not ready yet. If Yucca Mountain isn't good enough, we shouldn't proceed with it." Referring to the debate over guarding against leakage for 10,000 years versus several hundred thousand years, Ms. Triechel said, "There cannot be an expiration date on safety." Some experts at the meeting were pessimistic that Congress would grant the Energy Department's request to change the rules. "The appearance of such an action to the lay public might well be that Congress, having realized that Yucca Mountain could not meet the existing standards, was now trying to dumb down the standards to the point where Yucca could pass the test," said Sam Fowler, the chief counsel for the Democratic minority on the House Energy Committee. Others said that question would be much clearer after Election Day. Senator John Kerry, the Democratic nominee, has pledged not to proceed with Yucca Mountain. But even if the White House does not change hands, a Congress that is only slightly less sympathetic to the project than the current one would probably derail the project. The radioactive waste board also heard an extended discussion of whether the Energy Department should be allowed to define some nuclear waste created in weapons production in a way that would allow it to be covered with cement and left in place, instead of sealed in glass and prepared for burial. The department is seeking to define some of the waste as "waste incidental to reprocessing," meaning it could be left behind. Environmentalists say the material is high-level waste that under the law that established the Yucca Mountain program must be readied for "deep geologic disposal." In July 2003, in a case brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council, a federal district judge in Idaho ruled that the department could not change its responsibilities by the way it defined the waste. The department appealed, and an appeals court will hear arguments next month in Seattle. But as with Yucca Mountain, the Energy Department has also turned to Congress to ask to have the decision overridden. The Senate, in a tie vote, agreed to leave a provision in a military appropriations bill that would overturn the decision for wastes in South Carolina, and the House Armed Services Committee has approved the idea as well. Geoffrey Fettus, the lawyer at the environmental group that brought the suit, complained on Monday that he had been unable to obtain even a copy of the House legislation. _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 45 Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Plutonium Shipments Head to France By ELAINE GANLEY ASSOCIATED PRESS PARIS (AP) - Plutonium from U.S. nuclear warheads - enough to make nearly 20 Hiroshima-style bombs - is headed for France aboard armed freighters and a new life as commercial fuel that will ultimately light American homes. But environmentalists fearful of terrorist attacks, accidents and the fuel itself, known as MOX, want to stop the shipment - a test run for a larger post-Cold War program to help the United States and Russia disarm. Ironically, France will reap the first benefits of the project to turn nuclear weapons-grade plutonium into MOX, a fuel used to fire nuclear reactors, as Washington and Paris mend ties made prickly by differences over Iraq. France's state-of-the-art nuclear technology is being used to help fulfill the terms of a September 2000 U.S.-Russia disarmament accord under which both countries promised to destroy 34 tons of military plutonium each. Radioactive material has been shipped to France in the past for conversion into MOX fuel, but this is the first time weapons-grade plutonium is being used. The U.S. portion of the project is worth $250 million to $300 million to French state-run nuclear company Areva, which will start by turning 308 pounds of plutonium into MOX, a mixture of plutonium oxide and uranium oxide. The environmental organization Greenpeace opposes the use of MOX to run reactors, saying it becomes hotter and more radioactive than the enriched uranium used to fuel most reactors. The weapons-grade plutonium left Monday for France from Charleston, S.C., aboard the armed ships Pacific Teal and Pacific Pintail, Areva said. About 20 demonstrators waved signs and banners along the Charleston waterfront to protest the shipment. For anti-nuclear activists, MOX presents a danger at every turn. "What you have is material that can be used in nuclear weapons unfortunately being traded in as if you were moving bananas around," said Shaun Burnie, nuclear campaign coordinator of Greenpeace International. Security, he claimed "is an afterthought." The U.S. Energy Department must ship the plutonium overseas for conversion because there isn't a plant in the United States that can do it. After unloading at the French port of Cherbourg, the plutonium will cross about 620 miles of France in an armed convoy to factories in the south, where it will be converted into four rods of MOX. For security reasons, neither U.S. nor Areva officials would give an expected arrival date. The MOX is to be shipped back to the United States in early 2005 for burning at South Carolina's Catawba Nuclear Station. Special security measures will be in place for that trip, too. After this first test run, U.S. officials plan to build a MOX factory with French help at the Savannah River nuclear site, near Aiken, S.C., to dispose of the rest of the plutonium the United States agreed to destroy. Another MOX factory would be built, likely with Areva help, in Russia. "Everyone is getting the payoff in this in that we're reducing and getting rid of dangerous material that could be used to make thousands of nuclear weapons," said Bryan Wilkes of the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration in Washington. "We're confident this material will be fully protected every step of the way," he added. The armed ships have "a specialized guard force. The people that are doing this have a lot of experience doing this. They're not shipping oranges." An alternative to using French technology would have been to bury the plutonium - a solution environmentalists also find troubling. MOX is made only in France and Britain, with France having most of the market. Some 80 percent of France's electricity is generated by nuclear reactors - 20 of them using MOX. In the United States, there are no reactors that currently run on MOX and U.S. reactors will have to be adapted to use the fuel. France stamped itself as a nuclear upstart in the 1960s when then-President Charles de Gaulle - intent on ensuring his country's independence from the mighty U.S. military umbrella - decided to develop atomic weapons. France's nuclear arsenal quickly became a source of contention with the United States and other Atlantic alliance partners. De Gaulle pulled France out of NATO's military wing in 1966 and shut down U.S. bases here. However, in today's post-Cold War world, the stakes have changed and U.S. bitterness over France's opposition to the invasion of Iraq appears to be diminishing. Greenpeace accuses the United States and France of arrogance for organizing the plutonium trip even while pressuring other countries not to use technology or materials that could make nuclear weapons. "Nonproliferation policy has been hijacked by the commercial nuclear industry," said Burnie. "This shipment is going to bring that into stark focus." --- On The Web: [http://www.areva.com] [http://www.stop-plutonium.org] -- ***************************************************************** 46 Las Vegas RJ: Yucca guidelines at least several months away Tuesday, September 21, 2004 EPA might propose new radiation protections early next year, panel told By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Environmental Protection Agency might propose new radiation standards for Yucca Mountain early next year, prolonging uncertainties that could build sentiment in Congress to revisit alternatives to burying nuclear waste in Nevada, a science panel was told Monday. EPA executive Jeffrey Holmstead said it will be at least several months before the agency develops new radiation standards for the repository after a federal appeals court threw out a set of protections in a July 9 ruling. Holmstead, the agency's assistant administrator for air and radiation, said EPA will be challenged by the task, which involves projections of radiation dangers to Nevadans from decaying nuclear waste for periods that could reach hundreds of thousands of years. "We're dealing with time periods different from anything else we've done at EPA," Holmstead said. "Going beyond that is a challenge." Holmstead commented at a meeting organized by the Board of Radioactive Waste Management, part of the National Academy of Sciences. The board assembled experts to review the July ruling in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. A three-judge panel invalidated an EPA regulation requiring DOE to prove radiation protections at the repository site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, for a 10,000 year-period. The judges ruled EPA failed to take into account the recommendations of a 1995 Academy of Sciences study that concluded repository radiation doses may not peak for thousands of years longer. The ruling has thrown the Yucca program into jeopardy. The Department of Energy now is reconsidering whether it can meet a December deadline to submit a repository license application, a spokesman confirmed. "We're reviewing where things stand," DOE spokesman Joe Davis said. "We're looking at the total picture of the entire program with respect to the court rulings, congressional action and interaction with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission." Deputy Secretary Kyle McSlarrow, DOE's No. 2 leader, last week told an energy newsletter, The Exchange Monitor, that the federal court ruling and an NRC board ruling against DOE's certification of an online document database for Yucca Mountain is causing the evaluation. "I have to be realistic. It's going to affect the application process," McSlarrow told the trade publication. "I am not prepared to write off any goals and objectives right now. But I'm now an optimist with a dose of realism. We have a whole lot of unanswered questions." Energy Department officials have said repeatedly they intend to have a license application submitted by the end of this year. But when asked Monday in Las Vegas if that goal is still intact, DOE's civilian radioactive waste management director, Margaret Chu, said, "I can't say" if it is likely or unlikely if the agency will submit an application before 2005. "We are preparing one and reviewing it, and it's important that we submit a high quality one," Chu said during a break in a meeting of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board. Because the massive collection of documents in the licensing support network must be certified six months before the NRC can docket a license application, it appears inevitable that DOE can't meet its self-imposed deadline in December. In Washington, Sam Fowler, a senior U.S. Senate adviser on nuclear waste, told members of the science academy Monday there is "some sympathy in some corners in Congress" for lawmakers to pass a bill that would help the Yucca project by overruling the court and keeping the 10,000-year radiation standard intact. But, Fowler said, that might not work politically. "There may be an appearance to the lay public that Congress was now trying to dumb the standards down to where Yucca Mountain can pass the test," said Fowler, who was once an aide to then-Sen. J. Bennett Johnston, D-La., who promoted the 1987 legislation singling out the Yucca site for study. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 47 Las Vegas SUN: Experts question safety of Yucca casks Water penetration, earthquakes among concerns By Stephen Curran LAS VEGAS SUN A metal drip shield that would keep water from penetrating casks holding high-level nuclear waste at a proposed dump at Yucca Mountain may be less effective than originally thought, members of an independent oversight board said Monday. Robert Andrews, a geologist for Bechtel SAIC, the project's main contractor, said scientists are still developing models to determine if water seeping into the mountain could penetrate the alloy shield roughly 980 feet below the surface. He was one of several scientists with both the Energy Department and private contractors who addressed the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board on Monday. But even if water does go through cracks in the protective layer, researchers still do not know if it could corrode the cylindrical casks that would store the 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste in the mountain, Andrews said. "The fact that it could crack is well known, but what happens when water comes in contact (with the cask) needs to be assessed," Andrews told the board, which met Monday at the Atrium Suites hotel on Paradise Road. The scientists' concerns came as scientists continue a study on possible risks stemming from the proposed nuclear waste dump 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The study is part of the long-term license application process, which Energy Department officials say could lead to nuclear waste being shipped to Yucca as soon as 2010. The department has until the end of the year to submit the license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A team of geologists is studying whether water flowing on the surface could alter the chemistry of the rocks, which could cause the barrier to degrade. If enough water penetrates the shield, scientists worry that radioactive nucleotides could seep into the water table another 980 feet below the casks, he said. Six teams with three geologists each are developing a plan to study the risks that could arise from a possible earthquake near the proposed repository, said Jon Ake, a geophysicist from the federal Bureau of Reclamation. A key part of the plan, he said, is incorporating possible but unlikely scenarios about the potential endangerment of those living near the proposed dump. Little Skull Mountain not far from Yucca suffered a 5.6 magnitude earthquake in 1992 and the area was shaken by a 4.4 magnitude quake in June. Ake and others are currently evaluating faults near the proposed dump to see how dangerous a similar quake would be for the nuclear waste, he said. "We need to find a way to incorporate the unknown," Ake said. The meeting came a day after a high-level Energy Department official said the government will likely miss the Dec. 30 deadline to submit the application. Bechtel had a financial stake in finishing the application on time, as the DOE has promised to pay the contractor another $15 million if scientists for the company finish the application by Nov. 30. The company could also get another $22 million if the Nuclear Regulatory Commission puts the item on its docket by March. The project has been on shaky ground since a federal court this summer ruled planners' 10,000-year radiation standard falls short of a stricter standard mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency. The next step for the Energy Department is to submit the application, which it plans to do by the end of the year. If approved, a 319-mile railroad would carry the waste through much of rural Lincoln County to the nuclear waste dump. ***************************************************************** 48 Las Vegas SUN: Nevada urges rejection of appeal By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada is urging the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reject an Energy Department appeal regarding the first phase of the licensing process for the nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "The carefully reasoned decision of the (Pre-License Application Presiding Officer's) Board should be affirmed," Attorney General Brian Sandoval and the state's Yucca legal team wrote in a response filed with the commission Monday. Sandoval told the commission that if it were to accept the department arguments, the whole of the document database would be "undermined." "An essential part of the commission's regulatory design for conducting the Yucca Mountain licensing proceeding would be replaced by an unworkable scheme that aids and abets requests for extensions of time for filing critical pleadings and provokes needless controversy." The commission licensing board decided Aug. 31 that the Energy Department did not comply with all of the commission's requirements when the department said it made all of the Yucca project documents available on June 30. The department has to make the documents available six months before submitting the license application. It wants to hand in the application by Dec. 30. But last week, the department asked the board to revisit its decision on the document database. The department said the board should not tie validity of its database to the commission's ability to load documents onto its own Web site. The department created it own Web site to handle the documents, which Nevada says defeats the whole purpose of having a site run by the commission. ***************************************************************** 49 AP Wire: House passes bill for groundwater cleanup in Santa Clara Valley Posted on Tue, Sep. 21, 2004 Associated Press WASHINGTON - The House of Representatives on Tuesday passed a bill to spend $25 million cleaning up groundwater in the Santa Clara Valley that's contaminated with perchlorate. "Hundreds of private and city-owned wells have been closed and many residents are forced to rely on bottled water," said Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Tracy, who sponsored the legislation. "Everyone agrees on the need for safe drinking water for our community." The Santa Clara Valley Water District last year discovered perchlorate in its groundwater basin, which serves some 80,000 residents of Morgan Hill, Gilroy and an unincorporated community in between. Cleanup costs have been estimated between $2 million and $150 million Perchlorate is an ingredient in defense and industrial manufacturing that has been found in drinking water supplies in some two-dozen states. It has been linked to damage to the thyroid and may be especially harmful to infants. The problem is widespread in California because of the state's many current and former defense sites. Pombo's bill, which passed on a voice vote, would provide funds for cleanup from Jan. 1, 2000, through Jan. 1, 2010. Local authorities would be required to provide matching funds of 35 percent. A spokeswoman said Pombo is hopeful that the Senate will pass companion legislation so that the measure can become law. ***************************************************************** 50 Nevada Appeal: EPA hopes to have new Yucca radiation standard early next year September 21, 2004 Associated Press WASHINGTON - Trying to overcome a possibly crippling court decision, the Environmental Protection Agency hopes to have a proposal by early next year on new radiation exposure limits at a proposed nuclear waste site in Nevada. Jeffrey Holmstead, chief of EPA's air and radiation programs, told a panel of scientists Monday that a wide range of options is being considered that would not require Congress to intervene in the politically charged issue. The future of the waste project at Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert was put into jeopardy when a federal appeals court rejected an EPA radiation exposure standard in July that was tied to 10,000 years into the future, even though some of the waste will be at its most dangerous thousands of years later. The court said EPA failed to take into account a 1995 National Academy of Sciences recommendation that the standard be set at periods of peak-radiation, although Congress required that the recommendations be followed. Opponents of the project have argued that the design of the waste site as it is now contemplated cannot meet a standard set that far into the future. At a meeting Monday, members of the Board of Radioactive Waste Management, a part of the National Academy of Sciences, examined implications of the court case and possible options for future action. The board frequently offers a forum to examine waste management issues. Robert Fri, chairman of the National Academy panel that wrote the 1995 report cited by the court, suggested the EPA satisfy the court's objections only by significantly altering its standard more in line with what his group had recommended. That would involve going well beyond 10,000 years, but not necessarily so far into the future that risk modeling, or even the proposed Yucca design, might be useless, Fri suggested. EPA would have to adopt a less conservative approach to determining public risks from exposure, said Fri, a scholar at the environmental think tank Resources for the Future. Holmstead said the EPA is "at the beginning of the process of determining what options might be" available but would not discuss specific proposals. Going beyond 10,000 years for a radiation standard "is a real challenge," he conceded. Congress also could intervene by passing legislation to free the EPA from having to take into consideration the 1995 National Academy recommendations. Sam Fowler, the senior Democratic staff member on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, told the scientists such a move could appear to the public as Congress "trying to dumb down the standard" for political reasons. Strong opposition to the Yucca project by Nevada's congressional delegation also would make it difficult to pass such legislation. Whether the impasse over an acceptable radiation standard eventually could scuttle the Yucca Mountain project remains to be seen. Nevertheless, supporters acknowledge it casts serious doubt on the Energy Department's plan to open the waste site by 2010. Trying to establish public risks tens of thousands of years into the future is a staggering undertaking, scientists acknowledged at Monday's meeting. All contents © Copyright 2004 nevadaappeal.com Nevada Appeal - 580 Mallory Way - Carson City, NV 89701 ***************************************************************** 51 Salt Lake Tribune: Huntsman declares he's against N-waste in Utah Article Last Updated: 09/21/2004 07:48:56 AM Republican gubernatorial candidate Jon Huntsman Jr. is launching anti-nuclear waste and bomb-testing ads on cable television in southern Utah. The commercials, scheduled to begin running today, feature Huntsman in shirtsleeves standing in front of Snow Canyon declaring Utah as "the most beautiful state in America." "As governor, I will not allow the state to become a dumping ground for hotter levels of nuclear waste," the candidate declares. "And I will aggressively defend our right to say 'No' to nuclear testing in Utah or in surrounding states. I will fight the federal government or anyone else who would threaten our quality of life." Democratic candidate Scott Matheson Jr. also has made nuclear waste and testing an issue in the campaign - with no discernible difference between the candidates on the subject. "I've taken a very strong position in opposition to resumption he also opposes the transportation or storage of higher levels of radioactive waste in the state. "I've been consistent and strong in my position on those issues," said Matheson. Huntsman spokesman Jason Chaffetz said the Republican, a former U.S. ambassador and President Bush supporter, is "best suited to fight the federal government on this. Jon is not afraid of spending political capital on this issues, on ethics reform and a number of other issues - in contrast to the last 12 years." - Dan Harrie © Copyright 2004, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 52 Salt Lake Tribune: Leavitt looks to end-run Yucca Article Last Updated: 09/21/2004 02:56:11 AM EPA chief and former Utah governor may seek a safety law rewrite By Christopher Smith The Salt Lake Tribune WASHINGTON - With plans to bury the nation's nuclear waste in Nevada looking more uncertain, Environmental Protection Agency head Mike Leavitt may ask Congress to rewrite a critical radiation safety law so the dump can open as planned in 2010. But the National Academies of Science Board on Radioactive Waste Management - charged with advising Congress on radioactive waste policy - was told Monday there may not be much political appetite to waive another set of regulations for the sake of keeping the proposed Yucca Mountain repository alive. Utah lawmakers, who have supported entombing the 77,000 tons of high-level waste, now scattered in 39 states, at Yucca Mountain, are concerned continued delays in the Nevada repository could mean more pressure to license temporary storage at Utah's Skull Valley. Adding to the uncertainty is the race for the White House. Democratic nominee John Kerry has pledged to stop waste from being buried in Nevada, while President Bush signed the decision that cleared the way for the Yucca Mountain repository. "That is rhetoric, since Kerry could have stopped it when he was in the Senate if he wanted to, but if so, Skull Valley becomes a primary temporary site, and temporary can be up to 100 years," Utah Republican Congressman Rob Bishop, whose district includes Skull Valley, said in an interview. "I had one Nevada politician tell me that if there's only a temporary reprieve that lasts 100 years, they don't care, they'll be happy." The trouble now is a federal court ruling that EPA's 10,000-year limit on the amount of radiation released from the dump should have followed a National Academies recommendation for a limit on releases over hundreds of thousands of years. The Department of Energy designed Yucca Mountain to meet EPA's 10,000-year radiation standard, not the longer term the court says is required by law but that some lawmakers feel is virtually impossible to comply with. The ruling means Leavitt, who as Utah's governor crusaded against temporarily storing Yucca-bound waste on the Goshute Indian Reservation in Skull Valley, must decide whether EPA should write a new set of radiation limits to protect the 1992 Energy Policy Act to uphold the EPA's 10,000-year standard. "The appearance to the public would be that Congress, having realized Yucca Mountain could not meet existing standards, was trying to dumb down the standards to meet Yucca Mountain," Sam Fowler, Democratic chief counsel to the Senate Energy Committee, told the board Monday. Whatever the federal government does, the state of Nevada vows it will continue to fight. "As a matter of actual morality, you shouldn't have a repository that you know will eventually be unsafe," said Joe Egan, lead attorney for the state. Fowler said Yucca Mountain faces "a number of potentially fatal problems" on Capitol Hill, including a chance congressional budget writers could slash funding for Yucca Mountain this year to the point "there's not even enough to decently shut it down." The DOE still intends to file a licensing application for Yucca Mountain in December based on EPA's 10,000-year protection standard. EPA Assistant Administrator Jeff Holmstead said "it's certainly possible we would go back to Congress" and ask lawmakers to rewrite the law, but no decisions have been made yet. "We are committed to developing an appropriate regulatory response," said Holmstead. "The direction I've received from my boss, the administrator, is we want to respond to the court as quickly as we can." Asked by Radioactive Waste Management Board member Norine Noonan just when EPA plans to decide what to do next, Holmstead said the internal discussions will "take a number of months, but we will have a decision in less than 10,000 years." © Copyright 2004, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 53 Penton: NSF adds perchlorate to test list THE NEWSMAGAZINE OF MECHANICAL CONTRACTING ANN ARBOR, MICH. NSF International added perchlorate to the list of chemicals that drinking water treatment units can be tested against. Perchlorate is both naturally occurring and a manmade chemical found in rocket fuel that may pose serious health risks to consumers. The new requirements, under NSF/ANSI Standard 58, test and certify drinking water treatment units to ensure that products are available to reduce consumer exposure to perchlorate. The chemical has been known to cause thyroid malfunction by decreasing thyroid hormone production needed for prenatal and postnatal growth and development, as well as normal body metabolism. In addition, perchlorate has been linked to thyroid tumor formation. Manufacturers will now have a new set of guidelines for perchlorate in drinking water. The protocol was added to NSF/ ANSI Standard 58: Reverse Osmosis Drinking Water Treatment Systems. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is studying perchlorate, but the agency has not yet determined how adverse it may be to people's health and what levels of perchlorate are damaging. NSF said its move in testing and certifying treatment systems that reduce perchlorate was a proactive measure to help ensure safer drinking water. The protocol to evaluate drinking water treatment unit devices for perchlorate reduction performance was developed by the NSF Joint Committee on Drinking Water Treatment Units, which represents public health regulators, manufacturers and users. NSF's Council for Public Health Consultants, an advisory group of professionals, academicians and regulatory officials, reviewed the protocol to ensure it provided public health protection. Both groups will continue to evaluate perchlorate and its impact on humans. For an updated list of water treatment devices that comply with the new perchlorate-reduction testing protocol, visit www.nsf.org/certified/dwtu [http://www.nsf.org/certified/dwtu] . Subscribe [http://subscribe.penton.com/con/] Copyright 2003, Penton Media, Inc. [http://www.penton.com] Privacy Statement [http://www.penton.com/privacy.html] ***************************************************************** 54 KVBC: Environmental Groups Urge Lawmakers To Consider Yucca September 20th, 2004 Put up or shut up. That's the message activists are sending to elected leaders on the issue of Yucca Mountain. Today, letters are going out to politicians all over Nevada asking them to sign a pledge to protect the state from nuclear waste. [drosch@kvbc.com] tells us why environmental groups are making this move now. Some think Nevada's unified front is crumpling, and that during this election season, Washington and the voters, are getting mixed signals about what our leaders think when it comes to Yucca Mountain. Now, volunteers are doing whatever it takes to keep our highways waste free. "I just feel the whole idea of nuclear energy is crazy." Bill Jacobs is a man who gets attention. "Sometimes we get a thumbs up, sometimes we get another finger up." Last week, the retired auditor became the official driver for Citizen Alert's mock waste cask, visiting small towns with a big message. "I mean we'll probably get out of it okay, but what about people's children and grandchildren, their children?" Now, opponents of the Yucca Mountain project are making some noise with elected leaders, sending out a letter asking Nevada politicians to sign a pledge to fight the proposed site. Peggy Maze Johnson is with Citizen Alert. "We need to make sure the wins we've had in court don't back down." Environmental groups say it's wrong to think Nevada will reap financial benefits from the approval of Yucca Mountain. They say any deal worked out today won't necessarily be honored by a future president. Dan Geary is with the National Environmental Trust. "There's no such thing as a long term agreement." As for Bill Jacobs, he worries about any perceived split in Nevada's resolve. But that isn't why he volunteers. "It's a matter of conscious. I know its an evil thing to have on this Earth." Former Governor Bob List takes great exception with what these groups are doing. List is working to negotiate benefits for Nevada and believes most lawmakers will throw this pledge form in the trash. He calls it politically transparent. List also says, like it or not, Yucca Mountain is inevitable and he's confident the federal government will keep any pledge made to Nevada, giving our state money for schools, roads and public safety. [http://www.worldnow.com] All content © Copyright 2000 - 2004 WorldNow and KVBC. All Rights Reserved. For more information ***************************************************************** 55 KLAS: New Call to Oppose Yucca Mountain September 21, 2004 Adam White, Photojournalist There is now a new call to oppose Yucca Mountain. Environmental and citizens' groups are asking local and federal politicians to state their position on the national nuclear repository in this election year. More>> CIndy Cesare, Reporter (Sept. 20) -- There is now a new call to oppose Yucca Mountain. Environmental and citizens' groups are asking local and federal politicians to state their position on the national nuclear repository in this election year. But a new poll says that Nevadans may already believe the fight is over. Environmental and citizens' groups are hitting the road again with an anti-nuclear repository truck. They will go to 26 Nevada cities in an effort to remind residents that the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository is not a done deal. They will also be sending letters to Nevada politicians to clearly state their opinion on the project. Dan Geary, with the National Environmental Trust, said, "We're going back to our federal and state elected officials and asking them to reaffirm to the people of the state that the process of choosing Yucca Mountain is a political process, not a scientific one." But a recent poll conducted for the Las Vegas Review Journal showed that many Nevadans might have already given up the fight. This month, 50-percent of 625 registered voters said they still want to fight the project. But46-percent said the state should deal for benefits from the federal government. That's up from the same poll taken in July when only 39-percent wanted to negotiate. A spokesperson for the Yucca Mountain Project would not speak on camera in regards to this story because of the political sensitivity in this election year. But the Yucca Mountain information office, which has been open for 14 years now, may be the reason that many Nevadans have changed their minds about the project. But citizen and environmental groups say they don't believe that Nevada will ever see federal dollars for Yucca Mountain. "Whatever this Congress gives, the next Congress can take away. Whatever money to be negotiated, it should've been negotiated by now," commented Sally Maze Johnson with Citizens Alert. The Yucca Mountain information office gives free tours to the site. To make an informed opinion yourself about the potential site, call: 821-8048 for a tour. [http://www.worldnow.com] All content © Copyright 2000 - 2004 WorldNow and KLAS. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 56 Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Government Ships Plutonium to France By JENNIFER HOLLAND ASSOCIATED PRESS COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - A shipment of weapons-grade plutonium has left the United States for a nuclear reactor in France, drawing protests from activists who believe the shipment poses both an environmental and terrorist threat. Government officials confirmed the plutonium had left the United States aboard an armored ship escorted by second ship, but they would not say when the shipment departed, citing security concerns. However, about 20 activists waved signs and banners along the Charleston waterfront Monday to protest what they said was the departing plutonium. "This is really the wrong signal to be sending to countries around the world," said protester Tom Clements of Greenpeace International, calling the transport and use of nuclear weapons material "just the wrong thing given the security climate in the world right now." Once in France, the material is to be converted into nuclear fuel and returned next year for a test run in a commercial reactor. The U.S. Energy Department must ship the material overseas for conversion because there isn't a plant in the United States that can do it. Officials want to build a facility near Aiken, S.C., but construction has been delayed. The facility is part of an agreement between the United States and Russia to dispose of 68 metric tons of plutonium. "We're trying to get rid of this material that you could use once again in a nuclear weapon or for other types of purposes that terrorists could probably come up with," said Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration. He expressed confidence that the shipment will be safe. "We're confident this material will be fully protected every step of the way. Each one is equipped with heavy weaponry ... and a specialized guard force. The people that are doing this have a lot of experience doing this. They're not shipping oranges." -- ***************************************************************** 57 Tri-City Herald: End of an era (D Reactor pulled down) This story was published Tuesday, September 21st, 2004 By Annette Cary Herald staff writer As workers for Federal Engineers &Constructors pulled down the concrete blocks of the outer portions of Hanford's D Reactor, they learned a little about the men who put up the walls 60 years before. D Reactor, one of three World War II reactors along the banks of the Columbia River, was built as the United States raced to make an atomic bomb, fearful that the Nazis had begun a similar project. Tucked inside the hollows of concrete-block walls were bits of trash left by World War II construction workers. Among the items salvaged by today's workers were a white-and-red package for Wings cigarettes and a deteriorating edition of a May 19, 1944, Sage Sentinel. That edition of the newspaper of the Hanford Engineering Works Employee Association included a ration calendar, a cartoon strip with safety hints and a feature on worker Bonnie Chartrand headlined "She Rides a Horse to Work." The Wings package and a copy of the Sage Sentinel will remain at the reactor. Workers finished the construction work of cocooning D Reactor on Friday. The project seals up the radioactive reactor core and perimeter to keep the reactor in safe storage for up to 75 years. But before the door is welded shut this fall, Daryl Schilperoort, a Bechtel Hanford subcontract technical representative, plans to tuck in a time capsule. Bechtel Hanford holds the Department of Energy contract for cleanup work along the river shore and has subcontracted some of the work to Richland-based Federal Engineers &Constructors. Schilperoort is adding items to the time capsule to reflect the three phases of the reactor's life. The Sage Sentinel may give a future generation a glimpse of life during the reactor's construction. He's also putting in safety instructions posted for workers during the reactor's 23 years of operation. Aerial photos taken during the cocooning of the reactor complete the timeline. D Reactor will be the fourth of Hanford's nine reactors built for plutonium production to be cocooned. Official plans for Hanford call for tunneling underneath D Reactor, then dropping the radioactive core where fuel was irradiated onto a huge crawler like those used to haul space shuttles to launch sites, said Bechtel Hanford spokesman Todd Nelson. The core then would be taken to the center of Hanford, away from the Columbia River, and buried. But because of the cost of the move and the significantly higher risk of radiation exposure to workers, the Department of Energy has developed an interim strategy of cocooning reactors until DOE and regulators can decide what should be done next. The $13.7 million cost of cocooning the reactor is less expensive than continuing to maintain it. Cocooning also gives radiation time to decay. The reactor building has been demolished down to the solid-concrete perimeter walls around the reactor core, most openings sealed with concrete or steel, and a new roof installed. The new roof that peaks at 95 feet high replaces a flat roof at the reactor that tended to leak. Before cocooning began, sunlight shone through the cement blocks on the outer portions of the reactor building. While the construction work on D Reactor cocooning was completed Friday, this week work is continuing to test a computer monitoring system that will alert officials if it detects unusual heat or fire. Later this fall, a tamper plate will be welded to the door, and it will be sealed shut. Plans call for entering the building again in five years to check for any evidence of water penetration, small animals or other problems. The reactor has not operated since June 1967, said Michele Gerber, a historian working at the Hanford site. It was the fourth Hanford production reactor to shut down after President Lyndon Johnson decided in 1964 that the nation had enough plutonium. It was similar to the nation's first full-scale production reactor, B Reactor, which was built upriver and supporters are working to preserve as a museum. D Reactor went critical Dec. 17, 1944, about three months after B Reactor. The Manhattan Project originally had planed to build eight reactors to produce plutonium. But it found by using water from the Columbia River to cool the reactors, it could increase the design from 100 megawatts to 250 megawatts of power. Just three World War II reactors were built -- B, D and F. They were constructed about five miles apart, both for security in case of an attack and also so an accident would not wipe out other reactors. As the nation's nuclear weapons program pushed for more plutonium during the Cold War, tests boosted the power of D Reactor to 330 megawatts, Gerber wrote in Columbia magazine in a spring 1995 history of Hanford reactors. The fifth reactor, DR, for "D replacement," was built near D Reactor when Hanford officials feared D Reactor was going to fail, Gerber said. The plan was to take advantage of D's water and pumping system. "But as they built DR, they solved the problem with D Reactor," Gerber said. The graphite of the reactor's core swelled during irradiation, bending the process tubes within and leading to the potential for the reactor shield to fail. Helium used inside the core was overcorrecting the heating problem, causing the graphite to cool quickly and harden while still swollen. By adding carbon dioxide, which has a lower capacity to remove heat, to the helium, the problem was solved, Gerber said. D Reactor ended up outlasting its planned replacement, DR Reactor. © 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 58 San Francisco Chronicle: UC / Regents advised to seek lab contract [kdavidson@sfchronicle.com] Tuesday, September 21, 2004 The University of California should join the competition to retain its controversial 6-decade-old contract to run Los Alamos National Laboratory as long as specific contractual details prove to be satisfactory, a top advisory council to the UC president is recommending. Some UC regents and other university officials have questioned over the past year whether UC should join an expensive competition for the Los Alamos contract at a time of state budget crisis. But in a short summary of its position, the UC President's Council on the National Laboratories says UC's continued management of the nuclear weapons laboratory in New Mexico "is in the best interest of the nation." The council plans to issue its full statement at the UC regents meeting in San Francisco on Wednesday. Affiliation with UC is "of great importance" to "thousands of (Los Alamos) employees," the summary says. "These people are the heart of the (nuclear weapons) laboratories and the engine that drives the superb research and development activities that have been the hallmark of the University's laboratories and the pride of the University." UC has had a long-standing monopoly on the management of Los Alamos and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in the East Bay -- but its stewardship of Los Alamos has been controversial at least since 2002, following scandals that include missing classified data and financial mismanagement. Last week, after a long investigation, the Los Alamos director fired four employees and forced another to resign. Because of the scandals, Congress and the U.S. Department of Energy decided last year that all future contracts for running Los Alamos and some other national labs must be open to outside competition. The UC regents are scheduled to hear a discussion of the pros and cons of competing for the Los Alamos and Livermore contracts at the Wednesday meeting. In making the recommendation, the council offers only one caveat: that UC should compete for the contract as long as specific contractual details are satisfactory to UC officials. UC's current contract for operating the New Mexico lab expires Sept. 30, 2005, while the contract for running Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory expires in late 2007. The opposite view also will be expressed Wednesday: The Coalition to Demilitarize the University of California, a self-described "coalition of student and community groups," plans to attend the regents meeting to attack UC's management of the labs. "UC should not participate in furthering the development of nuclear weapons," said a press statement jointly issued Monday by the coalition, which includes two veteran Bay Area activist organizations, Tri-Valley Citizens Against a Radioactive Environment and Western States Legal Foundation. It remains uncertain when the Energy Department will issue the draft contracts, otherwise known as "requests for proposal," or RFPs. On Monday, it was reported that the department might not present the draft contracts until after the November election. Citing an unidentified source, Inside Energy, an expensive "inside the Beltway" newsletter that closely monitors Energy Department activities, said the RFPs might be issued "either late this year or early in 2005." The statement is posted at the UC regents Web site at [http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu] / regents/regmeet/sep04/203.pdfE-mail Keay Davidson at [kdavidson@sfchronicle.com] . [graphical line] Page B - 2 ©2004 San Francisco Chronicle | Feedback | FAQ ***************************************************************** 59 NPR: Scientist Criticizes Los Alamos Security Shutdown [http://www.npr.org/] [Entrance to the Los Alamos nuclear facility. Credit: Los Alamos National Laboratory] Credit: Los Alamos National Laboratory Sept. 20, 2004 -- Administrators of the Los Alamos National Laboratory plan to remove weapons-grade nuclear materials from a section of the lab after determining the area to be too prone to security lapses. Scientists at the National Nuclear Security Administration lab say morale is low after four employees were fired and another was forced to resign. Some have aired doubts that recent responses to security lapses are out of proportion. NPR's David Kestenbaum [http://www.npr.org/about/people/bios/dkestenbaum.html] reports. [http://www.npr.org/about/privacypolicy.html] for more ***************************************************************** 60 lamonitor.com: Nanos: History will tell if right The Online News Source for Los Alamos [http://www.lac-nm.us] CAROL A. CLARK, lanews@lamonitor.com [lanews@lamonitor.com] , Monitor Staff Writer Was he right or wrong? This is the question debated repeatedly since LANL Director G. Peter Nanos grabbed the reins of Los Alamos National Laboratory and jerked back with all his might. He shut down the laboratory on July 16 in a drastic action never before taken in the institution's 60-year history. "That was a precedents breaking, and a very serious, action - a decision that may well be questioned until the end of time," Nanos said. "When history is written, we'll find out if we went too far." Nanos was speaking before a joint meeting of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Oversight and Information Technology Oversight committees at the Research Park here on Friday morning before addressing the work force at an all-employee meeting about "The Path Forward" that afternoon. The oversight committee reviews the activities, operation and management at LANL and consists of 11 state legislatures, including six committee members and five advisory members. Nanos provided a chronological accounting of incidents leading up to the shutdown, what has happened since and when he expects it to all be over, which appears to be in the first week of October. Seventy percent of lab operations are already back to full strength, he said. Rep. Nick Salazar thanked Nanos, "for getting us over the darkest hour that I've experienced at our lab in the last 60 years." He also asked Nanos to explain why he felt he had to shut down the entire lab. "Given the strength of safety occurrences over the last two years including acid splashes, improper safety procedures and near misses that could have resulted in death - we were not in a position to gage the risk at the lab," Nanos said. "I didn't have a feel for where the next problem might be coming from - this was a reactive process - we had to isolate those areas of risk and deal with them." Nanos described breaking precedents again when he fired four employees, allowed a fifth to resign, and reprimanded, demoted or transferred seven others last week because of their involvement in the lab's security and safety breaches. Only one of the original 23 placed on investigatory leave still remains under investigation. "We took this action, not based on the disks, but on people's actions doing their jobs in the workforce," Nanos said. "I feel fortunate we were able to do a thorough investigation - in doing that you really do set the standards for what is expected." Nanos told the committee that to strengthen safety, the lab is going to a DOE process in storing classified media. There will be nine satellite classified media libraries and one destruction library. Employees hired to work in these newly created libraries will receive full training and be given career ladders, Nanos said Nanos saved LANL $4 million in cost-saving modifications this year and will use the money to accelerate the installation of a classified network. All classified material will be placed on the network to be accessed remotely. The lab will also decrease electronic media by a factor of 10 over the next year, Nanos said. "This is not going to be the Los Alamos of three months ago," he told the committee. "The employees have done a tremendous amount of work and have turned the corner to a brighter future." LANL having gone through such a complete overhaul of CREM safety processes may turn into a model for the rest of the national labs and even the state. Rep. Janice Arnold-Jones, also a DOE contractor, asked Nanos to help the state CREM processes through their lessons learned. Rep. Thomas Anderson said, "I'd like to make sure this effort of yours gets passed up the line to all the other national laboratories." Rep. Debbie Rodella told Nanos her constituents have two concerns. One is the revocation of the 9/80 work schedule, which began on March 20, 2000. "Taking the 9/80 work schedule away is causing hardships and having a detrimental effect on families," Rodella said. Nanos assured Rodella and the other legislatures that once everyone is back on line, he will open the discussion of flexibility schedules in one form or another. He plans to speak with members of the business community, county traffic control, law enforcement and others to determine the best way to schedule lab workers stating that the community is heavily impacted by when such a large number of employees work. Rodella told Nanos her constituents are also worried that he will use their one on one interviews conducted during the stand down against them if there is a reduction in force of RIF. Nanos was adamant he would not do that. He told committee members he would not be bringing contracted employees to permanent status if he was planning a RIF. Nanos said he appreciates the support he has gotten during the crucial process of bringing the lab through an extremely difficult time. "I can't walk through Smith's or Starbucks without two or three people telling me how good they feel about the lab and where it's going," Nanos said. "I just returned from Washington where I received very strong support from our congressional delegates and even from the congressional oversight committee." Rep. Ben Lujan told Nanos he was concerned and disappointed in people jumping on the lab when they were down and offered him any help he might need. Nanos praised the lab employees for working so hard and for doing such a great job during a very difficult time. "My number one priority besides getting the lab back to work is to establish clearly in the minds of the employees that they have a bright future and I ask your help with that," Nanos said to the committee. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 61 The Bulletin: No plans for new nukes here! | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists [http://www.thebulletin.org/clock.html] By Bret Lortie If you thought all the talk about new nuclear weapons was just hot air, the proposed environmental plan for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is a cool reminder that the Energy Department is moving ahead with plans to ramp up production of plutonium pits and other materials for a rejuvenated nuclear weapons program. It has been more than 10 years since Livermore's "Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement" has been updated, and the National Environmental Policy Act required that Energy produce a review to cover Livermore's planned operations for the next 10 years. The proposal offers a rare glimpse into the government's plans for the top-secret weapons lab. If Energy gets its way, Livermore will be allowed to house twice the plutonium and work with nearly 10 times the radioactive tritium it does now, reports the February 21 Contra Costa Times. The lab will also start research on how to manufacture plutonium pits (nuclear weapon cores) using modern robotic manufacturing techniques. The lab currently cannot separate large quantities of weapons-grade plutonium or fabricate the dense metal into pits, things that Los Alamos National Laboratory (Livermore's "sister" lab) is able to do. The nearly tenfold increase in tritium-handling capacity, reports the February 26 Tri-Valley Herald, would allow Energy to resume nuclear weapons testing in 18 rather than 36 months if President George W. Bush ends the 12-year moratorium on nuclear testing. Tritium is used in the sensitive instruments used to evaluate nuclear explosions. Livermore scientists would also use the tritium for filling small metal or glass spheres used as targets in fusion experiments at the National Ignition Facility--the world's largest laser--whose construction is beginning to wind down. Marylia Kelley, executive director of the Livermore watchdog group Tri-Valley CAREs, says that in the mid-1990s her organization was told that Livermore would never fill targets on site because the lab is just too crowded. "Lo and behold," she says, "that is what they want to do. And every time they increase their tritium workload, more tritium gets into the environment." "The most important thing in all this," says Kelley, "is that this is a 10-year planning document--and it demonstrates that this administration is planning a long-term future for making weapons at the lab." She says it's ironic that while Livermore is planning to double the amount of plutonium it can handle (from 1,540 to 3,300 pounds), some Energy officials want to "de-inventory" Livermore because of security problems. Many of Livermore's security problems are linked to the lab's location, Kelley says. Unlike Los Alamos, where plutonium facilities are spread out over 43 square miles of remote land, Livermore's plutonium facilities are crammed into an area just 1.3 square miles in size. "Livermore lab is unique in the weapons complex because of how close the buildings are to each other," she says. "The plutonium facilities are next to tritium facilities, which are next to both the lab's internal streets and local public roads. There are people driving right next to the Superblock where work with radioactive materials takes place. It's a very difficult complex to defend because it's an extremely crowded site." With nearly 10,000 employees and subcontractors coming and going through the lab's gates, it is also very busy. Kelley adds that more than 7 million people live within a 50-mile radius of the complex, and there are several airports in the area with flight paths carrying planes directly overhead. "This is not a place where you can house plutonium and defend it easily," she says, noting that in addition to overflights the danger posed by either terrorists or disgruntled employees is very real. "This is why Tri-Valley CAREs supports the de-inventorying of plutonium and highly enriched uranium at Lawrence Livermore." Where does Kelley suggest Energy do the work? "A good deal of the work done at this lab duplicates the work done at Los Alamos," she says, and her organization rejects the idea that new labs need to be built if Livermore's plutonium and tritium-handling capacities are not increased. "This is an opportunity to make Lawrence Livermore safer and to build down the dangerous, duplicated, and unnecessary activities of the nuclear complex. "If you want to maintain the current arsenal, you do need some plutonium capacity, but what exists at Los Alamos is far in excess of what's needed. But if you're hell-bent on new weapons, what's planned for Livermore is exactly what you'd do." Another dangerous proposal in the Livermore plan is to triple the at-risk limit for how much plutonium can be in a single room at one time. The amount requested is not arbitrary but linked to specific projects such as developing prototype plutonium bomb cores and new processes for separating plutonium with lasers. "They want to be able to do anything they want to do and not tell anyone about it," says Kelley. "We think this is extremely dangerous for the community and for proliferation. New nuclear weapons seem to absolutely be their intent. What's new is that this is now being disclosed." Does Kelley think the plan can be stopped? "If the public, scientific community, and our legislators come together to oppose these actions, they're stoppable," she says. Energy plans on proposing a "record of decision" by January 2005, when the agency will advance its decision to expand activities at Livermore. Kelley says that if Energy chooses to go forward with the plan, her organization will consider litigation. "It's a shocking blueprint for an increasingly aggressive and robust nuclear weapons program," Kelley concludes. "And we're going to stop it if we can. "It's a moral, scientific, and political imperative." Bret Lortie is the Bulletin's former managing editor. © 2004 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 62 [NukeNet] FW: Global Pact Against Depleted Uranium Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 20:05:34 -0700 Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 11:34 AM To: abolition-caucus@yahoogroups.com Subject: Global Pact Against Depleted Uranium His Excellency Michel Barnier Foreign Minister French Republic 37, Quai d'Orsay 75351 Paris FRANCE FAX: 33-1-43-17-4275 Dear Excellency: The Republic of Freedonia presents its compliments to the French Republic. I have the honor to draw to your attention the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare of 17 June 1925, for which the Government of the French Republic serves as the depositary. The Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibits the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquids materials or devices, as well as the use of bacteriological methods of warfare. Freedonia believes that the Geneva Protocol of 1925 already prohibits the use in war of depleted uranium, uranium ammunition, uranium armor-plate and all other uranium weapons. Freedonia respectfully requests your Excellency to circulate this communication to the other High Contacting Parties to the Geneva Protocol of 1925. Please accept, Excellency, the assurance of our highest consideration. Francis A. Boyle Foreign Minister Republic of Freedonia 21 September 2004 -------------------------------------- you just need to get every Foreign Minister in the world to do the same. fab. _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 63 The Bulletin: Preempting the truth | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists [http://www.thebulletin.org/issues1/2004/so04/so04toc.html] 2004, Volume 60, No. 5, pp. 63-66 REVIEW Secrets and Lies: Operation "Iraqi Freedom" and After By Dilip Hiro Nation Books, 2004 467 pages; $14.95 Fraud: The Strategy Behind the Bush Lies and Why the Media Didn't Tell You By Paul Waldman Sourcebooks, 2004 311 pages; $24.95 The Iraq War: A Military History By Williamson Murray and Maj. Gen. Robert H. Scales Jr. Harvard University Press, 2003 312 pages; $25.95 Reviewed by Walter C. Uhler At first, one might wonder why Williamson Murray and Maj. Gen. Robert H. Scales Jr. even wrote The Iraq War. After all, as they write, "The conflict with Iraq engaged an enemy who had virtually no military capabilities left after an air war of attrition lasting over 12 years." Coalition forces not only had technologically superior weapons, but also engaged an enemy that had incompetent military leadership, soldiers unwilling to die for Saddam Hussein, and an air force that "could not get a single sortie into the air against the aerial onslaught that began on March 19." But the authors unexpectedly conclude that it was the "combination of discipline and initiative" of combat formations that was the most important factor in the coalition victory. More significantly, months before May 12, 2004--the date that Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate committee that "there is no way to militarily win in Iraq"--Murray and Scales saw that America could lose due to weak human intelligence. In fact, so "depressingly weak" is the "ability to interpret local languages, customs, and cultures," say the authors, that unless U.S. military technological superiority is soon coupled with intelligent thinking, "improved technologies will ensure only that political and military defeats will come later, and at greater cost." Such post-invasion pessimism hardly squares with the pre-war hubris of the Bush administration or the arrogance displayed by its most credible and statesmanlike representative, Secretary of State Colin Powell. His first week in office, Powell told his staff "that the United States can do pretty much what it wants because its sophisticated democracy makes it politically and morally superior to the rest of the world--and even sometimes exempts it from international norms and treaties" (Los Angeles Times, January 28, 2001). Not much later, in ostensible response to 9/11, the Bush administration unleashed a briefly victorious illegal preventive war opposed by most of the world but justified by strident assertions--subsequently proven to be false--about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ties to Al Qaeda. The invasion also unleashed looting, murder, infrastructure destruction, widespread insurgency, a worldwide surge in terrorism, torture in Iraqi prisons, and beheadings. Just 10 days after his inauguration, Bush held his first National Security Council (NSC) meeting. According to then-Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, who attended the meeting, the focus was Iraq. When Bush asked National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice what they would talk about, she asserted that Iraq might be the key to reshaping the entire Middle East, as Ron Suskind recounts in The Price of Loyalty. Bush did not emphasize Iraq during his presidential campaign. Indeed, in January 2000, Rice claimed there was "no sense of panic" about rogue regimes like Iraq and North Korea or even about their WMD because they are "living on borrowed time," meaning that any attempt to use WMD would spell obliteration. But O'Neill suspected Vice President Richard Cheney was writing the scripts. Cheney was influential in the appointments of Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, and therefore instrumental in creating the cabal of neoconservatives obsessed with Iraq. O'Neill also was surprised by Bush's decision to withdraw America from the Palestinian-Israeli peace process. He didn't know that Rice's words about reshaping the Middle East and Bush's decision to withdraw appear to have been lifted from an advisory paper ("A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm") written in 1996 for the prime minister of Israel by three Jewish-American neoconservatives--Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser. The paper is an ugly piece of work. As distinguished Middle East scholar Dilip Hiro notes in his exceptional book, Secrets and Lies, the paper urged Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's newly elected Likud prime minister, to abandon the peace process with the Palestinians, reject "land for peace," and strengthen Israel's defenses in order to confront Syria and Iraq, even with preemptive wars. Most significantly, the document recommended: "This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq--an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right." (It also recommended that Israel use pretexts for its preemptive attacks in order to dupe Americans into supporting naked Israeli aggression. As James Bamford remarks in A Pretext for War, "It was rather extraordinary for a trio of former and potentially future, high-ranking American government officials to become advisers to a foreign government. More unsettling still was the fact that they were recommending acts of war in which Americans could be killed, and also ways to masquerade the true purpose of the attacks from the American public.") If the "Clean Break" recommendations sound like the Bush-Rice-NSC agenda of January 2001, it's no surprise, because all three authors became senior national security officials or advisers in the Bush administration, all with close ties to Paul Wolfowitz. z Wolfowitz joined Rice as a foreign policy adviser to Bush during his presidential campaign. According to Hiro, Wolfowitz's obsession with Saddam Hussein began in 1992, when the CIA funded the Iraqi National Congress (INC) and its leader, Ahmad Chalabi. Wolfowitz forged close relations with Chalabi, who subsequently referred Iraqi defectors possessing intelligence about WMD (subsequently proved bogus) to the Office of Special Plans--a rogue intelligence center created within the Defense Department in 2002 at Wolfowitz's suggestion. Chalabi's defectors also fed America's gullible and lazy news media. Iraq dominated the private foreign policy agenda in 2001; missile defense the public agenda. In fact, Bush administration insider and terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke believes these obsessions prevented the United States from being as prepared as it could have been to prevent Al Qaeda's attacks on 9/11. Worse, however, was the Bush administration's decision to use 9/11 as the pretext for invading Iraq. Not only were Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz "going to try to take advantage of this national tragedy to promote their agenda about Iraq," but, as Clarke has said in his recent book, Bush told him to look for links between Saddam and Al Qaeda even though Bush knew that had already been done and had turned up no results. Through numerous iterations during 2002, the Defense Department perfected its plan of attack for Iraq. But it ignored many questions concerning post-Saddam Iraq--a purposeful omission, according to James Fallows in his article "Blind Into Baghdad" (The Atlantic, January/ February 2004). The lack of planning was deliberate, Fallows says, and designed to give Defense plausible deniability when asked by Congress or the public to project the problems and costs that might arise after the invasion. The flip side of Defense's refusal of accountability was a widespread propaganda effort aimed at leveraging Americans' strong support for the global war on terrorism by deceitfully linking Iraq to Al Qaeda and Saddam to bin Laden. Cheney was a powerful force pushing for war. And he was equally powerful when exerting pressure on the CIA and other intelligence agencies, making unprecedented visits to Langley in mid-2002 to speak with analysts there. When analysts wrote something about Iraq's WMD that didn't suit Cheney, he bombarded them "with a thousand questions," including, "Why are you disregarding sources that are saying the opposite?" (The New Republic, December 1, 2003). Cheney was referring to INC sources (now known to have lied) supplied by his friend, Chalabi. In a revealing outburst in the fall of 2002, Cheney asserted: "We're getting ready to go to war, and we're nickel-and-diming the INC at a time when they're providing us with unique intelligence on Iraqi WMD" (The New Republic, December 1, 2003). Guided by Cheney, Hiro tells us, Bush gave his "axis of evil" speech on January 29, 2002, announced his policy of "regime change" in April, and floated his policy of preemptive war in June--a first for an American president. By late summer 2002, the prospect of war was drawing attention and skepticism. To counter the skepticism, the White House Iraq Group was created to frighten the public into war. And it unleashed Cheney at the Veterans of Foreign Wars 103rd National Convention on August 26. Cheney cleared his speech with Bush "to the last word," according to Hiro. Making allegations that America and the world now know to be false, Cheney told his audience, "The Iraq regime has in fact been very busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and biological agents." Worse, he claimed, "We now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons." As evidence, Cheney cited the firsthand testimony of Saddam Hussein's son-in-law, Hussein Kamel Hassan. But Kamel could not have provided any recent information to support Cheney's claims: He had been executed in 1996. Moreover, rather than supporting Cheney's ominous claims, a complete reading of Kamel's assertions actually contradicts them, raising questions about Cheney's very competence and integrity. Kamel also said: "All chemical weapons were destroyed. I ordered the destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons--biological, chemical, missile, nuclear--were destroyed." Sitting on the stage behind Cheney during his VFW speech was a puzzled Gen. Anthony C. Zinni. As former chief of the Central Command (Centcom), Zinni had been responsible for enforcing the "no-fly" zones over Iraq and had access to the intelligence concerning Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Yet, as Zinni has said, "In my time at Centcom, I watched the intelligence, and never--not once--did it say, '[Saddam] has WMD'" (Washington Post, December 23, 2003). Cheney's speech took place just three days before President Bush signed a top secret National Security Presidential Directive titled "Iraq: Goals, Objectives, and Strategy" that committed the United States to the invasion of Iraq. That means Rumsfeld gave false testimony to Congress on September 19, 2002, when he said that Bush had not yet made the decision to go to war. Cheney's bogus claims were followed by Rice's false assertions about Iraq's aluminum tubes, which she coupled with a despicably alarmist warning about proof of a smoking gun coming in the form of a mushroom cloud. Soon after, Rumsfeld claimed to possess "bulletproof" evidence that linked Iraq with Al Qaeda. The world still awaits Rumsfeld's evidence. Although the decision for war already had been made, in October the CIA gave Congress its secret National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq and issued a public White Paper on Iraqi WMD programs. The NIE drew conclusions about Iraq's WMD that would be disproved by weapons searches after the war, but it also contained footnotes indicating why specific intelligence agencies dissented from some of these conclusions. Secret CIA testimony on the NIE persuaded Congress to authorize the use of military force against Iraq. But the public White Paper contained no dissent and was therefore much more categorical and alarmist. Moreover, in December 2003, Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida claimed that the secret briefings leading to the congressional resolution not only alleged that Iraq had WMD, but also "the means to deliver them to East Coast cities" (Florida Today, December 16, 2003). The case for Iraqi WMD was full of holes, and the Bush team knew it. Nevertheless, they dressed it up and gave it to Powell to present to the United Nations on February 5, 2003. There, Powell fell on his sword for Cheney's benighted obsessions. It was the crowning display of the Bush administration's so-called political and moral superiority--until it all came undone by actual events in Iraq. Hiro derides, among other things, the Bush administration's ignorance of history. "Baghdad was the capital of the Islamic Empire from 750 A.D. to 1258, with one interruption. . . . The occupation of Iraq by infidel troops was bound to inflame feelings in the Arab and Muslim world." And consider Bush's directive from God. According to Hiro, on June 4, 2003, Bush confided to Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas: "God told me to strike at Al Qaeda and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did." Paul Waldman's book, Fraud, fuels the fire of those who have a hard time believing any of Bush's words. Waldman excoriates the news media and focuses on Bush's lies because "when George W. Bush realized that his alleged lack of intelligence in the eyes of the press gave him the opportunity to lie without consequence, he knew he had struck political gold." The book is worth reading, if only because it yields one extremely relevant nugget concerning Iraq that speaks volumes about Bush's religious piety and character. In a supposedly private moment just before his national address announcing that war had begun, Waldman writes that "a camera caught Bush pumping his fist as though instead of initiating a war he had kicked a winning field goal or hit a home run. 'Feels good,' he said." Readers may have seen the Associated Press photo of Bush's tasteless fist-pump. Given all of the above, the words of former U.S. Chief Justice Robert H. Jackson, speaking as chief U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials in 1945, seem especially appropriate for the Bush administration: "Any resort to war--to any kind of war--is a resort to means that are inherently criminal. War inevitably is a course of killings, assaults, deprivations of liberty, and destruction of property. An honestly defensive war is, of course, legal, and saves those conducting it from criminality. But inherently criminal acts cannot be defended by showing that those who committed them were engaged in a war, when war itself is illegal." Walter C. Uhler, a Defense Department weapons acquisition executive, is president of the Russian-American International Studies Association. © 2004 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************