*****************************************************************
12/15/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.298
*****************************************************************
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 UPI OpEd on Iran and Nukes
2 EUbusiness: Iran nuclear chief says Tehran will not accept lengthy t
3 EUbusiness: Iran rejects negotiations with US on nuclear issue
4 Xinhua: Iran open to talks with US on nuclear issue
5 ITAR-TASS: US rejects bilateral talks with Iran on its nuke program
6 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Envoy Keeps N. Korea Talks Idea Open
7 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Iron pots from Gaeseong
8 Korea Herald: [HERALD INTERVIEW]'Pressure N.K. on human rights'
9 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS] Nuclear issue boils in the pot
10 Asia Times: US should recognize North Korea
11 [NYTr] US Missile "Defense Shield" Test Fails
12 US: [NukeNet] Important Test for Missile-Defense System Ends in
13 US: UPI: Energy Watch -
14 US: BBC: Missile defence shield test fails
15 US: csmonitor.com: Middle Path on Energy |
16 US: UCS: Global Warming Negotiations Must Move Forward Without the U
17 [NYTr] ElBaradei in Washington's Cross Hairs
18 Guardian Unlimited: Australia Minister Doesn't Want IAEA Post
19 New Vision online: Re-appoint Baradei
20 BBC: Making money from clean energy
21 BBC: Vanunu elected university rector
22 Haaretz: A `catch as catch can' nuclear policy
23 Xinhua: ElBaradei has nothing to hide - IAEA
24 Xinhua: Pakistan, India begin nuclear talks
NUCLEAR REACTORS
25 US: [NukeNet] Information Blackout Compels Call to Suspend Nuke
26 US: [NukeNet] NRC-PSEG meeting Friday at NRC HQ & 2 articles on
27 US: NRC: NRC Meeting with PSEG Nuclear Dec. 17 Concerning Hope Creek
28 US: NRC: NRC to Hold 17th Annual Regulatory Information Conference M
29 US: NRC: NRC Expands Eligibility Categories for Seeking Access to Cl
30 UPI: Czech nuclear reactor to shut once again -
31 US: NRC: Access Authorization & facility security
32 Slovak news: Bohunice wants payment for nuclear plant crash
33 Budapest Sun: Chernobyl cancer probe following train deaths
34 US: TheDay.com: NRC Denies Appeals Of License Renewals For Millstone
35 US: NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting
NUCLEAR SAFETY
36 [DU Information List] Uranium dust leaves a trail
37 [DU Information List] throw away soldiers and disposable
38 US: Daily Breeze: Depleted uranium used during both gulf wars is a p
39 Northumberland News: Inhaled uranium dangerous to human health
40 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Opinion What will it cost?
41 US: Daily Press: How Good Is Good Enough?
42 US: BusinessWeek: When Water Can Be Bad for Kids
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
43 US: Nuclear Terrorism, "Poofing," rad waste piling up (1000
44 US: Deseret news: Nuclear waste facility may 'raise bar'
45 US: San Bernardino County Sun: Percholorate treatment facility OK'd
46 US: Australian: With uranium, our interests come first
47 US: Bradenton Herald: Harris looks to expand testing
48 US: Bradenton Herald: Tallevast residents seek relocation
49 ThisisLondon: UK to keep foreign nuclear waste
50 BBC: 'Nuclear dumpsite' plan attacked
51 US: Canada NewsWire: Major additional uranium acquisitions at Saddle
52 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Huntsman hedges on B N-waste
53 CCDR: Company won’t be allowed to accept radioactive waste from othe
54 US: www.tbsource.com: Nuclear Waste Organization In Thunder Bay
55 Scotsman: Foreign Nuclear Waste to Be Dumped in Britain
56 US: courier post: Camco's suit against GEMS plan rejected
57 US: PE.com: County OKs plan to clean tainted water
58 US: CCDR: Public reaction mixed over decision
59 US: Casper Star-Tribune: Cotter loses bid to accept N.J. waste
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
60 Daily Times: There could easily be an accidental nuclear war = Anand
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
61 UC loses nuclear weapons program (2/9)
62 ABQjournal: LANL In Need of Upgrades
63 Tri-City Herald: Opinions Keeping wastes here at 'heart' of initiati
64 RGJ: Finally, an idea Nevada can use
65 lamonitor.com: Lab contract proposal seeks big changes
66 DOE: recommendation are due on or before January 14, 2005.
OTHER NUCLEAR
67 [du-list] link SR DailyNews Part 5: The best test
68 [du-list] SR DailyNews Part 5: The best test
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 UPI OpEd on Iran and Nukes
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:31:46 EST
Uninited Press International
Outside View: Iran can't be bought off
Bennett Ramberg
Published 12/15/2004 10:34 AM
LOS ANGELES, Dec. 15 (UPI) -- Can economics trump values? The European
Community has placed a bet that they can. In a new round of negotiations France and
Germany believe they can buy off Iran's ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons.
If history is the judge, the tack is a chimera. Failure should prompt another
course: challenge the values and their foundation.
Europe's quixotic aspirations go back to the fall of 2003. At the time,
Iran's nuclear perfidy was evident to all. Multiple reports from the United
Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency demonstrated conclusively that Tehran had
spent years secretly acquiring the means to manufacture nuclear weapons
ingredients in violation of its nonproliferation obligations. Washington took a
hard line. It called upon the IAEA Board of Governors to refer the matter to the
U.N. Security Council for the application of sanctions.
Britain, France and Germany balked. The Europeans saw a chance not only to
resolve the stalemate but -- in the case of Bonn and Paris -- to upstage
Washington while generating economic benefits for themselves. The result: In October
2003, the three European powers sent their foreign ministers to Iran to offer
economic, nuclear and political incentives. They believed that Iran could be
bought.
At first blush, the EU-3 scored a coup. On Oct. 21, 2003, Iran agreed "to
suspend all uranium enrichment and processing activities as defined by the IAEA."
Headlines declared, "Iranian Deal a Victory for European Diplomacy." The
adulation proved short-lived. Although it would not be until June 2004 when Tehran
bolted from the agreement, the signs already were present on Oct. 22, 2003
when President Mohammad Khatami declared, "Iran will never give up this
(enrichment) program."
When Iran's enrichment activities resumed in the summer of 2004, European
pride would not allow failure. The EU-3 offered the mullahs the promise of more
bountiful economic and nuclear carrots. Negotiations proved difficult. Iran was
unwilling to cede uranium enrichment. By early November, the parties struck a
new deal -- or so it appeared. Iran would "suspend" - again -- its enrichment
activities. Europe would have additional time to put an effective economic
incentive package together.
All that remained was the blessing of the IAEA Board of Governors. Back in
Tehran, conservative factions rebelled. They called for the exclusion of 20
centrifuges. The European venture teetered. To overcome the mullah's bargaining
ploy, the Board of Governors caved. It modified the standards applied to
verification and agreed that the suspension was not legally binding. It also rebuffed
Washington1s demands that Iranian violations serve as the tripwire for
Security Council action.
Now resolution of Iran's nuclear challenge resides entirely in Europe's
court. Unfortunately, a fundamental flaw infects the EU-3 strategy: Iran cannot be
bought. Economic currencies do not buy political values. For the mullahs, one
value dominates: preservation of the theocratic regime. Iran's leadership
appears to believe that a nuclear weapons capacity promotes supporting values
--security, international influence, self-confidence, prestige, scientific
infrastructure, economic modernization and energy diversity while buttressing
popular support.
Iran's values, however, can become the West1s sword. Consider a potpourri of
alternatives:
-- Co-opt Iran's nuclear enrichment ambition. Tehran repeatedly declares that
nuclear enrichment will promote energy security. The West should test the
contention. Propose an international partnership providing technology, expertise
along with co-managers, serving, most important, as expert resident watchdogs
with full authority to prevent suspect activities.
-- Sow nuclear fear. Iran, obviously, resides in a dangerous neighborhood.
Use public diplomacy to cultivate popular fear that nuclear plants are
radiological hostages to terrorist malevolence, military attacks and accidents.
Reiterate this question: Do nuclear values outweigh multiple nuclear risks and
economic costs for a country with abundant oil, natural gas and solar energy
resources?
-- Promote national security foreboding. The mullahs appear to believe that
nuclear weapons will promote national security. Impress upon them that the tack
will make them less secure. Iran will become an American nuclear weapons
target in an era of preemption.
-- Squeeze Iran's economy. The Iranian revolution promised a prosperity that
never matured. Economic isolation should follow the failed European
negotiation to press home the costs of nuclear perfidy.
-- Support Iran's democratic opposition. Provide convert assistance to such
groups as the Tahkimeh Vahdat, a domestic Iranian coalition that seeks to
contest the power of the clerics.
-- Use Baghdad to challenge Iran. Should Iraq stabilize and democratize, use
what will likely be a Shiite-dominated state to challenge Iran's model of
political development to promote regime change.
-- Offer a carrot. Remind Iranians about Libya. Libya's decision to halt its
WMD ambitions ended its political and economic isolation. Tehran would
likewise benefit.
Each measure tests values that sustain the Islamic regime. Collectively, they
provide a largely untried template that avoids the most draconian step that
lurks in the background -- namely, military action by Washington or Jerusalem
against Tehran's evident nuclear weapons program.
--
Bennett Ramberg served in the Department of State's Bureau of
Politico-Military Affairs in the administration of George H.W Bush.
--
(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by
outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views
expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the
interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)
Copyright © 2001-2004 United Press International
Want to use this article? Click here for options!
Copyright 2004 United Press International
Copyright © 2004. United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
*****************************************************************
2 EUbusiness: Iran nuclear chief says Tehran will not accept lengthy talks
with EU
http://www.eubusiness.com/plone.css);
15/12/2004
Iran's top nuclear official Hassan Rowhani said Wednesday his
country would not accept long drawn-out negotiations with the
Europeans over a nuclear deal, the state news agency IRNA
reported.
"I must say that the duration of the negotiations constitutes a
red line. The negotiations should not be lengthy," Rowhani said
on his return from talks in Brussels with the foreign ministers
of Germany, France and Britain, and European Union foreign
policy chief Javier Solana.
He said Iran would not allow the negotiations to last "too long
or be deviated from the main issues, or for a country to try to
waste time."
"We have reminded the Europeans that the duration of the
negotiations should not be too long and that the suspension of
(uranium) enrichment is valid only for the duration of the
negotiations," Rowhani added.
Iran has said a first evaluation of the negotiations with the
European Union would be carried out after three months.
The talks opened Monday with the focus on giving Tehran the
trade, technology and security rewards in return for suspending
uranium enrichment activities under an agreement struck last
month in Paris.
Text and Picture Copyright © 2004 AFP. All other copyright ©
2004 EUbusiness Ltd. All rights reserved. This material is
intended solely for personal use. Any other reproduction,
publication or redistribution of this material without the
written agreement of the copyright owner is strictly forbidden
and any breach of copyright will be considered actionable.
EUbusiness © Copyright EUbusiness Ltd 2004. Privacy Statement |
*****************************************************************
3 EUbusiness: Iran rejects negotiations with US on nuclear issue
url(http://www.eubusiness.com
15/12/2004
Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi on Wednesday rejected any talks
with the United States on the standoff over Iran's nuclear
programme because of Washington's hostile attitude towards the
Islamic republic.
"With the existing US hostile policies, there are no grounds for
negotiations with Washington. If they deal with Iran on the
basis of mutual respect and equality, then we would start talks
with them like other countries," he said after a weekly cabinet
meeting.
"There are no such conditions. In fact there no talks about
theirparticipation in negotiations between Iran and the
Europeans, and the Europeans have not proposed such a thing,"
Kharazi told reporters.
Washington, regarded by the Islamic republic as the "Great
Satan," accuses Iran of covertly developing nuclear weapons --
allegations that are vehemently denied by Tehran.
Meanwhile, top nuclear official Hassan Rowhani reiterated that
Iran would not accept long drawn-out talks with the EU powers
over a trade deal, offered in exchange for Tehran's decision to
suspend its controversial atomic activities.
"I must say that the duration of the negotiations constitutes a
red line. The negotiations should not be lengthy," Rowhani was
quoted as saying by the state news agency IRNA.
He was speaking on his return from Brussels talks on the
prospective European deal with the foreign ministers of Germany,
France and Britain, and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana.
Under an agreement struck in Paris last month, Iran agreed to
suspend uranium enrichment in return for trade, technology and
security rewards.
Talks began Monday with the focus on giving Tehran the trade,
technology and security rewards in return for suspending uranium
enrichment.
"We have reminded the Europeans that the duration of the
negotiations should not be too long and that the suspension of
(uranium) enrichment is valid only for the duration of the
negotiations," Rowhani added.
Iran has said a first evaluation of the negotiations with the
European Union would be carried out after three months.
Asked about US opposition to the re-election of Mohamed
ElBaradei as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), Rowhani said a renewal of his mandate would make no
difference to Tehran.
"It does not make any difference in our eyes whom ever is
elected for the post, since our case there is reaching its final
stages," he said. "In addition, the director's appointment does
not have any influence on our cooperation with the IAEA and we
will continue our cooperation."
On Sunday, the Washington Post reported that the US
administration has bugged telephone calls between ElBaradei and
Iranian diplomats, seeking ammunition to oust him as head of the
UN nuclear watchdog agency.
Some US officials maintain that ElBaradai was too soft on Tehran
since the IAEA began monitoring Iranian activities in February
2003.
Despite US pressures, the IAEA has confirmed that Iran had
suspended all the ultra-sensitive activities of uranium
enrichment and therefore was saved from his case being sent
before the UN Security Council.
The White House, however, has called on the international
community to "remain vigilant" and has not ruled out making a
unilateral Security Council referral despite the Paris accord.
Text and Picture Copyright © 2004 AFP. All other copyright ©
2004 EUbusiness Ltd. All rights reserved. This material is
intended solely for personal use. Any other reproduction,
publication or redistribution of this material without the
written agreement of the copyright owner is strictly forbidden
and any breach of copyright will be considered actionable.
EUbusiness © Copyright EUbusiness Ltd 2004. Privacy Statement |
*****************************************************************
4 Xinhua: Iran open to talks with US on nuclear issue
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2004-12-15 12:55:08
TEHRAN, Dec. 15 (Xinhuanet) -- Iran will not object to
talking with the United States on Tehran's nuclear program on
the basis of mutual respect and equality, said Iranian Foreign
Minister Kamal Kharazi here on Tuesday.
But the offer was rejected by Washington.
"Our condition for negotiating with America is that they
negotiate with us based on principles of mutual respect and
equality and not to impose their viewpoints," the minister told
a joint press conference with his South African counterpart
Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma.
Iran re-started negotiations with Britain, France and
Germany on Monday on freezing Tehran's nuclear program, and said
earlier that it will continue to freeze its nuclear activities
only as long as the talks with the above European countries show
progress.
Kharazi said the talks were "very serious" and Iran has "no
interest in wasting time and look forward to assessing trend
after three months to see if negotiations can guarantee Iran's
right to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes or not."
However, he warned that if Tehran finds the talks are waste
of time, "definitely we will make our own decisions."
Meanwhile in Washington on Tuesday, White House spokesman
ScottMcClellan expressed support for European countries'
efforts, but said what Washington believes is that "ultimately
Iran agree to end its nuclear weapons program, not just suspend
it."
Iran reached an agreement with the three European countries
in late November on the suspension of its uranium enrichment
program, but it said later the suspension was only for a short
period of time. Enditem
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
5 ITAR-TASS: US rejects bilateral talks with Iran on its nuke program
15.12.2004, 02.42
WASHINGTON, December 15 (Itar-Tass) -- The U.S. administration
made it clear it would not engage in bilateral talks with Iran
on its nuclear program.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan told a news briefing
Tuesday that the United States "remains supportive of the
European efforts."
"We will continue to stay in close contact with our Europeans
friends, and that's the way we're approaching this issue,” Mc
Clellan said after he was asked to comment on Iran's Prime
Minister statement that his country was willing to talk with the
United States about Washington 's concern over Tehran 's nuclear
program.
© ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy,
store in any medium (including in any other website),
distribute, transmit, re-transmit, broadcast, modify or show in
public any part of the ITAR-TASS website without the prior
written permission of ITAR-TAS.
*****************************************************************
6 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Envoy Keeps N. Korea Talks Idea Open
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Wednesday December 15, 2004 10:46 PM
By BARRY SCHWEID
AP Diplomatic Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration is willing to hold
limited face-to-face talks with North Korea and will continue to
help feed the country, but will not sweeten a proposed trade of
economic concessions for a halt in development of nuclear
weapons, the U.S. ambassador to South Korea said Wednesday.
Maintaining a tough line, Ambassador Christopher Hill said,
``They have to come to the table and respond to the proposal,''
which includes guarantees the United States will not invade
North Korea.
Hill also stressed that any direct negotiations with North Korea
would be conducted only under the umbrella of the six-country
format the Bush administration set up, in contrast to the
Clinton administration's one-on-one negotiations.
``We are prepared to talk to North Korea as part of the
six-party process,'' Hill said at the Asia Society. ``But we are
not prepared to undermine the six-party process'' that includes
China, South Korea, Japan and Russia in the talks.
So far, the Bush administration's persistence in using diplomacy
to solve a nuclear weapons crisis with North Korea is coming up
short as the communist country refuses to make good on its
pledge to resume talks.
The International Crisis Group, a private, nonprofit
organization that aims to prevent and resolve deadly conflicts,
recently criticized the U.S. offer as insufficient to move the
process forward, saying it lacked the kind of details that could
possibly win over North Korea.
Administration analysts are convinced that North Korea has made
two atomic bombs and may be adding to that arsenal while its
program remains unchecked.
The impasse in negotiations appears to be having a divisive
effect on U.S. relations with South Korea and Japan, which have
urged the United States to take a more flexible approach.
American diplomats are trying to smooth over those differences
while looking to China to make the case to North Korea that it
would be wise to remove nuclear weapons from the Koreas in
exchange for security assurances and economic benefits.
``We are in sync on how to address this issue,'' Hill said.
Asked if there were differences even with a common goal of
halting North Korea's nuclear weapons production, the ambassador
replied: ``Do they all have identical positions? Of course
not.''
He advised the North Korean government not to expect a better
deal than the trade-off proposed last June.
``We have to be sure they understand they are not getting a
better deal,'' Hill said.
Hill, who took up his post in Seoul last August after serving as
U.S. ambassador to Poland and to Macedonia, stressed the U.S.
offer of bilateral negotiations did not mean a return to the
one-on-one talks of the Clinton era.
From the outset of the Bush administration in 2001, some
analysts have urged maintaining one-on-one negotiations, which
produced a suspension of North Korea's plutonium production that
was later ended.
But Hill said, ``The notion that the United States should be
addressing this issue bilaterally, I frankly do not
understand.''
He offered assurances that American food shipments to North
Korea would continue so long as they are needed. But he said the
North Korean government had failed ``in a very fundamental'' way
to feed its people, and suggested that outsiders should monitor
food shipments.
An estimated 2 million North Koreans died of starvation or
disease associated with food deprivation during the mid- to
late-1990s.
In the past 1 years, the United States has provided 150,000 tons
of emergency food assistance to North Korea through the U.N.
World Food Program. Since 1995, the United States has given
North Korea about 2 million metric tons of food, valued at about
$707 million, the U.S. Agency for International Development
said.
A critic of the administration's negotiating strategy, Rose
Gotemoeller, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, said this week, ``The way in which the
administration has relied on diplomacy is to take a very hard
line and stick with it, and not be willing to explore possible
avenues of resolution.
``That's not diplomacy, that's standing tough,'' Gotemoeller, a
former Clinton administration official, said in an interview.
^---
On the Net:
State Department: http://www.state.gov
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
*****************************************************************
7 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Iron pots from Gaeseong
The Nation's No.1 English Newspaper
Home > News > Editorial/Op-Ed
A symbol of inter-Korean economic cooperation, the Gaeseong
Industrial Complex in the North Korean city of Gaeseong is up and
running. Living Art, a South Korean kitchenware company,
yesterday dedicated the first plant in the complex in a ceremony
attended by some 450 well-wishers from the two Koreas, including
South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young.
The first products made in Gaeseong, located just a few
kilometers north of the Demilitarized Zone, were 1,000 sets of
iron pots, which later in the day hit the shelves of Lotte
Department Store in Seoul for sale to ordinary consumers.
The historic start of the complex came four years after Hyundai
Asan Corp. signed a development agreement with the Asia-Pacific
Peace Committee of North Korea in August 2000. The beginning is
humble, with just 13 companies authorized to participate in the
pilot program which will run through the first half of next year.
Following Living Art, three or four South Korean companies are
scheduled to complete construction of their plants in January,
with the remaining firms to set up plants by June.
The number of companies operating in Gaeseong, however, will
rise as the development plan goes into full swing. If the first
phase of the plan progresses as scheduled, more than 300 South
Korean companies will be operating in the complex in 2006.
The launch of the complex means inter-Korean economic cooperation
is now shifting from the phase of unilateral support by the South
to that of mutual benefit. The complex, by combining the South's
capital and technology with the North's labor, will benefit both
sides.
But the prospects for the complex are not all that rosy. It faces
many obstacles. In the first place, if efforts to resolve the
North Korean nuclear problem run into a logjam, the expansion
plan may not go as planned. Furthermore, the U.S. ban on exports
of strategic items to North Korea could constrain the development
of the complex.
Another major challenge is the need to secure overseas markets
for products manufactured in the complex. To avoid heavy tariffs
on products made in North Korea, the government intends to seek
provisions in future free trade agreements with foreign countries
that will levy the same tariff rates on made-in-Gaeseong products
as those applied to South Korean products.
The Seoul government has already set an important precedent:
Singapore, which has recently concluded free trade talks with
South Korea, agreed to treat Gaeseong products as if they were
manufactured in South Korea when the free trade agreement goes
into force.
We hope the two sides across the border cooperate to overcome
these and other challenges and make Gaeseong a beacon of hope in
inter-Korean relations and a catalyst of meaningful changes in
the North.
2004.12.16
*****************************************************************
8 Korea Herald: [HERALD INTERVIEW]'Pressure N.K. on human rights'
U.S. expert says diplomacy alone won't end nuke standoff
By Andrew Petty
Passing the U.S. North Korean Human Rights Act was not easy but
enforcing it will be even harder, one of the drafters of the
bill, Michael Horowitz, said.
South Korea's support for the bill is key to its survival and
leaders of the liberal ruling Uri Party here have so far
rejected it, he said in an interview with The Korea Herald
during a trip to Seoul last week.
Horowitz, senior fellow of the U.S. think tank Hudson
Institute, met National Assembly members from the Uri and main
opposition Grand National Party, scholars, refugee aid groups
and religious leaders to get support and answer questions about
the effort to improve conditions in the North.
While Uri and other liberals are firmly against the bill, the
conservative GNP and other conservative groups support the
measure as a way to hold North Korea accountable for its actions.
Michael Horowitz
The toughest critics see the bill as being a U.S. tactic to
bring about a regime change in Pyongyang but Horowitz says that
more than just Bush administration officials are concerned about
human rights. "What people (in Korea) do not understand is that
Americans from the left and right, Jews and Christians are
supporting this," he said. "It came from a true grassroots
effort."
As a Jew, he spoke of people in his community now picking up
the fight for human rights after comparisons were drawn between
North Korea's prison gulags and labor camps and the
concentration camps of Nazi Germany.
At a seminar hosted last week by the local Christian group Save
North Korea, Horowitz criticized President Roh Moo-hyun for
being the only world leader working to keep the Kim Jong-il
government alive.
He noted that China, often defined as North Korea's closest
ally, may be reconsidering the costs of supporting the Stalinist
state and planning for measures needed in a possible post-Kim
Jong-il era.
The position of the South Korean government is to ensure peace
first through diplomacy while striking agreements with North
Korea to disarm its nuclear weapons, and then deal with human
rights.
Horowitz believes this approach will never work.
"We have to separate what we want and what can really happen,"
he said, expressing the firm belief that dictators cannot keep
agreements and Kim Jong-il will find a way to develop nuclear
weapons regardless of any pacts.
Horowitz suggests ignoring the nuclear situation for the
moment, believing that the communist state will only attack
Seoul if they are struck first. "The U.S. faced down the Soviet
Union without military action and they had about 6,000 nuclear
weapons," he said.
Putting Kim on the defensive about human rights is the best way
to pressure the leadership into change, he said. Before
Pyongyang receives any aid or peace agreements, Horowitz wants
to see "measurable improvement."
During his recent trip to Europe, Roh sought to dismiss
speculation of a North Korea regime collapse and spoke out
against a regime change.
Horowitz said the international community will have a difficult
time taking the South Korean leader seriously as it continues to
hear horror stories from the North.
One of the aims of the North Korean Human Rights Act is to
spread the word about abuses committed in North Korean prisons
and labor camps, the lack of freedoms for its citizens, and
alleged use of gas chambers and human experimentation.
Horowitz said that In the near future, an envoy will be
appointed to meet world leaders, non-government organizations
and other groups to get support to pressure North Korea into
reform. The list of candidates has not been narrowed yet.
Also, an international conference will be funded by the bill,
providing an opportunity for diplomats to see alleged evidence
of human rights violations and hear North Korean defectors share
their tales.
No date for the conference has been set, and no host city or
country has been selected.
As the international community learns more about human rights
violations in North Korea, South Korea will be pressured to act
as well and wake up from its state of "denial," Horowitz said.
"We are trying to tell them (the collapse of North Korea) is
coming sooner rather than later."
(apetty@heraldm.com)
2004.12.16
*****************************************************************
9 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS] Nuclear issue boils in the pot
December 16, 2004 KST 16:14 (GMT+9)
The first manufactured goods from the Gaeseong Industrial
Complex were produced yesterday. Despite the dire situation
surrounding the Korean peninsula due to the nuclear crisis in
the North, the Gaeseong Complex has now become a new symbol of
inter-Korean economic cooperation with the production of goods
there.
Even though the first products were 1,000 sets of pots, the fact
that the goods produced in Gaeseong were sold in a department
store in Seoul on the same day signals that if North and South
Korea cooperate, it will open an era of "one-day economic
cooperation." It symbolically shows that this is an opportunity
for coexistence.
Like the Mount Geumgang Tourism project, which has now
stabilized, the Gaeseong Industrial Complex has made a
successful start, and even though unification appears a long way
off, it will be a chance for people in North and South Korea to
increase their understanding of the need for unification and
will become a catalyst for change.
We shouldn't indulge in the excitement and delight that the
first goods were produced in Gaeseong and let them get in the
way of what needs to be done. The future of the Gaeseong
project, or the various kinds of inter-Korean cooperation that
will occur, may not be as smooth as one may expect.
In the microscopic sense, there are files of pending issues that
occurred in the course of developing the industrial complex,
including how the the project expenses will be procured. Other
issues that need to be overcome include simplifying passage
procedures for South Korean businessmen and technicians, the
communications issue and the ills of bureaucracy in North Korea.
Also, the government needs to figure out, with the help of the
international community, how to improve export procedures and
secure markets for goods, and deal with restrictions on sending
strategic goods to North Korea.
In the macroscopic sense, if there is no progress made on the
nuclear issue in North Korea, it is worrisome how we can link
this with economic cooperation with the North.
The government must let the North know the importance of solving
the nuclear issue. In this respect, cooperation and trust with
Washington is essential. In the era of inter-Korean cooperation,
the South Korea-U.S. alliance must get even more solid.
Inter-Korean relations can flourish when supported by a strong
alliance.
2004.12.15
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use
*****************************************************************
10 Asia Times: US should recognize North Korea
News and analysis from Korea; North and South
By Peter R Moody, Jr
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows
guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are
interested in contributing.
America's approach to nuclear proliferation in North Korea is
faulted for alienating its South Korean ally. Countries do what
they have to do, so perhaps it's worth the cost, except the
policy does not seem particularly effective in furthering US
goals toward the North. Indications are that US President George
W Bush is not prepared to rethink Korea policy during his second
term. Yet were there the will, Bush's re-election (and possibly
some kind of political change in the Democratic People's
Republic of Korea, the DPRK) provides an opportunity for a
radically different approach.
The general non-proliferation regime, such as it is, strives to
deny states the means to produce nuclear weapons. But states
that want such weapons seem to figure out ways to get them. It
may be more effective to treat the question from the demand side
- to address the political goals states hope to serve through
the acquisition of nuclear and other weapons of mass
destruction.
North Korea claims its governing motive is security from a US
attack. The very disproportion between the power of the United
States and the rest of the world gives states an incentive to
find ways to counter US pressures. This would be true even if
the United States were inclined to mind its own business, but
since the early 1990s, the US has shown an unusual propensity to
throw its weight around, a pattern only reinforced by the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The US has not attacked
any states that have nuclear weapons.
North Korea is most directly concerned with the US military
presence in South Korea, officially know as the Republic of
Korea (ROK). If we look at the matter coldly, there is really no
reason for hostility between the United States and the DPRK,
except for the US commitment to defend South Korea from a
Northern attack. But in the judgment of the ROK's government,
this is no longer the problem it used to be.
Of course, since the early 1990s the United States has become
more concerned about the North Korean weapons program than about
the ever less necessary defense of the South. But without the US
commitment to the South, the North would have much less of a
rationale for building nuclear weapons. And in the abstract,
North Korean nuclear weapons are not a direct threat to the
United States, apart from their potential use in a renewed
Korean war.
Should the US perhaps cut the Gordian knot: offer North Korea
immediate, good-faith, unconditional diplomatic recognition?
This would be the most tangible indication that the United
States does not intend to attack North Korea (at least as
convincing and simpler than a Ribbentrop-Molotov-style
non-aggression pact North Korea sometimes whines for): it would
be a public US acknowledgment of the DPRK's international
legitimacy.
"Unconditional" means the United States should not demand
beforehand that the DPRK do anything about its weapons program.
It certainly means that recognition should not be accompanied by
offers of money in exchange for concessions: questions of aid
can be negotiated on their own merits, not as extortion. Nor
should normalization be accompanied by any grandstanding -
visits by presidents or secretaries of state or such. The tacit
acceptance of a nuclear North Korea prevents the weapons program
being used as a bargaining chip. Perhaps the United States could
reasonably request that the DPRK refrain from selling its
weapons or technology to hostile states or unsavory non-state
entities.
This modest proposal violates current American policy against
bilateral negotiations with North Korea. Although it is now hard
to remember, the original rationale for this was to assuage the
ROK's not unreasonable fears that direct negotiations between
the United States and North Korea would lead to accommodations
at the South's expense. But given the current posture of the
government in Seoul, this concern also is anachronistic. And as
the 1993-94 Pyongyang nuclear crisis demonstrated, the DPRK can
force bilateral negotiations over South Korea's head when it
presses hard enough.
A side effect of the proposed action would be a dilution of the
South Korean-American alliance, a toning down of American
political influence in northeast Asia. The United States would
abandon any ambition to exercise direct control over much of
what goes on in the region.
There will be benefits to the region. America would no longer be
in a position to pledge its allies, Japan and South Korea, to
bankroll dubious Korean Peninsula Energy Development (KEDO), or
KEDO-type boondoggles without consulting with them first. (KEDO
was established to provide safe nuclear power to North Korea,
but it has been suspended). But the immediate effects of an
American-North Korean demarche would probably be consternation.
Over the longer run, it could promote multilateral interaction,
perhaps fostering the evolution of a Korean security regime
guaranteed by the countries participating in the current
six-party talks involving North and South Korea, China, Japan,
Russia and the US.
American power generates distrust of the United States. It also
allows free rides on the American bandwagon. On the Korean
issue, states can maneuver for their own advantage in ways that
are not always constructive, confident that the US will check
any North Korean audacity while reserving the luxury of
criticizing how America goes about it and reaping the rewards of
that criticism. A partial American suspension of offensive
military action would encourage a greater sense of
responsibility among the regional powers.
In the unlikely event that American recognition results in North
Korea's abandoning its nuclear program, there is little left to
say. And if there is a problem, it is more the region's than
America's. If current South Korean policy is based on illusion,
a less prominent American role will encourage a less illusory
approach. China wins praise for helping mediate between the DPRK
and the United States, but in a way that leaves the impression
it thinks it is doing America a favor and that its mediation
should give it leverage against America, say, on Taiwan. A more
modest American role would induce China to deal with North Korea
on its own merits (and if China really believes a nuclear North
Korea is, on balance, tolerable, then its mediation is perhaps
not worth much anyway).
A limited American regional role does not mean no role; and a
lesser degree of engagement is not total disengagement. The
American role should be to support, within the constraints of
its own interests, regional efforts to handle problems presented
by the DPRK. It is not America's place to run the show.
All of this is offered without any excuses for the DPRK, or even
too many hopes for immediate effects. To deprive North Korea of
the pretext of threats to its security might provide room for
internal reforms, at least more so than the present course. But
this is nothing to count on. The North Korean regime is truly
foul. Its foulness, though, lies in the way it treats its
people, in its internal political dynamic, and its indifference
to international standards of civilized behavior. It is best
dealt with by its neighbors who are directly affected by its
foulness, not by a pushy, self-righteous, questionably competent
outside superpower.
Peter R Moody Jr is professor of political science at the
University of Notre Dame, and has written on Chinese politics,
the politics of the East Asian states, and the international
relations of East Asia.
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows
guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are
interested in contributing.
Online may be republished in any form without written
Online, 4305 Far East Finance Centre, 16 Harcourt Rd,
*****************************************************************
11 [NYTr] US Missile "Defense Shield" Test Fails
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:56:52 -0600 (CST)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
sent by Simon McGuinness
BBC News - Dec 15, 2004
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/4097267.stm
Missile defence shield test fails
The first test in almost two years of the planned multi-billion dollar
US anti-missile shield has failed.
The Pentagon said an interceptor missile did not take off and was
automatically shut down on its launch pad in the central Pacific.
A target missile carrying a mock warhead had been fired 16 minutes
earlier from Kodiak Island in Alaska.
The Pentagon is spending $10bn a year on the missile system, which was
meant to be in operation by the end of 2004.
The Missile Defence Agency said an "unknown anomaly" was to blame for
the system shutting down.
A spokesman said officials would now study data from the launch site at
Kwajalein Atoll, in the Marshall Islands, to establish what went wrong.
In earlier tests, target missiles have been successfully intercepted in
five out of eight attempts.
Wednesday's trial had been put off four times because of bad weather at
launch sites and, on Sunday, because a radio transmitter failed.
A Pentagon spokesman told Reuters news agency the test had not been tied
to the question of when the national missile defence system would be
declared operational.
Philip Coyle, chief weapons tester under former US President Ronald
Reagan, told Reuters: "This is a serious setback for a programme that
had not attempted a flight intercept test for two years."
The goal, announced by US President George W Bush in 2002, was to have a
basic ground-based shield in place by the end of this year.
The last test, in December 2002, failed when the interceptor missile did
not separate from its booster rocket.
The programme has been nicknamed "son of Star Wars" after the original
Strategic Defence Initiative - or "Star Wars" - outlined by President
Reagan in the 1980s.
*
Search the NYTr Archives at:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
=================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012
http://www.blythe.org e-mail: nyt@blythe.org
=================================================================
*****************************************************************
12 [NukeNet] Important Test for Missile-Defense System Ends in
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:40:55 -0800
Videos, Including Space Weaponization,
Nuclearization: http://www.envirovideo.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/15/politics/15cnd-miss.html?ei=5094&en=6fc01398c045bf2b&hp=&ex=1103173200&adxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1103146232-s73Xstu91Z1uyyVsXkcr7g
Important Test for Missile-Defense System Ends in
Failure
By DAVID STOUT
Published: December 15, 2004
ARTICLE TOOLS
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Format
Most E-Mailed Articles
Reprints & Permissions
TIMES NEWS TRACKER
Topics
Alerts
United States Armament and
Defense
Track news that interests you.
ASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - An important test of the
United States' emerging missile-defense system
ended in an $85 million failure early today as an
interceptor rocket failed to launch as scheduled
from the Marshall Islands, the Pentagon said.
A target rocket carrying a mock warhead was
successfully launched from Kodiak, Alaska. But the
interceptor, which was to have gone aloft 16
minutes later and picked off the target 100 miles
over the earth, automatically shut down instead
because of "an unknown anomaly," the Defense
Department's Missile Defense Agency said.
Despite the disappointment, today's event was not
a total failure, said Richard A. Lehner, an agency
spokesman. He said "quite a bit" had been learned
from the aborted test, which he called "a very
good training exercise." He noted that the rocket
that failed to rise can be used later. The target
rocket landed in the ocean some 3,000 miles from
Kodiak, he said.
Mr. Lehner said he could not predict when the
cause of the shutdown might be determined. No
future tests have been scheduled.
The missile agency had attempted a test several
times this month, but weather and other factors
caused postponements. Today's test was to have
been the most advanced so far, Mr. Lehner said.
The interceptor was equipped with the same type of
booster rocket that the defense system is to use
when it is fully operational.
The test was also to have been the first for the
multibillion-dollar program since Dec. 12, 2002.
That test was also a failure; the interceptor did
not separate from its booster rocket, missed its
target by hundreds of miles and burned up in the
atmosphere.
Before today's test, the Pentagon agency had
conducted eight tests with interceptor vehicles,
scoring hits in five. Some critics of the Missile
Defense Agency, which has spent more than $80
billion since 1985, say the entire program is
unrealistic, and that the tests have been
scripted.
On the contrary, the agency says. It says the
tests are designed to answer specific questions
and "to build confidence in the system that we are
working to design." Although individual tests are
expensive, Mr. Lehner said fewer are necessary
than with missiles of years past because of
advanced modeling and simulation techniques.
The missile system under development is a
scaled-down version of the "Star Wars" defense
envisioned by President Ronald Reagan two decades
ago against a rain of missiles from the Soviet
Union. But the end of the cold war made President
Reagan's original vision outdated. The system now
contemplated would guard the United States against
attack from smaller "rogue nations."
The administration of President Bill Clinton
explored a much less advanced system. Then George
Bush pledged during the 2000 campaign to push for
a scaled-down version of the Reagan plan.
It was not immediately clear how long today's
failure might delay deployment of the system. In
December 2002, President Bush said he hoped the
system would be operational by the end of 2004.
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
13 UPI: Energy Watch -
(United Press International)
December 16, 2004
By Andrea R. Mihailescu
Washington, DC, Dec. 15 (UPI) -- According to Viktor
Shevaldin, director general of Lithuania's Ignalina nuclear
power plant, one of the plant's turbines ceased to function for
one week due to technical difficulties. Shevaldin said, "control
indicators at the turbine's system of pipelines, which has
recently been repaired, showed two faults which are not
essential and do not pose a threat." The turbine has a capacity
of 350 megawatts. Shevaldin added, "This month, Lithuania's
power grid will not receive 58.8 mega kilowatt hours of electric
power." Before joining the European Union, Lithuania intends to
shut down the No. 1 generating set of the nuclear power plant by
Dec. 31, and No. 2 generating set in 2009. Shevaldin said that
Lithuania sought to persuade EU experts to extend the work on
the plant's No. 1 generating set for another six months because
the construction of new thermal power plants in Kaliningrad and
Riga would not be completed according to the planned schedule.
Lithuanian experts argued that if an accident occurred at the
plant's No. 2 generating set during the winter, the entire power
grid of the Baltic region would experience a serious power
shortage. The entire plant produces 80 percent of all electric
power for Lithuania, of which almost half is exported to Russia,
Belarus, Poland, Latvia and Estonia.
-0-
After a three-year interruption, Israel's Delek Group
subsidiary Delek Energy Systems intends to invest $4.6 million
in concessions to resume drilling for oil and gas in Vietnam.
Delek and its partners have prepared a drilling plan for 2005.
Britain's Premier Oil plc intends to make most of the investment
in the concession. Delek currently owns 25 percent of the
concession; U.S. Samedan Oil Corporation sold its 75 percent
share to Premier Oil in June. Drilling in Vietnam ceased because
Delek and its partners did not find commercial quantities of oil
or gas. The concession covers 2,664 square miles in the South
China Sea with a 62-miles depth, 155 miles southeast of Vietnam.
The Vietnamese government has the option to purchase 15 percent
of the concession rights from U.S. Opeco; the Vietnamese
government currently owns 3.8 percent in royalty rights.
According to the agreement with the Vietnamese government,
Premier Oil will undertake the full cost of the drilling; the
Vietnamese government intends to assume an additional 25 percent
drilling costs. Delek expects costs for 2005 to amount to
$60,000-200,000.
-0-
Government Holdings Limited and Oil &Gas Development Company
Limited will invest approximately $3.5 million in an offshore
drilling project in Pakistan's Indus Delta, located at the
offshore edge of the Thar platform. The government of Pakistan
granted exploration licenses over block no. 2367-4, known as
Indus Delta-A, to Government Holdings Limited and signed a
Production Sharing Agreement with Oil &Gas Development Company
Limited for offshore exploration. According to the agreement,
the total area of the block is 965 square miles. Through the
Premier-Kufpec joint venture with Pakistan, Kuwait Foreign
Petroleum Exploration will also commence drilling in the Indus
Delta by mid-2005 with an investment of $20 million.
-0-
On his visit to Yemen, Marc Eyking, parliamentary secretary to
the Canadian Ministry of International Trade announced on Dec.
13 that Canada intends to expand the country's cooperation on
trade and oil relations with Egypt. Eyking added that Egypt's
security environment provides a good atmosphere for Canada's
businessmen. Leading a business delegation on a two-day visit as
part of a tour to include the United Arab Emirates and Qatar,
Eyking visited Cairo later that day and said that Canada seeks
to improve educational cooperation in the technological and
engineering fields. Eyking also expressed Canada's hope to have
a trade exchange with all countries in the Middle East.
-0-
Francisco Jose Elorza Cavengt, Spanish ambassador to Russia,
announced that Spain intends to participate in the construction
of a Moscow-St. Petersburg high-speed railway line and to
purchase Russian gas for re-export. Cavengt said, "Spain is
ready to finance the Moscow-St. Petersburg high-speed railway
project at its designing and development stage. The overall cost
of preliminary work amounts to $1.3 million." Spain also seeks
to purchase Russia's gas for domestic consumption and for
re-export of gas products to North American markets.
-0-
Sergei Mironov, speaker of the Federation Council, the upper
chamber of the Russian Parliament, announced on Dec. 12 that
Iran has asked Russia to assist the country in constructing
another nuclear power plant. Mironov said, "They hope that the
next nuclear power plant will also be constructed by Russia."
Mironov noted that Iran's President Mohammad Khatami shares his
wishes while adding that the construction of the Bushehr nuclear
power plant will continue and its first power generating unit
will begin its operations in 2006.
-0-
Closing oil prices, Dec. 15, 3 p.m. London
Brent crude oil: $42.22
West Texas intermediate crude oil: $41.82
*****************************************************************
14 BBC: Missile defence shield test fails
Last Updated: Wednesday, 15 December, 2004
[A target missile that was launched from Vandenberg Air Force
Base leaves a blue light over the night sky in California, 7 July
2000. ]
The Pentagon blamed the test failure on an "unknown anomaly"
The first test in almost two years of the planned multi-billion
dollar US anti-missile shield has failed.
The Pentagon said an interceptor missile did not take off and was
automatically shut down on its launch pad in the central Pacific.
A target missile carrying a mock warhead had been fired 16
minutes earlier from Kodiak Island in Alaska.
The Pentagon is spending $10bn a year on the missile system,
which was meant to be in operation by the end of 2004.
The Missile Defence Agency said an "unknown anomaly" was to blame
for the system shutting down.
Animated guide: How the system works
A spokesman said officials would now study data from the launch
site at Kwajalein Atoll, in the Marshall Islands, to establish
what went wrong.
In earlier tests, target missiles have been successfully
intercepted in five out of eight attempts.
Wednesday's trial had been put off four times because of bad
weather at launch sites and, on Sunday, because a radio
transmitter failed.
A Pentagon spokesman told Reuters news agency the test had not
been tied to the question of when the national missile defence
system would be declared operational.
Philip Coyle, chief weapons tester under former US President
Ronald Reagan, told Reuters: "This is a serious setback for a
programme that had not attempted a flight intercept test for two
years."
The goal, announced by US President George W Bush in 2002, was to
have a basic ground-based shield in place by the end of this
year.
The last test, in December 2002, failed when the interceptor
missile did not separate from its booster rocket.
The programme has been nicknamed "son of Star Wars" after the
original Strategic Defence Initiative - or "Star Wars" - outlined
by President Reagan in the 1980s.
*****************************************************************
15 csmonitor.com: Middle Path on Energy |
for 12/16/2004
One of President Bush's first-term goals was a new national
energy policy. But it bogged down over such controversies as
drilling for oil in Alaska's National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR),
Vice President Cheney's industry-heavy task force, and a gasoline
additive.
While Washington wrangled, top US foundations funded the
bipartisan National Commission on Energy Policy. Staffed by a
diverse group of energy stakeholders, the private panel last
week issued balanced recommendations that take on "cherished
myths from both right and left," as put by John Rowe, commission
cochair and CEO of utility Exelon Corp.
The group recognized, for instance, a "misplaced focus on energy
independence." The US will depend on fossil fuels for decades.
On the supply side, it suggested encouraging oil production in
nations with underdeveloped reserves, and building an Alaska
natural gas pipeline. On the demand side, it called for
strengthening federal fuel economy standards, and incentives for
making and buying hybrids and advanced diesel vehicles.
But it also emphasized cleaner and alternative energy -
investment in advanced coal and nuclear technology, for example,
and in renewable energy.
The price for this $36 billion, 10-year program could be paid
for by tradable permits from mandatory reductions on greenhouse
gas emissions. The cost of those cutbacks would be capped - a
compromise with industry.
The commission left ANWR alone and couldn't agree on specific
fuel efficiency standards. But its middle-of-the-road approach
is a template for an urgently needed energy policy that the new
Congress must consider.
Special Offer: Subscribe to the Monitor and get 32 issues FREE
www.csmonitor.com | Copyright © 2004 The Christian Science
Monitor. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
16 UCS: Global Warming Negotiations Must Move Forward Without the U.S.
[Union of Concerned Scientists]
(Opening remarks of Alden Meyer, Union of Concerned Scientists,
at the Climate Action Network press conference,
December 13, 2004, in Buenos Aires, Argentina)
While there are many technical and tactical issues being
discussed at these negotiations, there is one overriding
strategic issue: what to do about the United States?
The Bush administration has made its position crystal clear: the
United States will not engage in any negotiations or discussions
about mandatory emissions limits before 2012 at the earliest. Of
course, unless the U.S. Constitution is changed to allow
President Bush to run for a third term, this "just say no"
position will only stand until early 2009, when the next
president takes office.
Under President Bush, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions will continue
to increase in the years ahead. Fifty years from now, the Bush
presidency will likely be remembered for two things: the war in
Iraq, and the utter irresponsibility of the president's climate
policy.
For negotiators here in Buenos Aires, the U.S. government's
position leaves three options for future negotiations.
First, they could try to engage the Bush administration on
post-2012 climate policy. Given the administration's posture,
this would be like talking to a brick wall.
Second, they could wait for the next administration to take
office in four years to start negotiations on what comes next.
Given the urgent need to minimize the impacts of climate change,
the world can't afford such a delay. Also, this would create
uncertainty amongst the world's businesses, just now starting to
adjust to the reality of binding emissions limits under the Kyoto
Protocol, as to whether those limits will in fact continue and
deepen post-2012.
The third option is to start negotiations next year, as called
for in the Kyoto Protocol, without any expectation of meaningful
participation by the United States. This should be done in a way
that makes U.S. re-entry into the process possible under the next
U.S. administration. This last option is far from ideal, but is
the only one that holds out any prospect for progress.
The European Union must take the lead in these negotiations, by
engaging major developing countries such as Brazil, China, and
India, and by declaring now that it will move forward with
further emissions reductions post-2012 even in the face of U.S.
inaction. Implementation of its existing Kyoto commitments will
also show how seriously the EU takes this issue, and will
demonstrate the fallacy of President Bush's claim that meeting
the Kyoto targets can only come at the costs of the economy and
jobs.
The EU should support the progressive actions being taken by a
growing number of U.S. states, cities, and businesses on global
warming. These governors, mayors, and business CEOs are providing
much-needed leadership, in stark contrast to the president's
head-in-the-sand approach. The EU should consult these leaders as
to the shape of the future climate treaty regime, ensuring that
constructive U.S. views are taken into account in the negotiating
process and building support within the United States for the
post-2012 agreement that results from the negotiations.
It may seem a paradox that the best way to ultimately draw the
United States back into the international climate treaty regime
is by not wasting time trying to engage the current U.S.
administration. But that is the reality the world now faces.
To set up interviews or for UCS info, contact:
ERIC YOUNG
Assistant Press Secretary
202-223-6133
eyoung@ucsusa.org
RICH HAYES
Media Director
202-223-6133
rhayes@ucsusa.org
© Union of Concerned Scientists
Page Last Revised: 12.14.2004
*****************************************************************
17 [NYTr] ElBaradei in Washington's Cross Hairs
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:13:59 -0600 (CST)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Asia Times - 14 December 2004
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FL14Ak03.html
ElBaradei in Washington's crosshairs
By Ehsan Ahrari
When a major policy fails to produce the desired results, put the
blame on an unrelated reason for its failure and go after the
removal of that unrelated reason. That, in essence, is what the
United States is trying to achieve in its current endeavors to
remove Mohammad ElBaradei as the head of the United Nations' nuclear
watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). His
supposed fault, according to US sources, is that he "lacks
impartiality" in his dealings with Iran in the ongoing diplomatic
crisis over its nuclear programs. A front-page report of the
Washington Post published on December 12 has thrown light on the
continuing power play between Washington and the IAEA, a tussle that
ElBaradei might lose - despite that it has done nothing wrong.
There is no doubt that Iran's supposed aspiration to develop nuclear
weapons has vexed the US for many years. Even in the first Bill
Clinton administration in the early 1990s, that very issue clouded
US-Russia relations, since Moscow was, and remains, involved in
providing Iran with nuclear technology. In the post-September 11,
2001, environment, depriving the so-called "rogue states" - whose
new label under the Bush administration became "axis of evil" states
- of weapons of mass destruction has become one of the foremost
objectives of President George W Bush's national-security strategy.
That was also the first purported reason underlying the US-led
invasion of Iraq. However, the absence of nuclear weapons in Iraq
has created a sort of long-term drawback - if not a credibility gap
- for the US when it comes to accusing another member of that "axis"
of nuclear ambitions, and then persuading the world body to impose
punitive sanctions.
That was why the US had to take a back seat and let the European
Union's "big three" - France, Germany and the United Kingdom - take
the lead in negotiating an agreement with Tehran to freeze its
uranium-enrichment program. This development aside, the role of the
IAEA has remained a source of ongoing, if not permanent, friction
with the White House. The United States' modus operandi on the issue
of nuclear non-proliferation is to consider an accused "axis of
evil" nation guilty, and then to insist that it should produce
incontestable evidence proving its innocence. The chief motivation
of the IAEA, on the contrary, is to bring about nuclear
non-proliferation with a country under inquiry without any prior
assumptions of its guilt. At the same time, the IAEA is not
interested in responding to the specific national-security agendas
of any of the member nations of the world body, and it insists on
maintaining strict neutrality and impartiality in the entire process
of its inquiry. That was the chief reason the IAEA came under major
criticism from the US when Hans Blix was heading it, during its
dealings with Iraq under Saddam Hussein.
ElBaradei shares that legacy of impartiality for which the IAEA is
despised in US national-security institutions. According to the
Washington Post report, the US has eavesdropped on ElBaradei, as it
did during the term of Blix. Some Bush partisans are claiming that
the intercepted calls have shown a lack of impartiality by the chief
of the IAEA as he tried to help Iran navigate a diplomatic crisis
over its nuclear programs. However, according to that report, the
"intercepted calls have not produced any evidence of nefarious
conduct [of partiality] by ElBaradei". Others take the position that
"the transcripts [of the intercepted calls] demonstrate nothing more
than standard telephone diplomacy".
A well-known US intention in this entire episode of questioning
ElBaradei's impartiality is to force him into not seeking a third
term next summer. However, the Egyptian diplomat has an impeccable
reputation and strong support among the 35-nation board of the IAEA,
which is likely to vote for his reappointment. In a rare show of
independence from the Bush administration, even the United Kingdom
is reportedly reluctant to press for ElBaradei's ouster. However,
outgoing US Secretary of State Colin Powell is citing the so-called
"Geneva rule" of limiting the chief of the IAEA's tenure to two
terms. What might be helping ElBaradei is the fact that no
acceptable major candidate has yet emerged, even though a near-ideal
US choice is reported to be Australian Foreign Minister Alexander
Downer.
The ElBaradei controversy only underscores America's frustrations
with the international negotiating process that is not immediately
leading to iron-clad guarantees about Iran's promise to freeze its
uranium-enrichment program. But the chief of the IAEA has broken no
rules and has shown no favors toward Iran. In fact, by becoming
unpopular within the chauvinistic cadres of American bureaucrats, if
anything, ElBaradei, like his memorable predecessor Blix, has proved
that he is a stickler for going by the book, and for the use of
international diplomacy for the sole objective of bringing about
global nuclear non-proliferation.
[Ehsan Ahrari, PhD, is an Alexandria, Virginia, US-based independent
strategic analyst.]
*
Search the NYTr Archives at:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit:
http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
=================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012
http://www.blythe.org e-mail: nyt@blythe.org
=================================================================
*****************************************************************
18 Guardian Unlimited: Australia Minister Doesn't Want IAEA Post
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Wednesday December 15, 2004 2:16 AM
CANBERRA, Australia (AP) - Australia's foreign minister said
Wednesday that the United States had asked him to challenge
International Atomic Energy Agency head Mohamed ElBaradei for
the top job at the U.N. nuclear watchdog, but he had declined.
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer was responding to a report
Sunday in The Washington that the Bush administration wanted him
to take over the role because it regards ElBaradei as too soft
on Iran's suspected nuclear program.
Downer said he had ``barely'' spoken to the United States about
challenging the agency's chief.
``I've not taken up the opportunity to demonstrate a great deal
of interest in this job,'' Downer said at a news conference in
Papua New Guinea that was aired by Australian Broadcasting Corp.
radio.
``I appreciate the interest that's been shown but I enjoy what
I'm doing,'' he added.
The U.S. State Department had no direct response to Downer's
comments.
``The United States does not have a preferred candidate to
succeed Dr. ElBaradei. We are interested in knowing what
candidates other counties may put forward,'' State Department
spokesman Noel Clay said in Washington.
Australia is a staunch ally of the U.S.-led war on terror and
contributed 2,000 troops to the Iraq invasion.
Downer declined to say whether Australia would support ElBaradei
remaining in the job he has held since 1997.
``We're not getting into, for Australia's part, any particular
role in this issue at all,'' Downer said.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004
*****************************************************************
19 New Vision online: Re-appoint Baradei
Uganda's leading daily http://www.newvision.co.ug
THE United States has been tapping the phone of Mohammed
el-Baradei, the Egyptian head of the International Atomic Energy
Agency. The CIA listened into his phone calls with Iranian
officials discussing their controversial uranium enrichment
programme.
The Washington Post alleged that the Bush administration is
looking for dirt to get rid of el-Baradei. The White House denies
this but says it does not believe that any UN head should serve
more than two terms in office. Baradei’s term expires next year.
American frustration with el-Baradei dates back to before the
invasion of Iraq when the IAEA remained sceptical that Iraq
possessed a nuclear bomb. They were right. After the invasion,
el-Baradei further infuriated the United States by criticising
lax security by coalition forces when looters stole hazardous
radioactive material.
The United States should gracefully accept that el-Baradei was
right and they were wrong. They should not try to get rid of him
because they believe he is ‘soft’ on rogue states.
The Bush administration has double standards. It was happy to
negotiate with North Korea which openly admits it has an illegal
nuclear weapons programme. But it wants UN sanctions against Iran
which denies any such programme and for which no hard evidence
exists.
It also tapped the phones of weapons inspector Hans Blix and UN
head Kofi Annan in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.
The United States no longer trusts any international agency. The
Bush administration is coming close to subverting the world order
that it was instrumental in establishing through the League of
Nations and Bretton Woods.
The rest of the world should now signal that enough is enough and
ensure the re-appointment of the competent and respected
el-Baradei for a third term at the IAEA. That would clearly
signal to the United States that prejudice cannot be allowed to
take precedence over factual analysis in foreign policy.
Published on: Thursday, 16th December, 2004
© Copyright The New Vision 2000-2004. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
20 BBC: Making money from clean energy
Last Updated: Wednesday, 15 December, 2004
By Andrew Walker
BBC economics correspondent in Buenos Aires
[Wind energy]
Wind energy represents a business opportunity for some companies
Many business people are worried about efforts to tackle climate
change.
Some of the key tools in the effort to curb greenhouse gas
emissions could raise the cost of energy.
Carbon taxes or the capping of industrial emissions could raise
costs.
Some businesses, like BP, say they have saved money by improving
their own energy efficiency.
But there is a whole group of businesses that stand to do very
well out of the climate change agenda.
The fact that the Kyoto Protocol comes into force in February -
imposing limits on most developed countries' emissions - means
those opportunities may be close at hand.
Take electricity generation.
Wind and solar power and small hydro-electric plants don't
produce greenhouse gases. (Nor do nuclear or large
hydro-electric projects but they are more controversial for
other environmental reasons.)
No complaints
[Oil plant in Brazil]
Many argue that developing countries should not rely on fossil
fuels
These 'renewable' energies account for a very small proportion of
current worldwide power generation. But they are likely to grow.
Companies in these businesses see a huge opportunity ahead of
them.
This is not a sector where people will express a hint of doubt
about the science of climate change - which other business people
sometimes do.
Econergy provides advice and investment funds for what chief
executive Tom Stoner calls clean energy.
Wind and solar feature and there is one project which involves
burning waste from a sawmill to produce electricity, waste that
would otherwise rot or be burned and give off greenhouse gases.
He says developing countries need investment in their energy
infrastructure; otherwise they won't develop.
Nevertheless, it needs to be clean energy he says, the world
cannot afford the additional emissions if developing countries
grow on the basis of fossil fuels.
And of course businesses like his will thrive in an environment
where that approach is widely believed.
Efficient energy
[Paris] Buildings produce more emissions in the EU than transport
And there is the unglamorous business of using energy
efficiently.
The European Insulation Manufacturers' Association has sent its
boss, Horst Biedermann, here to Buenos Aires.
He says that in the European Union, buildings produce more
emissions - 40 per cent of the total - than either transport or
industry.
The firms he represents can fix that problem.
He acknowledges that making insulation produces a lot of
greenhouse gas - because glass or stone has to be heated to high
temperatures before it is made into mineral wool.
But, when installed, the savings are greater by a factor of
twenty, he says.
So, for sure there are some businesses who see the effort to
tackle climate change as cloud on the horizon. But for a few it
is a little ray of sunshine.
*****************************************************************
21 BBC: Vanunu elected university rector
Last Updated: Wednesday, 15 December, 2004
[Mordechai Vanunu on release from prison]
Vanunu was released in April from an 18-year prison term for
treason
A former technician who was jailed for 18 years for leaking
Israel's nuclear secrets has been elected rector of Glasgow
University.
Mordechai Vanunu, 50, will hold the post for three years.
Students said they had voted for him to show their support for
basic human rights and their opposition to weapons of mass
destruction.
Mr Vanunu's predecessors include Winnie Mandela, Benjamin
Disraeli, Johnny Ball and current rector Greg Hemphill.
The position of rector only exists at Scotland's four "ancient"
universities.
Arms programme
The person in the post is elected by students to represent them
in a number of ways, which can include chairing the University
Court.
The rector's participation in events is entirely voluntary,
depending on their own availability and choice.
Mr Vanunu, who is widely regarded as a traitor in Israel, was
jailed for revealing details of Israel's clandestine nuclear
arms programme.
It is our hope that he wi be able to support the student body in
the way that they desire
Sir Muir Russell
Glasgow University principal
Under the terms of his release, he is forbidden from leaving
Israel, meeting foreigners and revealing secrets about the Dimona
nuclear plant.
The principal of Glasgow University, Sir Muir Russell, said: "The
election of Mr Vanunu demonstrates the diverse and international
concerns of Glasgow students.
"It is our hope that he will be able to support the student body
in the way that they desire."
Previous rectors have included politicians such as former British
Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli and South Africa's Mrs Mandela.
More recently, the post has been filled by children's entertainer
Johnny Ball, pop singer Pat Kane, trade unionist Jimmy Reid and
sports commentator Arthur Montford.
'More active'
Comedian Greg Hemphill was elected to the rectorship in 2001.
Speaking after his nomination last month, Mr Vanunu said:
"Because of my current situation I will try to do my best for
Glasgow University if I am elected rector - and I hope I am
elected.
"One day I might be free to leave Israel and then I could come to
Scotland and be much more active for the students.
"If I am chosen I will do all I can to help them and to draw
international attention to the restrictions in Israel."
*****************************************************************
22 Haaretz: A `catch as catch can' nuclear policy
News Updates Thu., December 16, 2004 Tevet 4, 5765
By Yossi Melman
This week, the discussions between Iran and the European Union
were renewed. Their purpose is to reach a solution - even a
temporary one - to the crisis of Iran's nuclear program. The
contacts and the discussions follow on from the November Paris
agreement between Iran and the EU and the decision of the
secretariat of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
According to the Paris agreement, which was approved by the IAEA,
Iran agreed to freeze all procedures related to its enrichment of
uranium for an unspecified period of time. In exchange, there was
an agreement regarding negotiations over the package of benefits
to be granted by the EU.
During the talks, which begin this week, the sides will discuss
the provision of European uranium with a low level of enrichment
(which cannot be used for producing nuclear weapons), the
provision of a reactor powered by light water (as opposed to the
heavy water reactor that Iran is trying to build, in which it is
possible to produce plutonium, which is also used for nuclear
weapons), and enabling Iran to join the World Trade Organization.
The Paris agreement and the IAEA decisions do not mention the
time span of suspension, because this point remains
controversial. The EU would like the suspension to continue for a
long time, but senior Iranian spokesmen made it clear several
times that it will be for a limited time: "The suspension has
been set for a maximum of six months, to guarantee Iran's nuclear
activity is for peaceful purposes," said the chair of Iran's
Expediency Council and former Iranian president, Ali Akbar
Hashemi Rafsanjani. Iranian President Mohammad Khatami expressed
similar sentiments this month, saying that Iran had declared to
the world that it would not accept an unlimited suspension and
would defend its rights.
It should be emphasized that Iran, which is a signatory to the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), is allowed to enrich
uranium so long as it is designated for peaceful purposes and is
supervised by the IAEA. Iran's willingness to freeze its program
for enriching uranium comes of its own free will, and is defined
as a "confidence-building measure," in the hope that in exchange
the IAEA and the international community will stop pressuring
Iran, thus enabling it to continue with its clandestine program
to reach the capability to develop nuclear weapons - or the
threshold of that capability.
Renewed crisis
All the experts who are keeping track of Iran's nuclear program,
both in the academic world and in the research units of the
Western intelligence communities, therefore agree that the crisis
will soon be renewed. Dr. Sharam Chubin, an Iranian exile who
participated this week in the session about nuclear proliferation
at the Herzliya Conference, sponsored by the Interdisciplinary
Center Herzliya, also shares this view. But as opposed to the
opinion that prevails among most of the experts, mainly in Israel
and in the United States, he is not an alarmist. "Although Iran
is determined on the issue of its nuclear program, it has no
clear strategic rationale on this issue, as did Israel in the
1950s when it formulated its nuclear program, or later, when
India and Pakistan did so," he says in a conversation with
Haaretz.
Chubin left Iran in 1977, about two years before the Islamic
revolution that brought Ayatollah Khomeini to power in February
1979. During the 1960s he studied at Columbia University in New
York City, worked as a researcher at the International Institute
for Strategic Studies in London and now lives in Geneva, where he
heads the academic program of the Swiss group called the Geneva
Center for Security Policy. Since the 1980s, he has been writing
articles and publishing research about Iran's foreign policy.
Chubin agrees with the assessment that Iran's nuclear program is
consistent and methodical, and is attempting to achieve a
"nuclear option." These efforts have been going on for two
decades and in that Iran differs, in his opinion, from Saddam
Hussein's Iraq. "After Israel destroyed the nuclear reactor in
Iraq in 1981, Saddam Hussein tried in the decade ending in 1991
to attain nuclear weapons, and for that purpose he established an
accelerated program, into which he channeled billions of
dollars." Iran, on the other hand, is working slowly but
determinedly. "Every year, Iran allocates funding for the purpose
of developing its nuclear capability, but it doesn't do so with
accelerated moves, as did Saddam."
This stems from the absence of a clear decision in Iran, he
believes. "Iran's program is not final. Its leadership has no
clear knowledge on this issue - only a general goal. This is
because Iran has no strong enemies threatening it, it has no
neighbors with nuclear weapons that are threatening it and above
all it is very sensitive to international pressure, and fears the
high price it is liable to pay - in international sanctions and a
military strike - because of its nuclear program."
Therefore, he says, Iran prefers first and foremost to work
towards what is defined as a "nuclear option" - attaining all the
required materials and technology, which will enable it, if it
wishes to do so, to reach the stage of producing nuclear weapons
within a very short time. He sees an expression of this in Iran's
decision to prefer the development of the nuclear option in the
context of its membership in the IAEA and the NPT, unlike Israel,
India and Pakistan, which are not signatories to the NPT. He
estimates that "there is no decision in Iran saying `Let's fool
the world - we'll manufacture two bombs and then we'll resign
from the NPT." However, he does not believe that Iran's efforts
to achieve nuclear capability should be taken lightly, and he
believes these efforts are taking place in secret, outside the
supervision of the IAEA. In other words, Chubin claims that Iran
is taking an approach of "catch as catch can" as long as
possible, but it is also taking international pressure into
account and is aware of its own limitations.
Promotes solidarity
How do you explain the fears in Israel and in the United States
that Iran is trying with all its might to attain nuclear weapons
and the warning being heard to that effect?
Chubin: "It's quite natural, because in keeping with the
strategic culture of the experts in Israel and in the United
States, their analysis relies on the worst-case scenario."
Does the world have to accept the possibility that Iran will have
nuclear weapons?
"Yes. Words to that effect were said recently by Zbigniew
Brzezinski, who was U.S. president Jimmy Carter's national
security adviser. But of course, official spokesmen of Western
governments will not dare say this, and perhaps justifiably so,
because it would be interpreted in Tehran as a weakness of the
international community, and would encourage them even further."
How can Iran be prevented from achieving the nuclear option - and
nuclear weapons?
"If the United States takes wise diplomatic steps. American had a
rare opportunity about a year and a half ago. After the
occupation of Baghdad and the fall of Saddam Hussein, the regime
in Iran suffered from anxiety. Rafsanjani declared that
everything - terror, the nuclear program and even the
Israeli-Arab conflict - were open to negotiations. Contacts were
initiated between American and Iranian officials, but in the wake
of the Al-Qaida attack in Riyadh in May 2003, which the United
States claimed was initiated by Iranian terror masterminds, the
administration cut them off.
"Since then, the United States has been demanding that the IAEA
decide that the nuclear issue will be discussed in the UN
Security Council. But it is having difficulty doing so, because
it doesn't have a majority for its position. It would be better
if the Americans were to threaten sanctions and an economic
boycott against Iran. Two days ago, Iranian Foreign Minister
Kamal Kharazi did not reject the possibility that his country
would conduct discussions about its nuclear program with the
United States."
Is there a military option to speak of?
"Such an option is hard to implement. In effect, the United
States has no military levers against Iran. The United States is
stuck in Iraq, and it is doubtful whether it will open another
front. It is Iran that can threaten the United States. The regime
in Iran behaves like bullies in the marketplace. There is a
feeling there of `What can you do to us, anyway?' since Iran is
the country that can activate terror against the Americans in
Iraq and in Afghanistan."
Who in Iran makes the decisions on the issue of the nuclear
program?
"As opposed to the general impression, the spiritual leader Ali
Khamenei hardly intervenes on the issue. President Khatami
actually has no control, either. Policy is formulated and
determined by a limited group headed by Rafsanjani, Hassan
Ruhani, who heads the Supreme Security Council, Ali Akbar
Velayati, who was the foreign minister and is now Khamenei's
adviser for national security, and Mohsen Rezai, who was the
commander of the Revolutionary Guards."
In your opinion, is Iran an "insane country"?
"Not at all. The regime in Iran is rational and pragmatic. They
are not a sect whose members are willing to commit suicide. They
want to survive and will use any means to do so. Iranian
chauvinism, national pride, the nuclear program, are all
instruments for attaining this goal. They know that most of the
population opposes them. The regime takes that into account. The
nuclear policy serves them for creating national unity and
solidarity. They want to create the impression among the
population that the entire world is against Iran and that Iran is
under siege, and as proof they present the opposition to the
nuclear program as an attempt to deny Iran modern technology and
scientific capability.
"However, I don't want to sound as though I take the danger posed
by their nuclear policy lightly. It has two causes: one is the
distorted worldview of the regime and its self image. The regime
sees itself as the victim of an international conspiracy. The
second reason stems from the nature of the regime, which operates
in secret when it comes to its strategic decisions and
particularly the nuclear program."
Chubin. "The regime in Iran wants to survive, and will use any
means to do so. Iranian chauvinism, national pride, the nuclear
program, are all instruments for attaining this." (Ofer Vaknin)
© Copyright Haaretz. All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
23 Xinhua: ElBaradei has nothing to hide - IAEA
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2004-12-15 09:47:09
VIENNA, Dec. 14 (Xinhuanet)-- International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei has nothing to hide, his
spokesman said in response to reports that the United States was
spying on ElBaradei, Austria's Presse newspaper reported on
Tuesday.
[International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed
ElBaradei has nothing to hide, his spokesman said in response to
reports that the United States was spying on ElBaradei,
Austria's Presse newspaper reported on Tuesday.]
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed
ElBaradei has nothing to hide, his spokesman said in response to
reports that the United States was spying on ElBaradei,
Austria's Presse newspaper reported on Tuesday. (Xinhua/AFP)
"We work on the assumption that one or more entities may be
listening to our conversations," ElBaradei's spokesman Mark
Gwozdecky said, adding that the agency works for all members and
had nothing to hide.
On Sunday, the Washington Post reported that the US
government has dozens of intercepts of ElBaradei's telephone
calls with Iranian officials, and is scrutinizing them in search
of ammunition to oust the IAEA chief.
ElBaradei, an Egyptian diplomat, began to lead the UN
nuclear watchdog in 1997.
The 62-year-old ElBaradei is well-respected inside the
United Nations, and many of the countries on the IAEA board have
asked him to stay for a third term beginning next summer.
[International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed
ElBaradei has nothing to hide, his spokesman said in response to
reports that the United States was spying on ElBaradei,
Austria's Presse newspaper reported on Tuesday.]
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed
ElBaradei has nothing to hide, his spokesman said in response to
reports that the United States was spying on ElBaradei,
Austria's Presse newspaper reported on Tuesday. (AFP/file)
Washington, however, opposes a third term for ElBaradei,
claiming that heads of international organizations should not
serve more than two terms.
The United States has also allegedly complained that
ElBaradei has been too soft with Iran, and has clashed with
Washington over the issue of weapons of mass destruction in
Iraq.
Washington denied allegations that it wants to get rid of
ElBaradei.
"We work very closely with Dr. ElBaradei to address
proliferation issues and address issues of nuclear weapons
programs in countries like Iran and North Korea (the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea), and we will continue to do that
during his term," White House spokesman Scott McClellan told a
news briefing on Monday. Enditem
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
24 Xinhua: Pakistan, India begin nuclear talks
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2004-12-15 13:15:18
BEIJING, Dec. 15 -- Pakistan and India have begun
expert-level talks on nuclear confidence building measures in
Islamabad amid hopes of progress on a proposed agreement on the
advance notification of missile tests.
The talks are part of the on-going peace process between the
two nuclear-armed neighbors.
Officials are expected to discuss opening a hotline between
the two sides, to avoid a nuclear dispute caused by a
misunderstanding or accidents.
In another development, the two sides concluded talks on
anti-drug trafficking in New Delhi. They did not reach any
agreements but agreed to continue discussions.
(Source: CRIENGLISH.com)
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
25 [NukeNet] Information Blackout Compels Call to Suspend Nuke
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:41:19 -0800
*** P R E S S R E L E A S E ***
NUCLEAR INFORMATION AND RESOURCE SERVICE
PUBLIC CITIZEN
For Immediate Release: Dec. 15, 2004
Contact: Michael Mariotte, NIRS (202) 328-0002; Joseph Malherek, PC
(202) 454-5109
Citizens' Groups Request Suspension of Licensing Hearing for Nuclear
Plant
Litigants in Case Seek Relief from Filing Schedule as Government Files
Remain Inaccessible Due to Security Review
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS)
and Public Citizen -- two groups engaged in a legal intervention against
a company seeking a license to build a uranium enrichment plant in New
Mexico -- today asked an adjudicatory board of the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) to suspend the licensing case schedule as
long as official documents relating to the case remain inaccessible due
to a security review being conduced by the NRC, the primary regulator of
the nuclear industry.
On Oct. 25, the NRC blocked public access to virtually all of the
electronic documents posted on its Web site pending a security review
"to ensure that documents which might provide assistance to terrorists
will be inaccessible." Included among those documents is the license
application of Louisiana Energy Services (LES), the subject of dispute
in this case. Additionally, all other case-related documents in the
hearing file have been rendered unavailable to the public.
Despite this, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) that is
governing the case has yet to suspend or delay the hearing schedule
deadlines to ensure that interested parties have access to all relevant
documents that are needed to file timely and complete motions, briefs
and legal testimony. Pre-filed testimony is due Dec. 30, and the
hearing is scheduled to begin Feb. 7, 2005.
"The effect of this information blackout is to marginalize the citizen
intervenors in this case," said Wenonah Hauter, director of Public
Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program. "How can we be
expected to prepare meaningful testimony when we have been denied access
to the most basic information in this case?"
In their motion, the groups complain that the NRC is in breach of rules
and regulations. As a remedy, the groups propose a suspension of the
scheduled proceedings until 30 days after essential case documents are
once again available.
"This is a blatant violation of regulatory procedure and the
Commission's own established rules governing this case," said Michael
Mariotte, executive director of NIRS. "It is inexcusable that the NRC
has kept these documents unavailable for this long while proceeding with
deadlines in this case. Short of a complete and immediate restoration
of public access to these documents, the only solution is a suspension
of the proceeding."
LES is a multinational consortium of energy companies led by the
European firm Urenco. It has been seeking a license for a domestic
uranium enrichment facility for more than a decade.
To read the motion, please go to
http://www.citizen.org/documents/ADAMSmotion.pdf .
###
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
26 [NukeNet] NRC-PSEG meeting Friday at NRC HQ & 2 articles on
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:40:02 -0800
Those interested in participating in Friday's NRC-Hope Creek meeting by
telephone can call 1-888-455-0045. The pass code for the teleconference is
"Hope Creek" and several dozen phone lines have been reserved for the
meeting by the NRC.
"participating" means being able to listen in as an observer during thte
meeting, and making comments only after the meeting has ended.
norm
NRC, PSEG Nuclear to meet Friday
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet with the operators of the Hope
Creek nuclear reactor Friday to discuss the condition of a key pump at the
power plant in Lower Alloways Creek Township.
The meeting -- the first of two expected before the Hope Creek reactor is
restarted -- will be held at NRC headquarters in Rockville, Md. The
session begins at 10 a.m. and is expected to conclude by 3 p.m.
NRC Spokesman Neil Sheehan said the main focus will be the condition of
one of two large recirculation pumps at the Hope Creek reactor which moves
water through the nuclear reactor to keep it cool. The pump in question,
recirculation pump B, vibrates when in operation.
The NRC wants to hear how PSEG Nuclear, the plant's operator, will ensure
the pump doesn't affect the plant's safe operation.
PSEG announced last month it would not replace the pump during the current
refueling outage, but would wait until the next outage -- about 18 months
away -- to put in a new pump.
The utility maintains despite the vibrations, the pump is safe to operate.
Nuclear watchdog groups are lobbying for replacement of the pump now.
Sheehan said there will be an exchange of information between the federal
agency and the utility about the pump's safety.
Also Friday, other issues at Hope Creek are expected to be discussed,
specifically the plant's high-pressure coolant injection system.
On Oct. 10 a steam pipe broke in the plant's turbine building. When that
occurred, operators manually shut down the reactor, but encountered
"complications" -- problems with controlling water levels in the reactor.
The meeting will be held in Room T7A1 of the agency's Two White Flint
North Building, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Md.
The public is invited to observe the meeting and will have an opportunity
to talk with NRC staff after the business portion, but before the meeting
is adjourned. Those interest in participating by telephone can call
1-888-455-0045. The pass code for the teleconference is "Hope Creek" and
several dozen phone lines have been reserved for the meeting by the NRC.
Another meeting on Hope Creek is to be held before the reactor is
restarted. During that session, preliminary results from the NRC's special
investigation at the plant after the Oct. 10 shutdown are expected to be
reviewed.
A date for that meeting has not yet been scheduled, but it may come before
the end of the year.
The meeting will be held closer to this area.
Copyright 2004 NJ.com. All Rights Reserved.
Posted on Tue, Dec. 14, 2004
Nuclear reactor's pump generates a safety dispute
Hope Creek's operator said the faulty equipment would last till 2006. The
state wants it replaced now.
Associated Press
LOWER ALLOWAYS CREEK, N.J. - The operator of the Hope Creek nuclear reactor
in Salem County wants to put off replacing a problem recirculation pump for
11/2 years despite concerns about its safety.
The 18-year-old recirculation pump, one of two that push water through the
core of the reactor, has a damaged shaft and a history of premature seal
failures, and it vibrates so severely it sounds like a freight train,
according to a report prepared last month for plant owner PSEG Nuclear.
New Jersey regulators have urged its replacement, but do not have
jurisdiction over the plant. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which
does, is reviewing the report and plans to meet with PSEG officials before
deciding whether to allow the delay.
Jill Lipoti, assistant director for radiation protection for the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection, said state officials had urged Hope
Creek to replace the pump now.
"The shaft is bowed, based on their own independent assessment," Lipoti
said
yesterday. "It seems prudent to replace it, but we'll rely on the NRC's
decision on the matter."
PSEG officials say the pump, which dates to the 1986 opening of the plant,
is stable enough to continue operating and will not be replaced during Hope
Creek's current shutdown.
Skip Sindoni, a PSEG Nuclear spokesman, said yesterday that the 62-page
report, by consulting engineers Sargent & Lundy, acknowledged the need to
replace the recirculation pump, but he said its continued operation was not
a safety risk.
Sargent & Lundy "came back and said there's vibration issues but that the
vibrations are stable, the conditions in the pump are not degrading, and
the
vibrations are below the vendor limit. This is safe to go for another
operating cycle," Sindoni said.
Replacement can wait until the reactor's next outage in 18 months, he said.
The plant had been scheduled for an outage but was shut down prematurely
Oct. 10 after a pipe ruptured, releasing radioactive steam into an area to
which workers do not normally have access.
No date has been set for Hope Creek to go back online. Diane Screnci, an
NRC
spokeswoman in King of Prussia, said it would have to wait for federal
regulators to weigh in on whether the recirculation pump's replacement
could
wait.
In the meantime, plant operators are installing new sensors to help monitor
the vibrations, Sindoni said.
Critics want quicker action.
In a letter to PSEG Nuclear chief executive A. Christopher Bakken, the
Union
of Concerned Scientists urged immediate replacement, saying anything else
would be "a gamble far larger than anything wagered in Atlantic City."
David Lochbaum, a nuclear safety engineer with the Washington-based
watchdog
organization, told Bakken in the letter that the vibrations from the pump's
bent shaft had damaged safety equipment at the plant.
A New Jersey group also wants the problem fixed immediately.
"It doesn't make any sense to take these kinds of risks for 18 months,"
said
Norm Cohen, coordinator of Unplug Salem, a nuclear watchdog group. "It
seems
the prudent thing to do is just fix the damn pump."
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/state
--
Coalition for Peace and Justice
UNPLUG Salem Campaign; 321 Barr Ave, Linwood
NJ 08221; 609-601-8583; cell 609-742-0982
ncohen12@comcast.net; www.unplugsalem.org
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
27 NRC: NRC Meeting with PSEG Nuclear Dec. 17 Concerning Hope Creek Maintenance Issues
News Release - 2004-15
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200
Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov
No. 04-159 December 14, 2004
Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff and managers will meet with
representatives of PSEG Nuclear, LLC on Dec. 17 at NRC
Headquarters in Rockville, Md., to discuss the Hope Creek
nuclear power plant in southern New Jersey.
The meeting will focus on high vibrations in a pump at Hope
Creek and how PSEG is planning to ensure the pump doesnt affect
the plants safe operation, as well as damage to a turbine
exhaust discovered during the plants current refueling outage.
The meeting will run from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. in Room T7A1
of the agencys Two White Flint North Building, at 11545
Rockville Pike.
The public is invited to observe the meeting and will have an
opportunity to talk with NRC staff after the business portion,
but before the meeting is adjourned. Those interested in
participating by telephone should call 888-455-0045. The
passcode for the teleconference is Hope Creek, and several dozen
lines have been reserved for this meeting.
Last revised Wednesday, December 15, 2004
*****************************************************************
28 NRC: NRC to Hold 17th Annual Regulatory Information Conference March 8 - 10 in Rockville, Md
News Release - 2004-16
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200
Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov
No. 04-160 December 15, 2004
annual Regulatory Information Conference (RIC) from Tuesday,
March 8, to Thursday, March 10, 2005, at the Bethesda North
Marriott Hotel & Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road in
Rockville, Md. There is no conference fee and the sessions will
be open to the public.
The conference brings together NRC managers, regulated utilities
and other interested stakeholders to meet and discuss nuclear
safety initiatives and regulatory trends. The RIC 2005 program
includes presentations by the NRCs Chairman, Commissioners and
Executive Director for Operations as well as breakout sessions
on technical and regulatory topics.
The agency is merging the RIC with the annual Nuclear Safety
Research Conference, previously run by the NRCs Office of
Nuclear Regulatory Research. In 2005, three sessions typically
discussed at the research conference will be integrated into the
RIC program.
A preliminary conference agenda is available on the NRCs Web
site at this address:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/conference-symposia/ric/.
Hotel reservations should be made through the Marriott at
1-800-228-9290. Please mention REG INFO CONF March 8, 9, and 10,
2005" when making your reservation. Interested parties may
register on the Internet at:
http://www.itgmanaged.com/nrc/registration.aspx[Exit Icon] or by
contacting Innovative Technology Group, Inc., 850 Sligo Avenue,
Suite 501, Silver Spring, Md. 20910; telephone: 301-495-9471 or
fax: 301-495-4946.
Last revised Wednesday, December 15, 2004
*****************************************************************
29 NRC: NRC Expands Eligibility Categories for Seeking Access to Classified Information
News Release - 2004-16
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200
Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail:
No. 04-161 December 15, 2004
classified information associated with NRC-regulated activities,
as well as the categories of facilities that may be authorized
to store such information.
The changes will allow the agency to process any requests for
security clearances related to the anticipated hearing for a
potential high-level radioactive waste repository at Yucca
Mountain, Nev., and to activities involving the design of
advanced reactors.
The rule will contribute to the Commissions policy of openness
by allowing authorized stakeholders to be involved in NRC
decision-making involving classified information relating to the
potential Yucca Mountain repository.
With regard to advanced reactors, NRC believes that most current
vendors of advanced reactor designs are NRC licensees or
contractors to NRC licensees or holders of security clearances
from other government agencies. However, to allow for the
possibility that there could be vendors who would need to seek
access to classified information through the NRC, the agency is
amending the regulations to allow the processing of these
requests.
Before access authorization to classified information is
granted, a satisfactory background investigation must be
completed, and the individual will be informed that unauthorized
disclosure of classified information could result in civil or
criminal penalties.
The amendments also extend the regulations on facility security
clearances. Current regulations permit persons and companies
regulated by the NRC to seek a facility security clearance to
use, store, reproduce, transmit, transport or handle NRC
classified information. These changes allow persons who are not
regulated by the NRC but nevertheless need the facility
clearance for NRC classified information to apply.
The revised regulations were published today in the Federal
Register and will become effective Feb. 28, unless significant
adverse comments are received by Jan. 14. Comments should be
addressed to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff; or sent by e-mail to SECY@nrc.gov or fax to
301/415-1101. Comments may also be submitted via the NRCs
rulemaking web site at .
Last revised Wednesday, December 15, 2004
*****************************************************************
30 UPI: Czech nuclear reactor to shut once again -
(United Press International)
December 15, 2004
Prague, Czech Republic, Dec. 15 (UPI) -- Czech officials
Wednesday announced a reactor at the Temelin nuclear power plant
would be closed again for repairs.
Temelin has encountered a series of problems over the years
raising fears in neighboring Austria that the plant is
fundamentally unsafe. Reactors were shut down four times in
August and September alone.
Officials said one of the two 1,000 megawatt reactors would be
shut down for five days for repairs to its cooling system.
Temelin was originally built using a Soviet design, but has
subsequently been upgraded using American technology.
The Czech government says it monitors safety at Temelin closely
and is convinced the plant is technically sound. The reactor
located 35 miles north of the Austrian border.
[UPI Perspectives]
*****************************************************************
31 NRC: Access Authorization & facility security
FR Doc 04-27405
[Federal Register: December 15, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 240)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 74949-74953]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15de04-1]
Rules and Regulations Federal Register
_________________________________________________________________
_______ This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory
documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of
which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal
Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44
U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the
Superintendent of Documents. Prices of new books are listed in
the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week.
=================================================================
======= [[Page 74949]] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Parts
25 and 95 RIN 3150-AH52
Broadening Scope of Access Authorization and Facility Security
Clearance Regulations
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission)
is
amending its regulations to broaden the scope of the regulations
applicable to persons who may require access to classified
information,
to include persons who may need access in connection with
licensing and
regulatory activities under the regulations that govern the
disposal of
high-level radioactive waste in geologic repositories, and
persons who
may need access in connection with other activities as the
Commission
may determine, such as vendors of advanced reactor designs. The
Commission is also amending its regulations to broaden the scope
of the
regulations applicable to procedures for obtaining facility
security
clearances, to include persons who may need to use, process,
store,
reproduce, transmit, transport, or handle NRC classified
information in
connection with the above-identified activities. In addition,
NRC is
correcting the scope section of the regulations that govern
access
authorization for licensee personnel to include certificate
holders and
applicants for a certificate; clarifying the definition of
``license''
in the regulations that govern access authorization for licensee
personnel and govern facility security clearance to include a
reference
to the regulations that govern combined licenses; correcting a
typographical error in the definition of ``security container''
in its
facility security regulations; and updating the references to
Executive
Order 12958 which has been amended.
DATES: The final rule is effective on February 28, 2005, unless
significant adverse comments are received by January 14, 2005. A
significant adverse comment is a comment where the commenter
explains
why the rule would be inappropriate, including challenges to the
rule's
underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or
unacceptable
without a change. In addition, if the NRC receives substantive
comments
on the information collection requirements by January 14, 2005,
the
direct final rule will be withdrawn. Then, the NRC will publish
a
document that withdraws the direct final rule and will address
the
comments received in a final rule as a response to the companion
proposed rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following
methods.
Please include the following number (RIN 3150-AH52) in the
subject line
of your comments. Comments on rulemakings submitted in writing
or in
electronic form will be made available for public inspection.
Because
your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or
contact
information, the NRC cautions you against including personal
information such as social security numbers and birth dates in
your
submission.
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attn: Rulemakings and Adjudications
Staff.
E-mail comments to: SECY@nrc.gov. If you do not receive a
reply e-
mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact us
directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the
NRC's
rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Address
questions
about our rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905;
e-mail
cag@nrc.gov. Comments can also be submitted via the
Federal eRulemaking
Portal http://www.regulations.gov.
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland
20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
(Telephone
(301) 415-1966).
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission at
(301) 415-1101.
Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may
be
viewed electronically on the public computers located at the
NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR), O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR reproduction
contractor
will copy documents for a fee. Selected documents, including
comments,
may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC
rulemaking Web
site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC
after
November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's
Electronic
Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From
this
site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide
Document
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and
image
files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to
ADAMS or
if there are problems in accessing the documents located in
ADAMS,
contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at
1-800-
397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Note: Public access to documents, including access via ADAMS
and
the PDR, has been temporarily suspended so that security reviews
of
publicly available documents may be performed and potentially
sensitive information removed. However, access to the documents
identified in this rule continues to be available through the
rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov, which was not
affected by the ADAMS shutdown. Please check with the listed NRC
contact concerning any issues related to document availability.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Anthony N. Tse, Office of
Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6233, e-mail
ant@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
NRC's regulations at 10 CFR Parts 25 and 95 govern access to
and
protection of classified information by licensees or other
persons who
have a need for access to this information. Part 25 contains
procedures
for establishing initial and continuing eligibility for access
authorizations for individuals
[[Page 74950]]
who may require access to classified information. Part 95
contains
procedures for obtaining a facility security clearance for
licensees,
certificate holders, or other persons who need to use, process,
store,
reproduce, transmit, transport, or handle certain types of NRC
classified information at any location in connection with
Commission-
related activities. The purpose of this rulemaking is to amend
Parts 25
and 95 to: (1) Add references to 10 CFR Parts 60 and 63 in Sec.
Sec.
25.5, 25.17(a) and 95.5; (2) expand the scope of Sec. Sec. 25.3
and
95.3 to include persons who may not be licensees or certificate
holders
or applicants for a license or certificate; (3) clarify the
definition
of ``license'' in Sec. Sec. 25.5 and 95.5 to include a
reference to
Part 52; (4) correct the omission of a reference to certificate
holders
in Sec. 25.3; (5) correct a typographical error in the
definition of
``security container'' in Sec. 95.5; and (6) update references
to
Executive Order 12958 to reflect that this Executive Order has
been
amended and could be further amended in the future.
Discussion
Although 10 CFR 25.3 speaks broadly of the regulations that
apply
to ``licensees and others who may require access to classified
information related to a license or an application for a
license,'' in
10 CFR 25.5, ``license'' is defined to mean ``a license issued
pursuant
to 10 CFR Parts 50, 70, or 72.'' Similarly, 10 CFR 95.3 states
that the
regulations apply to licensees and certificate holders and
others
regulated by the Commission who need access in connection with a
license or certificate or an application for a license or
certificate.
However, at 10 CFR 95.5, ``license'' is defined to mean ``a
license
issued pursuant to 10 CFR Parts 50, 70, or 72.'' Absent from
these
provisions is any reference to the Commission's regulations that
govern
the issuance of construction authorizations and licenses for
disposal
of high-level radioactive waste in geologic repositories (10 CFR
Part
60) or in a potential geologic repository at Yucca Mountain,
Nevada (10
CFR Part 63). Parts 25 and 95 were published on March 5, 1980;
45 FR
14476, before issuance of Part 60 (February 25, 1981; 46 FR
13971) or
Part 63 (November 2, 2001; 66 FR 55732) and Parts 25 and 95 were
not
amended to include these regulations. The Commission currently
anticipates receiving a license application from the U.S.
Department of
Energy under the provisions of Part 63. An adjudicatory
proceeding on
this license application could implicate the need for access
authorizations and facility security clearances by persons who
are
admitted as parties to the proceeding. Accordingly, NRC is
amending the
definition of ``license'' in Sec. Sec. 25.5 and 95.5 to include
references to licenses issued under Parts 60 and 63. For the
same
reason, references to Parts 60 and 63 are added to Sec.
25.17(a).
A second restriction that presently exists in 10 CFR 25.3
and 95.3
is that the requested access authorizations or facility security
clearances must be related to a license or certificate, or an
application for a license or certificate. There may be, however,
certain Commission-related activities undertaken by entities who
are
not licensees or certificate holders, or applicants for a
license or
certificate where an access authorization or facility security
clearance may be needed. The NRC believes there is a need for
access
authorizations and facility security clearances for vendors who
are
involved in the design of advanced reactors. These vendors could
need
access to classified information which would enable them to
consider
potential mitigative measures for operating reactors and design
features for the various advanced reactor systems. Currently, a
vendor
who is not an NRC licensee or a contractor to an NRC licensee
and does
not have a facility clearance or access authorization provided
by
another Government agency, is not eligible for an access
authorization
or a facility security clearance under Parts 25 and 95. NRC
believes
that most current vendors of advanced reactor designs are NRC
licensees
or contractors to NRC licensees or holders of clearances from
other
Government agencies. However, to allow for the possibility that
there
could be vendors who would need to seek access authorizations
and
facility security clearances through the regulations at Parts 25
and
95, the NRC is adding language to the scope sections of these
parts to
allow the processing of requests for access authorization or
facility
security clearances with respect to ``other activities as the
Commission may determine.'' This language could also be used to
begin
the processing of such requests, in advance of NRC's receipt of
a
license application under Part 63, by potential parties in an
adjudication on the application, or in circumstances when a need
for
access authorization might arise in the future.
Further, the NRC is clarifying the definition of ``license''
in
Sec. Sec. 25.5 and 95.5 to include a reference to Part 52 which
contains provisions for combined licenses in Subpart C and for
manufacturing licenses in Appendix M. Although NRC's intent that
access
authorizations needed in connection with activities under Part
52 be
included is evidenced by a reference to Part 52 in Sec.
25.17(a), a
similar reference to Part 52 does not appear in the definition
of
``license'' in Sec. Sec. 25.5 and 95.5. The Commission is
correcting
this oversight in this rulemaking.
In this rulemaking, the NRC is also correcting the omission
of a
reference to certificate holders in Sec. 25.3. Although Sec.
25.5
includes a definition of ``certificate holder'' and Sec.
25.17(a)
includes activities under Part 76 that issue certificates to
gaseous
diffusion plants, Sec. 25.3, unlike Sec. 95.3, does not
include a
reference to certificate holders or certificates. The NRC
believes this
is an oversight that is now being corrected.
In addition, the NRC is correcting a typographical error
which
appears in the definition of ``security container'' in Sec.
95.5. In
the description of a ``safe'' in paragraph (2), the phrase ``at
least
\1/2\ thick'' should read ``at least \1/2\ inch thick.''
Finally, NRC is amending references to Executive Order 12958
where
they appear in Parts 25 and 95 to include the phrase ``as
amended.''
This reflects that Executive Order 12958 was amended on March
25, 2003
by Executive Order 13292 (68 FR 15315; March 28, 2003) and could
be
further amended in the future.
Discussion of Amendment by Section
Section 25.3 Scope
The current scope limits the access to classified
information to
access ``related to a license or an application for a license.''
This
scope is broadened to include persons who may need access in
connection
with other activities as the Commission may determine, such as
vendors
of advanced reactor designs. Thus, the phrase ``or other
activities as
the Commission may determine'' is added to this section. The
Commission
is also correcting an oversight by including certificate holders
in
this section.
Section 25.5 Definitions
References to Parts 52, 60, and 63 are added to the
definition of
``license.''
The phrase ``Executive Order 12958'' is replaced by
``Executive
Order 12958, as amended'' under definitions of ``classified
national
security information'' and ``national security information.''
Section 25.17 Approval for Processing Applicants for Access
Authorizations
References to Parts 60 and 63 are added to paragraph (a).
[[Page 74951]]
Section 25.37 Violations
The phrase, ``Executive Order 12958'' is replaced by
``Executive
Order 12958, as amended'' in paragraph (b).
Section 95.3 Scope
The current scope applies to ``licensees, certificate
holders and
others regulated by the Commission'' who may require access to
certain
types of classified information ``in connection with a license
or
certificate or an application for a license or certificate.''
The
Commission is broadening the scope of the regulations applicable
to
procedures for obtaining facility security clearances, to
include
persons who may need to use, process, store, reproduce,
transmit,
transport, or handle NRC classified information in connection
with
other activities as the Commission may determine, such as
vendors of
advanced reactor designs. Thus, the phrase ``regulated by the
Commission'' is deleted and the phrase ``or other activities as
the
Commission may determine'' is added.
Section 95.5 Definitions
References to Parts 52, 60, and 63 are added under the
definition
of ``license.''
The phrase ``E.O. 12958'' is replaced by ``E.O. 12958, as
amended''
under definitions of ``classified national security
information,''
``infraction,'' and ``violation.''
The phrase ``at least \1/2\ thick'' is replaced by ``at
least \1/2\
inch thick'' under the definition of ``Security container,''
paragraph
(2).
Section 95.59 Inspections
The phrase ``E.O. 12958'' is replaced by ``E.O. 12958, as
amended.''
Procedural Background
This rulemaking will become effective on February 28, 2005.
However, if the NRC receives significant adverse comments by
January
14, 2005 or if the NRC receives substantive comments on
information
collection requirements by January 14, 2005, then the NRC will
publish
a document that withdraws the direct final rule and will address
the
comments received in a final rule as a response to the companion
proposed rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register. Absent significant modifications to the proposed
revisions
requiring republication, the NRC will not initiate a second
comment
period on this action.
A significant adverse comment is a comment where the
commenter
explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including
challenges to
the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would be
ineffective or
unacceptable without a change. A comment is adverse and
significant if:
(1) The comment opposes the rule and provides a reason
sufficient
to require a substantive response in a notice-and-comment
process. For
example, a substantive response is required when:
(a) The comment causes the NRC staff to reevaluate (or
reconsider)
its position or conduct additional analysis;
(b) The comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a
substantive response to clarify or complete the record; or
(c) The comment raises a relevant issue that was not
previously
addressed or considered by the NRC staff.
(2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the
rule, and
it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or
unacceptable
without incorporation of the change or addition.
(3) The comment causes the staff to make a change (other
than
editorial) to the rule.
Agreement State Compatibility
Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility
of
Agreement State Programs'' approved by the Commission on June
30, 1997,
and published in the Federal Register on September 3, 1997 (62
FR
46517), this rule is classified as Compatibility Category
``NRC.''
Compatibility is not required for Category ``NRC'' regulations.
The NRC
program elements in this category are those that relate directly
to
areas of regulation reserved to the NRC by the Atomic Energy Act
of
1954, as amended (AEA), or the provisions of Title 10 of the
Code of
Federal Regulations. Although an Agreement State may not adopt
program
elements reserved to NRC, it may wish to inform its licensees of
certain requirements via a mechanism that is consistent with the
particular State's administrative procedure laws but does not
confer
regulatory authority on the State.
Plain Language
The Presidential Memorandum dated June 1, 1998, entitled,
``Plain
Language in Government Writing'' directed that the Government's
writing
be in plain language. The NRC requests comments on this direct
final
rule specifically with respect to the clarity and effectiveness
of the
language used. Comments should be sent to the address listed
under the
heading ADDRESSES above.
Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology Transfer Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104-113)
requires that Federal agencies use technical standards that are
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies
unless the
use of such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise
impractical. In this direct final rule, the NRC broadens the
scope of
Parts 25 and 95 by adding references to Parts 60 and 63 and by
including language in the scope sections which will enable NRC
to
consider access authorizations and facility security clearance
for
persons who are not licensees or certificate holders or
applicants for
a license or certificate. This action does not constitute the
establishment of a standard that establishes generally
applicable
requirements.
Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion
The NRC has determined that this direct final rule is the
type of
action described in categorical exclusion 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1).
Therefore
neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental
assessment has been prepared for this direct final rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This direct final rule contains amended information
collection
requirements that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq). This rule has been submitted to the
Office of
Management and Budget for review and approval of the information
collection requirements.
Type of submission, new or revision: Revision.
The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part
25--Access
Authorization for Licensee Personnel; 10 CFR Part 95--Facility
Security
Clearance and Safeguarding of National Security Information and
Restricted Data.
The form number if applicable: Not applicable.
How often the collection is required: On occasion.
Who will be required or asked to report: Persons who may
need
access in connection with licensing and regulatory activities
under 10
CFR Parts 60 and 63 for the disposal of high-level radioactive
waste in
geologic repositories and in connection with other activities as
the
Commission may determine, such as vendors of advanced reactor
designs.
An estimate of the number of annual responses: 688 (Part 25:
572;
Part 95:116).
The estimated number of respondents (one time): 34 (Part 25:
28;
Part 95: 6).
An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to
complete the requirement or request: 485 (Part 25: 150; Part 95:
335).
[[Page 74952]]
Abstract: The NRC is broadening the scope of its regulations
applicable to persons who may require access to classified
information
to include persons who may need access in connection with
licensing and
regulatory activities under 10 CFR Parts 60 and 63 for the
disposal of
high-level radioactive waste in geologic repositories, and
persons who
may need access in connection with other activities as the
Commission
may determine, such as vendors of advanced reactor designs. The
Commission is also broadening the scope of its regulations
applicable
to procedures for obtaining facility security clearances to
include
persons who may need to use, process, store, reproduce,
transmit,
transport, or handle NRC classified information in connection
with the
above-identified activities.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking public
comment on
the potential impact of the information collections contained in
this
direct final rule and on the following issues:
1. Is the proposed information collection necessary for the
proper
performance of the functions of the NRC, including whether the
information will have practical utility?
2. Is the estimate of burden accurate?
3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of
the information to be collected?
4. How can the burden of the information collection be
minimized,
including the use of automated collection techniques?
A copy of the OMB clearance package may be viewed free of
charge at
the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville
Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. The OMB clearance
package and
rule are available at the NRC worldwide Web site:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html
for 60 days after the
signature date of this notice and are also available at the rule
forum
site, http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
Send comments on any aspect of these proposed information
collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden and
on the
above issues, by January 14, 2005 to the Records and
FOIA/Privacy
Services Branch (T-5 F52), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by Internet electronic mail to
INFOCOLLECTS@NRC.GOV and to the Desk Officer, John A. Asalone,
Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202, (3150-0046
and 3150-
0047), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
Comments
received after this date will be considered if it is practical
to do
so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments
received
after this date. You may also e-mail comments to
John_A._Asalone@omb.eop.gov or comment by telephone at (202)
395-4650.
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to
respond to, a request for information or an information
collection
requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently
valid
OMB control number.
Regulatory Analysis
A regulatory analysis has not been prepared for this direct
final
rule because this rule is considered minor and not a substantial
amendment; it has no economic impact on NRC licensees or the
public.
Regulatory Flexibility Certification
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5
U.S.C.
605(b)), the Commission certifies that this rule does not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
This rule merely makes procedures available to individuals and
entities
for obtaining access authorizations and facility security
clearances in
connection with licensing activities under Parts 60 and 63 or
with
other activities as the Commission may determine, corrects the
omission
of a reference to Part 52 in the definition of ``license'' in
Parts 25
and 95, corrects the omission of a reference to certificate
holders in
Part 25, updates references to Executive Order 12958, and
clarifies a
dimension used to describe a security container.
Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that the backfit rule (Sec. Sec.
50.109,
70.76, 72.62, or 76.76) does not apply to this direct final rule
because this amendment does not involve any provisions that
would
impose backfits as defined in the backfit rule. Therefore, a
backfit
analysis is not required.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
In accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, the NRC has determined that this action is
not a
major rule and has verified this determination with the Office
of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 25
Classified information, Criminal penalties, Investigations,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
10 CFR Part 95
Classified information, Criminal penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority
of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization
Act of
1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553; the NRC is adopting
the
following amendments to 10 CFR parts 25 and 95.
PART 25--ACCESS AUTHORIZATION FOR LICENSEE PERSONNEL
0
1. The authority citation for part 25 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 145, 161, 68 Stat. 942, 948, as amended (42
U.S.C. 2165, 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42
U.S.C.
5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); E.O.
10865,
as amended, 3 CFR 1959-1963 Comp., p. 398 (50 U.S.C. 401, note);
E.O. 12829, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p.570; E.O. 12958, 3 CFR, 1995
Comp.,
p. 333, as amended by E. O. 13292, 3 CFR, 2004 Comp., p.196;
E.O.
12968, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp, p. 396.
Appendix A also issued under 96 Stat. 1051 (31 U.S.C. 9701).
0
2. Section 25.3 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 25.3 Scope.
The regulations in this part apply to licensees, certificate
holders, and others who may require access to classified
information
related to a license, certificate, an application for a license
or
certificate, or other activities as the Commission may determine.
0
3. In Sec. 25.5, the definitions of Classified National
Security
Information, License, and National Security Information are
revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 25.5 Definitions.
* * * * *
Classified National Security Information means information
that has
been determined pursuant to E.O. 12958, as amended, or any
predecessor
order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure and
that is
so designated.
* * * * *
License means a license issued under 10 CFR parts 50, 52,
60, 63,
70, or 72.
* * * * *
National Security Information means information that has
been
determined
[[Page 74953]]
under Executive Order 12958, as amended, or any predecessor
order to
require protection against unauthorized disclosure and that is
so
designated.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 25.17, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 25.17 Approval for processing applicants for access
authorization.
(a) Access authorizations must be requested for licensee
employees
or other persons (e.g., 10 CFR part 2, subpart I) who need
access to
classified information in connection with activities under 10
CFR Parts
50, 52, 54, 60, 63, 70, 72, or 76.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 25.37, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 25.37 Violations.
* * * * *
(b) National Security Information is protected under the
requirements and sanctions of Executive Order 12958, as amended.
PART 95--FACILITY SECURITY CLEARANCE AND SAFEGUARDING OF
NATIONAL
SECURITY INFORMATION AND RESTRICTED DATA
0
6. The authority for part 95 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 145, 161, 193, 68 Stat. 942, 948, as
amended
(42 U.S.C. 2165, 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42
U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note);
E.O.
10865, as amended, 3 CFR 1959-1963 Comp., p. 398 (50 U.S.C. 401,
note); E.O. 12829, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p.570; E.O. 12958, as
amended,
3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p.333, as amended by E. O. 13292, 3 CFR, 2004
Comp., p.196; E.O. 12968, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., P. 391.
0
7. Section 95.3 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 95.3 Scope.
The regulations in this part apply to licensees, certificate
holders and others who may require access to classified National
Security Information and/or Restricted Data and/or Formerly
Restricted
Data (FRD) that is used, processed, stored, reproduced,
transmitted,
transported, or handled in connection with a license or
certificate or
an application for a license or certificate, or other activities
as the
Commission may determine.
0
8. In Sec. 95.5, the definitions of License and paragraph (2)
of
Security container are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 95.5 Definitions.
* * * * *
License means a license issued pursuant to 10 CFR parts 50,
52, 60,
63, 70, or 72.
* * * * *
Security container includes any of the following
repositories:
* * * * *
(2) A safe--burglar-resistive cabinet or chest which bears a
label
of the Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc., certifying the unit to
be a
TL-15, TL-30, or TRTL-30, and has a body fabricated of not less
than 1
inch of steel and a door fabricated of not less than 1\1/2\
inches of
steel exclusive of the combination lock and bolt work; or bears
a Test
Certification Label on the inside of the door, or is marked
``General
Services Administration Approved Security Container'' and has a
body of
steel at least \1/2\ inch thick, and a combination locked steel
door at
least 1 inch thick, exclusive of bolt work and locking devices;
and an
automatic unit locking mechanism.
* * * * *
0
9. Section 95.59 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 95.59 Inspections.
The Commission shall make inspections and reviews of the
premises,
activities, records and procedures of any person subject to the
regulations in this part as the Commission and CSA deem
necessary to
effect the purposes of the Act, E.O. 12958, as amended, and/or
NRC
rules.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of November,
2004.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Luis A. Reyes,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 04-27405 Filed 12-14-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
32 Slovak news: Bohunice wants payment for nuclear plant crash
Slovakia's English language newspaper December 13 -
December 19,2004, Volume 10, Number 48
THE VILLAGE of Jaslovské Bohunice in Western Slovakia is
demanding Sk2 billion (€50 million) from the state in damages
for the 1977 nuclear power plant crash. The municipality is
ready to turn to the courts to settle the claim.
Mayor Peter Ryška says that the municipality has been making
efforts to fix the amount of damages caused by the crash for 15
years, according to the daily SME.
Ryška claims that the good name of the village has been damaged.
This has resulted in a dramatic drop in land prices around the
village and had a negative impact on its agriculture.
Peter Gaál, of the Public Health Office, says that the radiation
during the crash of the A1 block reached degree four on the INES
seven-degree radiation chart. The Chernobyl catastrophe reached
the seventh degree.
Power producer Slovenské elektrárne, which operates the Bohunice
plant, is analyzing Jaslovské Bohunice’s damages claim.
Compiled by Beata Balogová from press reports
The Slovak Spectator cannot vouch for the accuracy of the
information presented in its Flash News postings.
[12/15/2004 10:54:58 AM]
Copyright © 1998-2003 The Rock spol. s r.o. All rights
*****************************************************************
33 Budapest Sun: Chernobyl cancer probe following train deaths
Volume XII, Issue 51
December 16, 2004
By Dániel Sándor
HUNGARIAN State Railways (MÁV) has denied that carriages coated
in radioactive dust coming from the Soviet Union were washed in
Hegyeshalom, a city on the border of Hungary and Austria, shortly
after the explosion of the nuclear reactor in Chernobyl (former
Soviet Union), in 1986. "There is no harmful radioactivity in the
area of Hegyeshalom as the consequence of the Chernobyl
catastrophe 18 years ago, and the rate of cancer mortality cases
is below the Hungarian average," MÁV announced in the statement
on Saturday (December 11).
The Chief Health Office (CHO) started investigations in
Hegyeshalom, after Kisalföld, a regional daily (and sister paper
of The Budapest Sun), published a series of articles based on the
reports of local citizens, and not a Ukrainian smuggler as MÁV
has suggested, about the high incident of cancer-related deaths
in the city in the early 1990s.
According to István Vida, Hegyeshalom editor of Kisalföld, Sándor
Cseh, a general practitioner taking up practice in the city in
1991, called on authorities to investigate after finding that the
incidence of cancer cases alongside the rail tracks had far
exceeded Hungary's average.
Vida told The Budapest Sun that "it is common knowledge among the
citizens of Hegyeshalom, of whom the most are railway workers or
custom officers, that cancer cases have been above normal there."
MÁV has denied the arrival of trains with radioactive
contamination from the Soviet Union.
"The emergency measures, which were introduced because no one
knew what was going on in Chernobyl, were in effect only for a
week."
The company called on the help of the National Radiation
Emergency Service and the National Radiation-biology and
Healthcare Research Institute . Examinations proved that the
level of radiation in the vicinity of the railways is normal, MÁV
said. Vida did not contradict the MÁV statement. However, he
commented that measurements taken by the Disaster Protection
Institute (called in by Kisalföld) showed that radiation in the
washing-pit where the trains were cleaned is 1.5 times that of
surrounding area, although still under the normal level.
The MÁV announcement also states that official records show the
examination of the trains in 1986, which found only two carriages
contaminated, and they were turned back immediately.
MÁV has also collected the names of those workers in Hegyeshalom
in 1986, saying, "Three hundred of the 500 people still work for
MÁV, and the rest are now pensioners."
Imre Kavalecz, spokesperson for MÁV, told press, "The cleaning of
the carriages were done with a hose so the workers did not have
direct contact with the cars." Vida, however, commented that
Kisalföld has received a list of the deceased workers.
"Employees were not told about the circumstances, neither were
they equipped with the adequate protective clothing. Most of them
have died since, despite being relatively young."
In the meantime, Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County, at the border of
Hungary and Ukraine, and headquarters of CHO, joined the
investigation last Wednesday (December 8) to find out what effect
the carriages entering Hungary at Záhony have had on the area.
Zsigmond Kósa, Chief Health Officer, told The Budapest Sun, "We
examined the cancer mortality rates of the period between 1986
and 1992, in Záhony and the towns surrounding it, but found that
the rate was below the Hungarian average."
Nonetheless, MÁV has initiated a committee that would analyze the
situation using the results of earlier examinations, to calm
public feeling. The explosion in the atom reactor in Chernobyl
occurred on the night of April 26, 1986, after operators failed
to terminate an experiment despite alarm signals.
It was the worst nuclear disaster in history, with radiation
escaping the building for a week, with the surrounding cities all
evacuated.
Intensive radioactivity was measured across the whole of the
northern hemisphere.
Copyright 2001 * The Budapest Sun * All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
34 TheDay.com: NRC Denies Appeals Of License Renewals For Millstone
By PATRICIA DADDONA
Day Staff Writer, Waterford
Published on 12/15/2004
Waterford The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has denied appeals
filed by the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone in its
quest for a hearing challenging proposed license renewals at
Millstone Power Station.
In January, Millstone owner Dominion Nuclear Connecticut
proposed extending licenses for two reactors, Millstone 2 and
Millstone 3, by 20 years each, to 2035 and 2045 respectively.
This summer, Nancy Burton, then the attorney for the coalition,
petitioned the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, a division of
the NRC, to grant a hearing on health and safety issues. The
petition alleged that there are cancer clusters near the power
plants, insufficient protection of the site against would-be
terrorists, and other issues.
When the panel denied the petition and Burton's request that
they reconsider it, Burton appealed to the NRC each time.
In a sternly worded decision from NRC Secretary Annette L.
Vietti-Cook, the commission found that the ASLB acted
appropriately and that Burton either failed to link her group's
concerns with issues concerning the aging of the plants, as
required; or simply failed to support her claims factually. She
also failed to show where the panel erred in its denials and
raised issues that were beyond the scope of license renewal,
Vietti-Cook wrote.
The NRC chastised Burton for her consistent disregard for our
practices and procedures and informed her the agency would
reprimand her if that disregard persisted. The coalition, a
grass-roots anti-nuclear group, and any legal counsel remain
welcome at NRC proceedings as long as they follow the rules,
the decision states.
Burton did not return calls seeking comment.
p.daddona@theday.com
1998-2004 The Day Publishing Co.
*****************************************************************
35 NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting
FR Doc 04-27491
[Federal Register: December 15, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 240)]
[Notices] [Page 75090-75091] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr15de04-100]
AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Nuclear Regulatory Commission DATE:
Week of December 13, 2004.
PLACE: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland.
STATUS: Public and Closed.
ADDITIONAL MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Week of December 13, 2004
Tuesday, December 14, 2004 12:55 p.m. Affirmation Session (Public
Meeting) (Tentative) A. Hydro Resources, Inc. Petition for Review
of LBP-04-23 (Final Environmental Impact Statement
Supplementation) (Tentative) b. State of Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities (Confirmatory Order
Modifying License); Intervenor's Motion for Reconsideration of
CLI-04-26 (Tentative) c. Final Amendments to 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix E, Relating to (1) Nuclear Regulatory Commission Review
of Changes to Emergency Action Levels, Paragraph IV.B and (2)
Exercise Requirements for Co-Located Licensees, Paragraph IV.F.2
(Tentative) 1 p.m. Briefing on Emergency Preparedness Program
Initiatives (Public Meeting) (Contact: Nader Mamish,
301-415-1086) This meeting will be webcast live at the Web
address--http://www.nrc.gov .
The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on
short notice. To verify the status of meetings call
(recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more
information: Dave Gamberoni, (301) 415- 1651.
* * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the
Internet at:
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html. * * *
* * The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable
accommodation to
[[Page 75091]] participate in these public meetings, or need this
meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the
public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large print),
please notify the NRC's Disability program Coordinator, August
Spector, at 301-415-7080, TDD: 301-415- 2100, or by e-mail at
aks@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable
accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.
* * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred
subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like
to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition,
distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is
available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission
meeting schedule electronically please send an electronic message
to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: December 10, 2004.
Sandy Joosten, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 04-27491 Filed 12-13-04; 9:24 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
*****************************************************************
36 [DU Information List] Uranium dust leaves a trail
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:39:25 -0800
Danger Dismissed: How the Pentagon downplays the risks of
depleted uranium weapons
Uranium Dust Leaves a Trail
dailypress.com
December 12, 2004
http://www.dailypress.com/news/specials/dp-du-day1super,0,588771.htmlstory?coll=dp-breaking-news
While U.S. forces fight in the streets of Iraq, scientists
are finding more evidence that the depleted uranium weapons
we've given them to defeat the enemy are a hazard to friend
and foe.
The weapons, first used in the Persian Gulf War, provide a
decided battlefield advantage. But the mildly radioactive
toxic dust that results when they're used successfully also
might be why veterans of the 1991 war have a disability rate
three times as high as those for Vietnam and World War II vets.
The Pentagon dismisses any link between those illnesses and
depleted uranium. This week, the Daily Press takes an
in-depth look at the latest science.
You'll see why some experts think now is too soon to pull
the plug on research into whether cancers and brain damage
result from breathing the dust. You'll find out why the U.S.
military uses an inferior process to identify whether our
forces have depleted uranium in their bodies and how British
vets are signing up for a better test.
You'll meet Matt Rohman of York County, a Gulf War veteran
who's lost all feeling in his feet and fingers, living every
day in pain. Government doctors say his problems are related
to the war, but they don't know how or why. Will a new
generation of warriors meet the same fate?
--
Posted for educational and research purposes only,
~ in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107
Win a
castle for NYE with your mates and Yahoo! Messenger
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
bfba1.jpg
bfc59.jpg
----------
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
*
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/
*
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
*
pandora-project-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
*
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Attachment Converted: bfba1.jpg: 00000001,1b849d59,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: bfc59.jpg: 00000001,1b849d5a,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
37 [DU Information List] throw away soldiers and disposable
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:39:37 -0800
Throw Away Soldiers & Disposable Civilians
Vive le Canada
December 12 2004
http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/2004121214584783
World Tribunal for Iraq
The records have to be kept and, by definition, the
perpetrators, far from keeping records, try to destroy them.
They are killers of the innocent and of memory. The records
are required to inspire still further the mounting
opposition to the new global tyranny.
The new tyrants, incomparably over-armed, can win every war
- both military and economic. Yet they are losing the war
(this is how they call it) of communication. They are not
winning the support of world public opinion . More and more
people are saying NO.
Finally this will be the tyranny's undoing. But after how
many more tragedies, invasions and collateral disasters?
After how much more of the new poverty the tyranny
engenders? Hence the urgency of keeping records, of
remembering, of assembling the evidence, so that the
accusations become unforgettable, and proverbial on every
continent.
More and more people are going to say NO, for this is the
precondition today for saying YES to all we are determined
to save and everything we love. John Berger, 18.06.2003,
Paris - Mieussy World Tribunal
Premeditated Death and Destruction Unleashed Against a
Sovereign Nation and People by Niloufer Bhagwat
Opening statement before the Iraq tribunal hearings at
Tokyo, 11 Dec 2004 Honorable Judges , Prosecutors , Amici
Curiae , witnesses of the satanic death and destruction of
the people of Iraq , of homes and livelihood , of hospitals
, schools and places of worship; concerned citizens of Japan .
We live in strange times. For even as a war rages fiercely
in Iraq which in epic terms can be compared to a
"Mahabharat" , a fierce war between the forces of right and
wrong , justice and injustice , occupation and national
liberation ; we resume this trial in the dark shadows of an
"Apocalypse" which is the continuing military occupation and
the reduction of the entire population of Iraq into the
inmates of a vast concentration camp unmonitored even by the
Red Cross and other UN and other International humanitarian
organizations. Unprecedented in the annals of legal history,
evidence is being recorded in this trial even as crimes
continue to be committed with impunity, bringing home to us
the reality of human existence, that words are never enough
to defeat a brutal tyranny and even those of us who use
words as tools are speechless in the face of the deliberate
and premeditated death and destruction unleashed against a
sovereign nation and people ,a member state of the United
Nations waged solely to capture its oil resources and with
that objective to subjugate and eliminate its population
through one strategy or another.
Millions of people in the world including in the United
States , even before the aggression and military occupation
commenced , much before we commenced our slow and
painstaking examination of evidence and precedents , sensing
imminent and unprecedented danger to the peoples of the
entire world including to soldiers recruited to defend
Republics and parliamentary democracies proceeded to
pronounce their verdict against the doctrine of "continuous
war " against one nation or another ;against the conversion
of domestic economies into "war economies" even as thousands
and thereafter millions were rendered unemployed .The people
across continents opposed the policy of "blood for oil" and
declared their rejection of this strategy of pre-emptive war
for the control of resources of other societies and nations .
The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear
War had estimated before the military onslaught that a fresh
attack against Iraq would result in the deaths of anywhere
between 48,000 to 260,000 Iraqi citizens and that post-war
effects could take the lives of an additional 200,000 Iraqis
excluding those killed in the 1991 attack on Iraq and those
dead because of illegal sanctions imposed on the civilian
population of Iraq by the Security Council and issue which I
had dealt with in detail at Kyoto, quoting extensively from
the statements of Mr. Dennis Halliday a former International
Civil Servant of rare integrity who had resigned on the
issues of sanctions claiming that it amounted to an illegal
declaration of war on the civilian population.
Now in the 19 month of the occupation by the military forces
mainly drawn from the United States and UK along with other
smaller contingents all members of the coalition of the
aggressors ; Lancet Online Medical Journal based in the UK
has published a study by American health experts and
researchers at the John Hopkins School of Public Health,
Columbia University and al Mustansiriya University Baghdad
on the deaths of Iraqi civilians under the military
occupation. The study confirms that : " Violent deaths were
widespread….and were mainly attributed to coalition forces.
Most individuals reportedly killed by coalition forces were
women and children…"
The report went on to say that: "Making conservative
assumptions , we think that about 100,000 excess deaths , or
more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Violence
accounted for most of the excess deaths and air strikes of
coalition forces accounted for most violent deaths."
Les Roberts and Gilbert Burnham who collaborated on the
research published informed the media that they had evidence
of the use of air power in populated urban areas. Richard
Horton editor of the Lancet in an editorial emphasized that
the "findings also raise questions for those far removed
from Iraq – in the governments of the countries responsible
for launching a pre –emptive war". The mounting evidence of
the human catastrophe in Iraq not seen since the days of the
Second World War prima facie indicates that the death toll
may be more but not less than 100,000 and even the Lancet
report however sincere has underestimated the death toll
from all facets of the Occupation.
In assessing the extent of Genocide it is necessary to focus
on the destruction and attack on hospitals and health
clinics to deny medical relief to those who could be saved
if the Iraqi health service was not destroyed . This
strategy was visible in the policy of organized looting and
destruction of Iraqi hospitals in the weeks and months after
the attack .The deliberate bombing of water pipes, the
cutting off of water supplies to cities and town under siege
by US, UK and other forces , destruction of sewage pipes and
sanitary facilities , of electricity and heating have
condemned millions in Iraq to consume contaminated water and
food ,as a consequence the old, the feeble, and the children
have been dying of diarrhea and related diseases caused by
contamination of food and water with lack of medicines and
health care leading to an increase in mortality. This is an
indicator that apart from death by violence the Occupation
has condemned people to death from malnutrition and lack of
food , and water and food borne diseases with inadequate
health care directly caused by the Occupation .
The intrepid reporter Dahr Jamail reporting for a weekly in
Alaska has disclosed that from what he had seen in six
months in Iraq at close quarters , it was difficult to find
any family in Iraq who had not had a member killed on
account of the conditions arising from the Occupation. And
what of the heroic city of Fallujah which dared to resist
the mercenaries of US and UK Security Companies and
Agencies, who have no combatant status under the Geneva
Convention in any armed conflict , yet are to-day high
profile in one war after another in Bosnia, in Kosovo , in
Afghanistan and other theatres including in the trafficking
in human beings as slaves .On 14th October 2004 sensing that
the city of 300,000 was to be singled out for destruction as
it had become a symbol of Resistance against the Occupation
; the people of Fallujah through several organizations of
Teachers, Tribal Leaders, the Shura Council , the Bar
Association, through the President of the Study Centre of
Human Rights and Democracy forwarded an urgent appeal to the
Secretary General of the United Nations in these words:
" Your Excellency, It is obvious that the American forces
are committing crimes of genocide every day in Iraq .Now
while we are writing to Your Excellency , the American
warplanes are dropping their most powerful bombs on the
civilians in the city , killing and injuring hundreds of
innocent people . At the same time their tanks are attacking
the city with their heavy artillery…" "On the night of 13th
October alone American bombardment demolished 50 houses on
top of their residents. Is this a genocidal crime or a
lesson about democracy? It is obvious that the Americans are
committing acts of terror against the people of Fallujah for
one reason only : their refusal to accept the Occupation."
"Your Excellency and the whole world knows that the
Americans and their allies devastated our country under the
pretext of the threat of the Weapons of Mass Destruction
.Now after the destruction and the killing of thousands of
civilians , they have admitted that there were no weapons
found .But they say nothing about all the crimes they have
committed .Unfortunately everyone is now silent and will not
dignify the murdered Iraqi civilians with words of
condemnation .Are the Americans going to pay compensation as
Iraq has been forced to do after the Gulf War……."
" We know we are living in a world of double standards .In
Fallujah , they have created a new vague target: AL ZARQAWI.
This is a new pretext to justify their crimes, killing and
daily bombardment of civilians. Almost a year has passed
since they created this new pretext and whenever they
destroy houses ….they said ‘We have launched a successful
operation against AL Zarqawi. hey will never say that they
have killed him because there is no such person. And that
means the daily killings of civilians and the daily genocide
will continue."
"At the same time the representatives of Fallujah , our
tribal leader has denounced on many occasions the kidnapping
and killing of civilians , and we have no links to any group
committing such inhuman behaviour." " Excellency , we appeal
to you and to all the world leaders to exert the greatest
pressure on the American administration to stop the crimes
in Fallujah and withdraw their army….the city was quiet and
peaceful when its people ran it ….We simply did not welcome
the Occupation. This is our right according to the UN
Charter , International Law and the laws of humanity. If the
Americans believe in the opposite they should first withdraw
from the UN and all its agencies before acting in a way
contrary to the Charter they have signed"
" It is very urgent that your Excellency along with the
world leaders, intervenes in a speedy manner to prevent a
new massacre…." This was the voice of the people of Fallujah
appealing to the UN and to world leaders and what was the
response? After the administration of the United States had
taken care of the African-American voters and others through
the Diebold electronic voting machines on the 8th November
commenced the destruction of Fallujah which to the United
States was a symbol of Iraqi resistance throughout the
world. There is hardly a home intact in the city of
Fallujah. The first attack by US forces with the Black Watch
Regiments poised on the highways , was on the Fallujah
hospitals and medical personnel who report the casualty
figures and treat the wounded the messengers of the
devastation and loss of lives .Dr Khamis al-Muhammadi of the
Fallujan General Hospital has informed the media that she
was seized and taken away by Occupation forces even as she
was about to cut an unbilical cord during child birth;
several doctors have been reported to have been killed and
all hospitals and clinics destroyed. AL ZARQAWI like BIN
LADEN was never captured despite the destruction of the
entire city. Yet who can destroy the spirit of Fallujah
which has survived many attempts of a whole century to crush it.
Even as use of Depleted Uranium , of napalm, of banned
chemicals spread throughout the world , Mr . Kofi Anan
reacted to the appeal of Fallujah and pronounced what had
already been known to millions that : "The Occupation of
Iraq is illegal…" with the Japan Times subsequently
reporting that the Secretary General of the United Nations
would pay the price for this statement with calls for his
resignation despite past services rendered and though the
real price for the fraudulently conceived ‘FOOD FOR OIL’
program vests with the Security Council and the entire
policy and its implementation was illegal as it sought to
impose control over the resources of anther sovereign
country to regulate production and distribution of Oil.
With the war declared categorically illegal even by the
Secretary General of the United Nations , on what basis does
the US administration plan to increase troop levels .Why has
it concealed from the world that it has already created four
military bases in Iraq with the objective of permanent
occupation . And what is the nature of the liberation of
Iraq. Dahr Jamail reports that Baghdad after 19 months
remains in shambles bombed out buildings sit as insulting
reminders of unbroken promises of reconstruction 70 % of
Iraqis at the very minimum are unemployed and there is a
five mile petrol lines in an oil rich country.Engineers and
doctors are unemployed and ply taxis .there are mass graves
of innocent civilians in Fallujah and bodies with skins
melted by napalm .bodies bloated and rotting devoured by
dogs in the street after the complete destruction of the
city of Fallujah water supply is frequently cut off from
cities and towns targeted for attack children lie deformed
by Depleted Uranium exposure in shattered hospitals from
lack of treatment or even pain medication the Iraqi Red
Crescent, other relief teams and the Red Cross has been
obstructed in rendering aid mosques are bullet ridden with
blood stained carpets."
Even as governments and heads of State continue to deal with
war criminals we must recall that the assault on Fallujah
and other cities , towns and villages of Iraq are covered by
article 6 (b) of the 1945 Nuremberg Charter and in the
trials of the Far East or Tokyo trials among the war crimes
defined include the" Wanton destruction of cities , towns or
villages " crimes for which the Nazi leaders and other
Generals and militarists were tried and executed .The acts
perpetrated by US,UK forces in the onslaught on Fallujah
constitutes a clear violation of the laws of Land War found
in the US army Field Manual 27-10. What of the US, UK
soldiers used as one half of the poor to kill the other half
;recruited from working class families from isolated and
marginalized communities and towns affected by the economic
recession and the downturn sweeping the United States and
England with employment opportunities steadily decreasing.
Christian Bollyn of the American Free Press , Washington D.C
asked Lt.Col. Joe Yoswa if the US was using Depleted Uranium
in Fallujah and received the reply that " DU is the standard
round on the M-1 Abraham Tanks" which have been used in
Fallujah. Because of the nature of poison gas exploded by
the exploded DU shells, American Free Press asked Yoswa if
the troops were protected from DU poisoning .Lt.Col. Joe
Yoswa seemed unaware of the dangers posed by DU. Marion Falk
a retired Nuclear scientist from Livermore Lab informed the
media that US troops in DU contaminated battlefields are
considered "throw away soldiers" who are dispensed with once
exposed , and replaced by others who become throw away in
their turn with risks of cancer ,deformed children from
genetic damage and serious health problems. There is no
higher purpose to fulfil for the "throw away soldiers" than
the war and oil profits of the Corporations at stake from
the continued occupation and the fear and unemployment at
home; the bankrupting of the US economy are two sides of the
same coin of which one side is the Occupation and the other
side is the whipping up of fear and frenzy in the United
States. Uranium Weapons
There is a direct connection between the appropriation
sought for the war at the cost of sweeping budget cuts and
the steady elimination of social security funds and post
office savings .There is also a direct connection between
the nature of elections held in the United States , in Kabul
where Mr.Hamid Karzai the representative of the UNOCAL
Company cannot stir out of Kabul , and the elections
proposed to be held in Iraq under conditions of Occupation
and coercion .
In all three countries the strategy is the same ; coerce the
electorate and declare an election as "won" after which
without a constitutional mandate enslave the majority of the
people by obfuscating political ,economic and social rights
reducing countries to garrisons .In recognition of these
similarities and the impact of the illegal war on the people
of the United States that the anti-war coalition has
supported the "absolute right of the people of Iraq to
resist the occupation of their country" and declared their
own resistance to re-instate the draft and to prepare for
resistance if conscription returns. In what has far reaching
consequences for International Security the movement has
declared that "it is incumbent on us to reject that notion
that smaller countries must disarm and leave themselves
defenseless at the demand of Bush and the Pentagon. Such
demands are not only hypocritical , irrational and unjust ,
they amount to little more than a pretext for more invasions
and occupations " . In the context of the fact that the
resistance to the Iraq war has more than one front with the
the military front in Iraq and the political front in the
Americas it is necessary in view of the Security Council
having acquiesced to the Occupation despite the fact that it
is illegal that the General Assembly should be moved by a
member of the United Nations to initiate moves for the
vacating of the aggression against Iraq under Article 35
read with article 11 (2 ) . Any organization in which some
powers have the hegemony of the veto can never fulfill the
requirements of a new democratic international order .
Prof. Niloufer Bhagwat
11 December, 2004 At Tokyo This article was posted at Crimes
and Corruptions of the New World Order News
ALL-NEW
Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
c29ef.jpg
c2a9f.jpg
----------
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
*
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/
*
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
*
pandora-project-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
*
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Attachment Converted: c29ef.jpg: 00000001,44d76d9f,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: c2a9f.jpg: 00000001,44d76da0,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
38 Daily Breeze: Depleted uranium used during both gulf wars is a potent threat
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Some scientists dispute Pentagon's claim weapons' component
imposes no serious health risk. By Helen Thomas
The Pentagon claims that American forces and Iraqis are not at
risk from contact with depleted uranium, which is used in
armor-piercing munitions and protective tank plating.
That's baloney to some scientists who insist the widespread use
of depleted uranium during the American-led invasion and
occupation of Iraq poses a grave danger.
Despite attempts to reassure the public, the Pentagon remains on
the defensive.
Depleted uranium or DU is a radioactive byproduct from the
industrial process to enrich uranium. It is the leftover
uranium-238 that results when scientists seek to transform
naturally occurring uranium into uranium-235, which is used to
produce nuclear energy.
The Army values munitions manufactured from depleted uranium
because, when fused with metal alloys, they are considered the
most effective warhead for penetrating enemy tanks. Also,
because depleted uranium is twice as dense as lead, the Army
uses DU as armor plating.
Once a depleted uranium round strikes its target, the projectile
begins to burn on impact, creating tiny particles of radioactive
U-238. Winds can transport this radioactive dust many miles,
potentially contaminating the air that innocent humans breathe.
This inhalation may cause lung cancer, kidney damage, cancers of
bones and skin, birth defects and chemical poisoning.
The 1991 Persian Gulf war was the first conflict to see the
widespread use of depleted uranium, both in armor-piercing
projectiles and in the protective armor of the new generation of
Abrams tanks.
Studies by the Pentagon and the National Academy of Sciences
established no linkage between DU and the "Gulf War Syndrome"
ailments after the first Gulf war.
Some 70 people are still under study for the effects of contact
with DU, with particular emphasis on what happens when people
breathe the air where DU projectiles have vaporized.
Dr. Helen Caldicott has dedicated her life to warning about the
hazards of nuclear war and the effects of DU.
Born in Melbourne, Australia, she first became interested in
nuclear hazards when she saw the movie "On the Beach" at the age
of 15. The film deals with a nuclear accident that leads to a
global nuclear war.
Growing up, she led a movement in Australia against the French
atmospheric nuclear tests in the Pacific and tried to win a ban
on Australian uranium mining.
She became a medical doctor and later founded Physicians for
Social Responsibility, which won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985.
In her book, The New Nuclear Danger: George W. Bush's
Military-Industrial Complex, Caldicott claims that DU qualifies
as a nuclear weapon because of its low-level radioactivity. She
said that huge quantities of DU were created during the Cold
War.
"Weapon researchers and developers have now succeeded in putting
this toxic 'nuclear waste' to use through the creation of
depleted uranium bullets and shells," she added.
Depleted uranium particles are soluble in water and the waters
around the battlefields, as in Iraq and Kuwait are at risk of
radioactive pollution, Caldicott said.
She warned that DU maintains radioactivity for billions of years
and can concentrate in the food chain, with children and babies
more vulnerable to the carcinogenic effects of ingested
radiation than adults.
Medical reports from Iraq indicate that childhood malignancies
are seven times greater than before the first Gulf war.
The complaints of the veterans of the first Gulf war are
"surprisingly similar in pattern to the various pathologies
induced by uranium exposure as described by the U.S. military,"
Caldicott said.
Some 50,000 to 80,000 veterans were afflicted with Gulf War
Syndrome and there has been no definitive answer -- but a lot of
dispute -- as to the cause.
The military use of depleted uranium is still being questioned.
But one thing is certain: War is dangerous to your health.
Helen Thomas is a Washington-based columnist with Hearst
Newspapers. Her e-mail address is hthomas@hearstdc.com.
Make DailyBreeze.com your homepage
©2004 Copley Press, Inc. Content may not be reproduced or
*****************************************************************
39 Northumberland News: Inhaled uranium dangerous to human health
Dr. Asaf Monday December 13, 2004 pic by Jeanne Beneteau
By jeanne Beneteau - see more articles from this author Dec 14,
2004
PORT HOPE - Inhalation of radioactive isotopes is extremely
dangerous to human health, said the director of an independent,
non-profit organization that provides objective, expert
scientific and medical research into the effects of uranium
exposure.
On Friday evening, nearly 100 people gathered at the Port
Hope Legion for a presentation by Dr. Asaf Durakovic, director of
the Toronto-based Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC). The
research centre has joined forces with two local organizations,
the Port Hope Community Health Concerns Committee (PHCHCC) and
Families Against Radiation Exposure (FARE) to study the presence,
type and quantity of radioactive materials that may be present in
the bodies of Port Hope residents as a result of the community's
70-year relationship with the nuclear industry.
Port Hope is not alone when it comes to political
resistance of keeping the truth of the dangers of uranium
exposure away from the people, said Dr. Durakovic. It happens all
around the world... in Russia, in the United States, in China, in
Germany, and in Africa, he noted.
"In the name of truth, in the name of science, I am
obligated as a medical doctor to provide for public health
regardless of political consequences," he says. "I'm not an
activist, just a scientist and medical doctor and I'm here to
tell you the truth."
The UMRC director explained there is substantiated,
empirical evidence produced by recognized researchers world-wide
that have documented the devastating toll on human health when
minute radioactive isotopes make their way into the body.
Although radioactive isotopes are present everywhere... in the
soil, in the water, in insignificant amounts, they generally do
not pose a health risk if "you do not disturb it, do not bring it
to the surface." However, when uranium is processed for
commercial use, there is a weak point.
"The more complicated the processing procedure, the more
opportunity for the isotopes to be released into the
environment," he said.
During his 35 years of medical and clinical experience
into the biological effects of nuclear materials, Dr. Durakovic
said he has seen first-hand just how dangerous exposure can be.
In Russia, he saw children born with two heads and four arms. He
was involved in a team that went into Chernobyl after the 1986
disaster at its nuclear reactor. Many of the contaminated towns
and villages produced sick children.
Stem cells, the cells from which all the other cells of
the body are derived, are extremely sensitive to ionizing
radiation, he explained.
"I wish I could do a complete genetic profile of the
people of Port Hope," he said. "Nobody has ever done this type of
work in this community."
UMRC's objective is how to "improve our lot, to make the
future of mankind more livable." Through upcoming
radio-biological studies on selected Port Hope residents, UMRC,
through objective evidence, plans to tell the true story about
the effects of possible uranium exposure may have had on the
people of Port Hope, Dr. Durakovic told the crowd.
"The truth will set you free," he said. "Objective
scientific truth answers to a higher source than the politicians
of Canada."
Tedd Weyman, the UMRC deputy director and field team
leader explained the initial study will involve from 12 to 20
Port Hope residents with a history of uranium exposure who also
present health problems that are symptomatic of exposure. Urine
samples will be collected from participants and sent to a lab at
the University of Frankfurt for analysis to determine if
contamination is present and whether the contamination is from
natural occurring uranium or is a result of commercial
processing. At the same time, UMRC will collect soil samples from
around the community to test for contamination.
"The cost of each individual testing is about $1,500,
paid directly to the lab," Mr. Weyman said. "None of it comes to
UMRC."
It will take about three months to receive the results.
Detailed information on individual test results will be provided
to each participant. Overall data collected will form the basis
for scientific papers and journal submissions, he adds. If
desired, UMRC representatives will be available to discuss tests
results and courses of treatment with family doctors. Some
participants could qualify for more in-depth chromosome testing.
In order to establish a baseline for the study, it will be
necessary to look farther afield of the community to remoter
areas where commercial uranium would not have found its way into
the environment in the form of air emissions, fill or in
fertilizer, he explained. Once complete, the studies will offer a
local biological and nuclear materials' baseline to enable
on-going measurements of changes over time.
Although it is not possible to determine when
contamination originated, five days or five years ago, it is
possible through identification of isotopes, to determine whether
the contamination is the result of commercial processing of
radium or uranium, he added.
When the testing results are in, UMRC will help residents
interpret the data; however, the political fight that may result
is within the community's arena, added Dr. Durakovic.
"Amazingly, no group testing of this type for exposure to
specific contaminants has ever been done in Port Hope, despite 70
years of nuclear processing on our waterfront," said PHCHCC
chairwoman Faye More. "The limited health studies authorized by
the federal regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
(and its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Control Board) during the
past 30 years were primarily based on theoretical modelling and
analysis of disease statistics. The work to be carried out by
UMRC is one component of a comprehensive plan for health
investigations developed by the local committee, for which
federal funding is being sought."
At Friday's presentation, the health concerns committee
held a silent auction to help raise funds to defray costs for
laboratory tests.
"We are so fortunate UMRC staff is giving their time and
expertise at no cost," says Ms. More. "We want to avoid people
who want to be tested having to pay out of their own pockets."
she said.
She added both PHCHCC and FARE are sending a strong
message to the federal government.
"We need the federal government to understand we are
serious about getting this testing done and we intend to move
forward," she concluded.
Copyright © Metroland, Northumberland Media Group.
*****************************************************************
40 Salt Lake Tribune: Opinion What will it cost?
Article Last Updated: 12/15/2004 01:27:26 AM
Criticism of environmentalism is hardly taboo. Under President
Bush (where dissent is considered disloyalty) criticism of
anti-environmentalism is taboo. Environmentalism is necessary to
reign in industrial polluters.
Rural, extraction-based communities ultimately suffer from
increased productivity and being mined out. Shifting revenue
streams to recreational services justifies environmental
preservation. The Legacy Highway cost Utah wasted millions
because the planners proceeded illegally. It is their fault for
being negligent, not those who stopped the project.
“Critters and weeds” are just part of the environment. How
much will cleanup of the West Jordan water supply cost? What
about the cost of treating asthma in children due to air
pollution? The Bush administration champions rolling back 30
years of environmental progress. The Superfund is no longer
funded by industrial polluters, but by taxpayers. Cleanup of the
Moab uranium tailings pile will cost hundreds of millions.
The U.S. trade deficits
consumerism, not environmentalism. Domestic oil production peaked
in the 1970s. Forty percent of U.S. oil consumption is by
automobiles which, under the Bush administration, have had
declining average fleet fuel efficiencies. Protecting our oil
supply line costs hundreds of billions of dollars (and numerous
lives) in military expenditures.
Fred Porter Salt Lake City
© Copyright 2004, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
41 Daily Press: How Good Is Good Enough?
HAMPTON ROADS, VA. December 16, 2004 2:22 AM
Chapter 5: The best test
The world's most accurate test for depleted uranium exposure is
now available - but only in Britain and Germany. The Pentagon
says U.S. vets don't need it.
Photo Gallery
[Exploring the dangers of depleted uranium.] Exploring the
dangers of depleted uranium.
CHAPTER 5 IN BRIEF
Depleted uranium bigger issue in U.K.
Public concern about health hazards from depleted uranium
weapons is higher in Britain than in America. Pressure from
thousands of sick British vets and anti-nuclear activists
prompted the British government to finance research that led to
the most accurate and precise urine testing available for
depleted uranium. Key to the testing: Mass spectrometer
Mass spectrometers are used to identify unknown materials,
especially in small quantities. This mass spectrometer used by
the U.S. military for examining urine samples is less capable
than the ones being used by the British. A Pentagon health expert
Lt. Col. Mark Melanson says that he's not familiar with the
British testing program but that the U.S. version is more than
adequate to detect quantities of depleted uranium that
endanger health. British testing officials say they've had no
inquiries about their methods or procedures from the U.S.
government, despite a promise by Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to look into these programs and
compare them with procedures used by the U.S. military.
Internal radiation expert Beate Ritz
Pentagon officials say their reliance on a less-than-the-best
test is OK because of all the research done with uranium miners,
millers and processors that shows how much uranium dust can be
inhaled safely. They point to a U.S. Institite of Medince report
for support. But Beate Ritz, a cancer researcher the institute
turned to for expertise on internal radiation, says there's too
little known about depleted uranium exposure to reach the
conclusions the military has.
Changes in blood DNA indicate possible cancer
Examinations of troops with depleted uranium shrapnel, and
studies with rats who inhaled the metal, show a link between
internal depleted uranium and changes in the DNA of genes in the
blood, says Richard J. Albertini, a cancer researcher in
Vermont. He and other scientists believe those changes in DNA
indicate cancer in humans.
After weighing risks, she'd choose weapons
Terry Pellmar, a researcher at the Armed Forces Radiobiological
Research Institute, has conducted important research on depleted
uranium's impact on animals. She says that while some increased
risks might come from the weapons' use, she would feel safe
trusting the Pentagon's assessment of dangers.
VIDEO
Watch a training video about depleted uranium.
ABOUT DU
What is it?
It's a byproduct of making "enriched uranium" for nuclear
weapons and fuel. "Enriched uranium" is somewhat misleading
because processors take uranium with natural levels of
radioactive isotopes, primarily Uranium 238 and Uranium 235, and
remove as much of the U-235 as possible. Weapons makers and
nuclear plant owners want almost-pure, highly radioactive U-235.
What's left behind is primarily U-238 (other isotopes remain, in
very small quantities). That substance has about 40 percent less
radioactivity than natural uranium and is "depleted uranium."
What makes it so important?
It's proven to be the most effective tank-killing weapon ever.
A round of depleted uranium no bigger than your little finger
can stop a top-of-the line tank without depleted uranium armor.
The weapons get sharper as they hit and plow through thick
steel. They also create fireballs of thousands of degrees, a
potent combination. What is the controversy?
As they strike, the weapons get sharper by peeling off millions
of shards of burning depleted uranium. Those burning pieces
become microscopic dust that can be inhaled. Depleted uranium is
a mildly radioactive, toxic substance that can cause damage to
live tissue and cells once inside the body.
THE SERIES
Part One: Looking for a cause, looking for a cure Part Two:
From the nose to the brain Part Three: The silver bullet Part
Four: The battlefield at home Part Five: The best test
BY BOB EVANS
247-4758
December 15, 2004
In Great Britain, veterans of the 1991 Gulf War are signing
up to take the world's most precise test for determining
exposure to depleted uranium.
The U.S. government advertises a test for its veterans of that
war too. But the test that it offers can't detect uranium in low
amounts, has a high error rate and uses equipment that's less
sensitive and accurate than the machines the British are using.
U.S. vets and soldiers who've had this test say they've been
told they weren't exposed when, in fact, the tests were simply
incapable of detecting whether depleted uranium was present.
Members of Congress have asked the Pentagon to look into testing
programs in other countries. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff promised to do that in April. But after that promise was
made, the officer in charge of U.S. testing said he had no
reason to gather such data because his test was good enough.
"Our labs would easily detect depleted uranium levels
approaching U.S. peacetime safety standards," says Lt. Col. Mark
Melanson, who runs the health physics program at the Army Center
for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine.
One of those labs handles all depleted uranium testing for the
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Randall Parrish, a scientist who played a big role in developing
the British test, says he can't understand why the United States
is satisfied with an inferior test.
"It is incorrect to assume that a low concentration of uranium
in urine means there is no contamination," he says, because
there's no good data to support that conclusion.
The U.S. government's refusal to adopt a state-of-the art test
also prevents researchers from finding out why tens of thousands
of veterans of the Gulf War have debilitating illnesses, says
Mohamad B. Abou-Donia, a researcher at Duke University.
Abou-Donia has conducted many significant experiments into the
causes of illnesses suffered by Gulf War vets. He also recently
published a study that reviewed available scientific work on the
health effects of depleted uranium.
Knowing which veterans were definitely exposed to depleted
uranium - not just those who might have been exposed to huge
doses - would fill a huge gap in the research, he says.
But until a better test is adopted and used on a larger number
of vets, that data isn't available, he says.
So there's no certainty about who was exposed and who was not.
Until scientists can reliably determine who was exposed and who
was not, they can't prove or disprove links between depleted
uranium and individual veterans' health problems, Abou-Donia
says.
Veterans and scientists have questioned for several years
whether the use of depleted uranium weapons in the Gulf War is
one of the reasons that so many veterans of that war came home
weak and full of pain.
The weapons provided a decisive edge in tank warfare in the 1991
and 2003 battles in the Persian Gulf region. They also left
behind millions and millions of pieces of easily inhalable black
dust that's toxic and mildly radioactive. The dust is a
necessary result of using the weapons to hit and destroy hard
targets.
In recent years, researchers have shown that laboratory animals
that inhaled depleted uranium dust developed cancerous tumors.
They've also found that a single particle of depleted uranium
can alter the genetic structure of nearby cells in ways
consistent with widely held scientific beliefs about the way
cancer starts in the human body. And they've found evidence that
once depleted uranium gets in the body, it migrates through the
bloodstream to the brain, testicles, lungs, kidneys and bones,
where it can reside for years.
But all that research constitutes preliminary steps toward
figuring out how big a problem the dust from depleted uranium
weapons might be, researchers say. Meanwhile, the military plans
to significantly reduce its investigations into possible health
effects resulting from depleted uranium, as well as other
possible causes of Gulf War-related illnesses.
IN BRITAIN, SAME COMPLAINTS PROMPTED DIFFERENT RESPONSE
The government's attitude toward critics of the weapon isn't
much different in Britain. British and U.S. troops are among the
few who actually used depleted uranium weapons in battles. A
large number of British vets have also been complaining about
health problems similar to those experienced by U.S. armed
forces from that war.
Parrish says his government paid to develop the more accurate
tests for veterans in part because of political pressure and in
part because of medical experts' suspicions that existing tests
yielded inconclusive and inadequate evidence of exposure.
Those tests were being used to dismiss the veterans' benefits
claims. Some British veterans went to independent labs and
received results that proved depleted uranium was in their
urine. Analysis of 24 hours' worth of urine is the commonly
accepted method of determining whether someone has been exposed
to uranium of any kind.
The British veterans' pleas for a better depleted uranium test
also got support from the British Royal Society, an
invitation-only group of prominent scientists. The Royal Society
carries clout in Britain: It dates to 1660, and its members are
readily acknowledged as among the best scientific minds in the
country. Society members decided to tackle the problem of Gulf
War illnesses independent of the government, and after several
years, they issued a series of findings.
While those findings didn't contradict the government's official
viewpoint in many ways, the society did call for a testing
program that could more accurately detect whether someone had
depleted uranium in their body. That, coupled with activism by
veterans groups, left the government little political choice.
It took about two years to develop the highly accurate tests,
says Parrish, a professor of isotope geology at the University
of Leicester.
In addition to his teaching, he runs a laboratory at the British
Geological Survey supported by Britain's Natural Environment
Research Council. The council is independent of the government
and is similar to the National Science Foundation in the United
States, Parrish says.
Parrish and David Coggon, a scientist and chairman of the board
that runs the testing program, say there are only four labs
(three in England, the other in Germany) that have adopted the
more rigorous testing regimen so far.
Part of the difficulty of testing for depleted uranium in
someone's body is that you can't cut up a person and look for
the uranium like you would if it were in a rock, soil sample or
lab rat. That's why scientists look for it in urine. While not a
perfect source, it's the best available right now, Parrish and
others say. Even the U.S. military agrees.
Finding depleted uranium in the body gets complicated. Natural
uranium is in everyone's body because it's in the food and water
we ingest. Therefore, there's natural uranium in everyone's
urine. It's difficult to accurately identify the depleted
uranium as opposed to the natural uranium, in part because the
amounts of both are so small.
Once obtained, the uranium in a 24-hour urine sample is
typically measured in nanograms. A nanogram is one-billionth of
a gram or one billion times lighter than a dollar bill. If a
total of 1 nanogram of natural and depleted uranium are
involved, the quantities of each are even lower. It takes
extremely sophisticated machines to help find and identify the
microscopic bits of depleted uranium.
The British and U.S. governments have been giving veterans and
soldiers urine tests for depleted uranium for years. But unless
the soldiers had relatively large quantities of uranium in their
bodies, the tests couldn't detect depleted uranium apart from
natural uranium without a high margin of error, Parrish and
other scientists say.
LIMITATIONS ON TESTS CREATE QUESTIONABLE RESULTS
U.S. military testing officials say that unless a sample has a
relatively high total uranium level, no attempt is made to
determine how much uranium is natural and how much is depleted
uranium. The level is deemed safe, and there's no need to tell
the difference, they say.
As a result, U.S. and British veterans have been told for years
that they tested negative for depleted uranium, Parrish and
others say. Instead, all that had been demonstrated was that the
methods used in testing were incapable of detecting depleted
uranium in such small quantities.
Painstakingly careful methods to collect the urine and separate
the uranium from the liquid and other chemicals in the sample
are important, Parrish says.
Axel Gerdes, a German scientist who worked with Parrish to
develop the tests, says a crucial difference involves the
methods used to concentrate the uranium in urine before it's
analyzed.
He says the labs used by the U.S. Army dilute the urine with
water, which makes it easier to examine, and take other
shortcuts that reduce the time and manpower to do the tests.
That comes at the cost of losing the ability to detect small
quantities with accuracy, he says, by a factor of about 1,000.
SUPERIOR SPECTROMETER USED BY BRITISH LABORATORIES
The British testing program also calls for using superior
hardware to aid the analysis, Gerdes and Parrish say.
Several machines are employed for that task, they say, including
a multicollector ICP mass spectrometer. A mass spectrometer is a
machine used to determine the contents of an unknown substance.
A multicollector ICP mass spectrometer is an even more
sophisticated version that's specially equipped to accurately
measure minute quantities of radioactive substances, including
the various forms of an element known as isotopes. The way that
scientists tell the difference between natural uranium and
depleted uranium in a sample is by counting these isotopes, a
process that at times involves tiny amounts of an element.
Scientists using the procedures and hardware developed for the
British test are now able to reliably identify the difference
between depleted uranium and regular uranium in samples with as
little as 0.1 nanogram of total uranium per liter of urine,
Parrish says. That's 10 billion times lighter than a dollar
bill. All this is done with a margin of error of less than 1
percent, making it a very accurate test.
Lt. Col. Melanson, who oversees much of the Pentagon's
scientific research into the health hazards of depleted uranium,
says the most exacting lab test used on U.S. veterans and
active-duty military personnel must have at least 3 nanograms of
total uranium to examine per liter of urine. That's 30 times
more than the minimum for the new British test.
The most sophisticated U.S. testing labs use a quadruple ICP
mass spectrometer, Melanson says. Parrish and other experts in
using mass spectrometry to identify materials say that's a much
less capable machine than the multicollector type that the
British are using, a machine that's been available for about 10
years.
Gerdes now works at a university in Germany and does testing
there for privately financed groups. He has an even more
sensitive version of the machine than the British labs do. He
says it enables his lab to accurately detect even smaller
quantities of depleted uranium.
Earlier this year, nine soldiers from a New York-based National
Guard unit who had health problems after serving in Operation
Iraqi Freedom had their urine tested at Gerdes' lab at the
University of Frankfurt.
Gerdes says the nine veterans had anywhere from 1.6 to 5.7
nanograms per liter of uranium in their urine. Of those, five
had little or no depleted uranium in their samples, while the
others' samples contained 1.2 percent to 8.2 percent depleted
uranium.
After publicity about the tests in the New York Daily News,
those veterans were tested by the labs used by the U.S.
military, says Michael J. Kilpatrick, deputy director for the
Pentagon's office of health protection for deployed troops. None
had enough total uranium in their urine to be concerned about,
Kilpatrick says, and the U.S. labs didn't find any depleted
uranium. The cause of the soldiers' illnesses remain undiagnosed.
Gerdes says the use of total uranium as a guide to the level of
depleted uranium in someone's body is a mistake because there's
often no correlation between how much total uranium is in a
sample and what percentage of it was depleted uranium. That's an
important point that the U.S. military seems to overlook, he
says. The U.S. military says the only difference is that
depleted uranium is less radioactive and therefore less harmful.
After initial reports about the results from Gerdes' lab
involving the New York veterans, several members of Congress
questioned whether the U.S. military should be looking at more
rigorous testing. They directed the questions to Gen. Richard
Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a congressional
hearing April 20.
They specifically asked about tests being developed in other
countries, in light of the different results involving the New
York National Guard unit.
JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN SAID STAFF WOULD LOOK INTO TESTS
Myers told them he didn't know about the other countries'
testing but that he would look into the matter.
Coggon, head of the board that oversees the British testing,
says he's not aware of any effort from the United States to get
information about the processes or procedures developed there.
Melanson, the U.S. military official deemed the most
knowledgeable about depleted uranium testing, says he's not
familiar with the British program and sees no need to inquire.
The tests available in the United States are good enough, he
says, and are capable of determining the presence of depleted
uranium at levels nearly 1,000 times lower than the health
safety standards established in the United States.
When U.S. troops or veterans are tested, they're usually told
that their results didn't contain uranium outside the normal
background levels of uranium intake and therefore aren't
considered a health risk.
That standard is set by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
and is based on a representative sample of 1,006 people given
urine tests collected and analyzed by another federal agency.
But the NRC attaches a warning to those standards, noting it's
"unknown" whether the levels of uranium in the survey "represent
cause for health concern." It's merely a level of uranium in
urine for a cross section of the population 6 years and older
and says nothing of how healthy or unhealthy they are or will
be, the NRC says.
The NRC further cautions that "more research is needed" to
determine what the healthy level is.
In the draft of a 2002 report outlining the issues involved in
using urine testing for soldiers' exposure to depleted uranium,
Melanson's own staff pointed out those same limitations and
warnings.
One thing everyone agrees on is that no one has been able to
credibly determine how much depleted uranium is in someone based
on the level of depleted uranium in their urine.
Research shows pretty clearly that when any uranium is
swallowed, it passes through the intestines and is excreted
quickly. Particles created by the use of depleted uranium
weapons, when inhaled, stay in the body much longer, Pentagon
research shows.
The tiny bits of depleted uranium created when the weapons hit
hard targets tend to be what chemists call ceramic, which means
they don't easily break down in liquid. Various forms of uranium
have a wide range of solubility, Parrish says. The effect of the
high heat from the explosions and other factors make this
particular kind of uranium a big unknown regarding how much and
how fast it breaks down in the body and enters the blood and
urine.
DUST IN LUNGS DOESN'T DISSOLVE QUICKLY, STUDY FINDS
The Army's recently completed five-year $6 million Capstone
study of those tiny pieces of depleted uranium concluded that
there's "a significant source of uncertainty" regarding how fast
inhaled particles would dissolve in simulated lung fluid. Still,
the study concluded, there was no significant health risk from
inhaling particles of depleted uranium that result from use of
the weapons in combat.
The Capstone study said the vast majority of the particles
created from use of the weapons and small enough to be inhaled
took 100 days or more before dissolving halfway in simulated
lung fluid. Generalizations were not easy, it said, but the
smallest particles tended to be the least soluble. That means
that pieces more likely to get more deeply into the lungs last
longer.
Anywhere from less than 1 percent to 35 percent of the
inhalable-sized pieces tested in Capstone dissolved halfway in
10 days or less, the study found, while 58 percent to 99 percent
took more than 100 days to dissolve half their mass. Dissolution
of half of the mass of a contaminant is the government's
standard measure of how long it might take to clear something
from the lungs after occupational exposures.
That data indicates that even the smallest particles could stay
in the lungs for several years, Melanson says, though he doubts
that they would pose any significant health risk.
So far, the British have tested only about 30 troops as part of
making sure that their procedures are accurate. None of those
people had depleted uranium in their samples.
Parrish says it's possible that by now, all the inhaled depleted
uranium that will ever dissolve in these soldiers' lungs has
dissolved and the rest will remain inside without a way to
detect it. He also says it's possible that all the uranium is
dissolved.
That's one reason why the testing program is so important, he
says - to find out, instead of speculating.
U.S. government scientists still find evidence of depleted
uranium in the urine of troops with shrapnel wounds. But those
larger particles tend to be more soluble than the dust that's
inhaled, the Capstone study says.
Some researchers say the relatively lower solubility of depleted
uranium dust could spell even more trouble for the veterans than
thought. If those little pieces in the lungs and nearby lymph
nodes aren't dissolving quickly and getting flushed out of the
body through the blood and urinary tract, then they're sitting
next to live tissue and blood cells, emitting DNA-altering alpha
particles for years.
Under this theory, it would be extremely important to know how
much of the uranium in someone's body is natural uranium, as
opposed to depleted uranium, even if there are small quantities
involved. That's because the level of natural uranium in
someone's body is mostly swallowed, and more than 90 percent of
it is flushed from the body within a day or two through
excretory systems. The swallowed uranium therefore doesn't stay
in one place to irradiate tissue or blood for hundreds of days.
Richard J. Albertini, a cancer researcher at the University of
Vermont, says those pieces of radioactive dust in the lungs, as
opposed to the digestive system, are important for another
reason.
LOCATION OF THE METAL MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE
Research indicates that inhaled depleted uranium can cause
genetic mutations in blood, he says. Those mutations signal what
very well might be the first step toward cancer. Because all of
a person's blood passes through the lungs to pick up oxygen to
be distributed throughout the body, large quantities of blood
are subject to mutations from exposure to depleted uranium. In
contrast, he says, veterans with shrapnel in isolated parts of
the body aren't irradiating as much of their blood because their
wounds are rarely in places where most blood circulates.
Kilpatrick dismisses these arguments, in part because natural
uranium is even more radioactive than depleted uranium. He also
dismisses a possible link between inhaling depleted uranium and
the neurological problems that seem to form the bulk of
complaints by Gulf War veterans.
None of the neurological problems associated with those vets has
been noted in the 50 years of research involving workers in the
uranium industry, he says. So if the quantities of either form
of uranium are lower than the Pentagon testing program shows,
there shouldn't be a problem, he says.
The British Royal Society's final report on the hazards of
depleted uranium basically agreed with the Pentagon's views of
the health risks. But it called for better testing to help
scientists get a better understanding of the relationship
between intake and risks, as well as help figure out what might
be ailing individual veterans.
Abou-Donia, the Duke University scientist who recently published
a survey of available research on depleted uranium, says data
from better tests - such as the ones being done in Britain -
could prove very helpful. "Absolutely. Any monitoring of this
chemical would be helpful," he says.
Abou-Donia has been conducting experiments and other studies on
various possible causes of Gulf War veterans' illnesses for
several years. One of the biggest problems that scientists have
in that field is a lack of fundamental data, he says.
If thousands of veterans in the United States got the new tests,
the lack of data regarding depleted uranium might be eased, he
says.
Scientists might be able to tell, for example, whether veterans
who definitely have depleted uranium inside them also have a
type of brain abnormality thought to be characteristic of the
neurological symptoms among Gulf War veterans, he says.
But until now, no one has had a test considered reliable enough
to detect small enough quantities to determine who was probably
exposed and who wasn't.
Scientists don't know what causes the brain abnormalities in
those vets, Abou-Donia says. But unlike other chemicals and
causes under suspicion, the depleted uranium in urine is
measurable and might still be in the body.
The level of exposure to chemical weapons, bug spray and other
suggested causes of the veterans' illnesses isn't detectable at
this late date because those toxins are long gone from the body
and no one kept accurate records of doses and other information
on the 1991 battlefield, Abou-Donia says. Those toxins have done
their damage and are gone. That's one reason that finding the
cause of the veterans' complaints has been so difficult.
ACTUAL BENEFITS OF NEW TESTS NOT DETERMINED YET
Gerdes, an environmental geochemist, says he questions whether
there's a link between depleted uranium exposure and the
illnesses suffered by veterans. But doing the science and the
testing is an important step toward understanding the problem.
"There is simply a need to do further research in this topic,"
he says.
Parrish says he's not sure what the testing is going to find. He
notes that though the British government agreed to finance use
of the new tests for veterans of the Persian Gulf War and
peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo, veterans of the
continuing war in Iraq are tested with the less precise
measurement.
A British Ministry of Defense spokesman says the new testing is
considered important for veterans of the other wars because of
the long period that's elapsed since the exposure and therefore
the need to identify what might be smaller quantities.
He says the military is satisfied with the less-exact testing
for veterans of the current fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan,
though some will be given the more sophisticated tests as an
expedience.
The new testing program for the British veterans is just
starting. Advertisements and notices directed at veterans
started in late September, and about 300 people have signed up
so far, Coggon says. About 1,500 are expected to sign up, says
Charles Williams, a spokesman for the Ministry of Defense.
Williams and Parrish say it will probably take six months to a
year before enough tests are concluded to get an accurate
picture of how many vets have been exposed and at what level.
Parrish says that as long as Britain and the United States
refuse to let outside independent laboratories handle the
testing, there will be suspicions that the truth about exposures
and possible problems are being concealed.
The two labs in Britain performing the tests are considered
independent.
He says he and other lab workers do the testing and analysis,
but they don't know whether they're working on "dummy" samples
or actual veterans' urine. That's one of the many levels of
exactitude they've built into the process to help ensure
accuracy. Some dummy samples might be "spiked" with known
quantities of uranium and depleted uranium in another lab and
sent out with the vets' samples, but others are taken from
people known to have no depleted uranium in their urine. That
keeps the labs on their toes, Parrish says.
In the United States, the most precise testing that the Pentagon
does is handled at a national Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention laboratory, Melanson says.
When that federal agency does testing for the military, it won't
release any information about the tests conducted there and
won't even answer questions about the procedures, error rates or
scientific standards for the tests, says Kathy Harben of the
disease control agency.
She referred all questions about the agency's testing for the
military to the Pentagon.
VETS SAY U.S. DOESN'T WANT TO PAY FOR BETTER TESTING
Steve Robinson, executive director of the Gulf War Resource
Center Inc., a veterans rights group, says he suspects there are
two reasons that the United States uses the less sophisticated
testing method.
First, he says, is the cost.
Pentagon officials say their tests cost $200 to $400 a sample,
depending on whether there's enough total uranium in the urine
sample for the government to attempt to determine whether it
contains depleted uranium.
Melanson initially refused to divulge the cost of this testing,
saying it wasn't a factor in his decision-making.
Parrish says his test costs about $1,000 each.
Robinson and other veterans advocates say the second reason that
the U.S. government doesn't want to use the more sophisticated
tests is they're afraid the tests might help show possible links
between the highly valued depleted uranium weapons and veterans'
health problems.
"These are very effective weapons, and they want to keep them,"
says Steve Smithson, assistant director of the American Legion's
Veterans Affairs and Rehabilitation Division.
Kilpatrick says the critics are wrong.
He and Melanson say there's no need to identify the low levels
of depleted uranium that the British can find because the tests
that the United States uses can detect depleted uranium 1,000
times less than what's dangerous to health.
They cite World Health Organization, or WHO, and U.S. Institute
of Medicine reports as authorities, based on 50 years of health
research involving uranium miners, millers and processors. The
Institute of Medicine is part of the National Science Foundation
and is considered the country's best impartial health research
organization. Kilpatrick and Melanson also cite the recently
completed Capstone study. It involved measurements of
inhalable-sized particles of depleted uranium that resulted from
test-range firing of the weapons into a real tank, the hulls and
turrets of tanks, and other combat vehicles.
Kilpatrick and Melanson say the Capstone research got its title
because officials think that it provides the last pieces of data
necessary to determine the health effects of depleted uranium.
Scientists who have been working outside the Pentagon to answer
that question say there are still some important pieces missing
before drawing such final conclusions.
Carolyn Fulco is one of the authors of the Institute of
Medicine's reports on Gulf War illnesses. She says it would not
be accurate to say her organization was as conclusive as the
Pentagon officials when it comes to how much depleted uranium
can harm someone.
"There was almost no literature on depleted uranium," she says.
Nearly all of it was on uranium before it became depleted and in
circumstances very different from the possible exposure
resulting from use of the weapons, she says.
As a result, the institute recommended additional study into
nearly all the health questions raised by the use of depleted
uranium in warfare. The WHO report says the same.
Beate Ritz is an epidemiologist at the University of California,
Los Angeles, who specializes in how internal radiation sources
cause cancer. She's also the primary author of several of the
most recent studies of the health effects of working with
uranium.
SCIENTISTS SAY SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE ISN'T REALLY KNOWN
When the Institute of Medicine needed an expert to review the
report that Melanson cited to support his view that the U.S.
testing program is adequate, it turned to her for approval.
That's because she's one of the few people in the world
qualified to pass judgments of that type, Fulco says.
Ritz now sits on an advisory panel for the institute's
continuing review of possible causes of the illnesses suffered
by Gulf War vets.
She says no one knows what the safe level of depleted uranium is
inside someone's body when it comes to cancer and risk from
radiation.
The field is rife with errors and misclassifications because
actual testing to settle the matter with scientific assurance is
almost impossible, she says.
"When you're looking at humans, you need large numbers of
subjects," to make sure that you have accurate results, she
says. "But you can't cage humans and feed them uranium and count
the exposure for 20 years."
The next best thing is to pick an animal - and hope that you've
picked the right one, she says.
Even then, rats, mice and monkeys often have genetic and other
differences that can't tell you whether a human will react the
same way, she says.
So to be sure, you have to try things out on humans. Or see what
happens to them after exposure.
Lots of them.
Kilpatrick, Melanson and others say 50 years of experience
watching the health and health problems of people who have
worked as uranium miners, millers and processors during the
Nuclear Age give them the number of people and the confidence to
say that enough research has been done. They point out that they
add in a large margin of error to make sure they're right.
They also dismiss the idea that depleted uranium exposures
resulting from combat can be a serious radiation or cancer risk.
Ritz and Alexandra Miller, a researcher at the Armed Forces
Radiobiological Research Institute, say that isn't a justified
conclusion, as far as science goes.
"I don't see the data that supports that at all," Miller says.
The studies on people who worked in the uranium industry are
often flawed and don't involve the same issues and exposures as
soldiers on the battlefield, Miller says. The Institute of
Medicine's report says the same thing, and so does the
Department of Veterans Affairs' educational program for
physicians and other health care workers.
Using uranium industry workers' health experiences as a
benchmark might not be a good measure either, say critics of the
military's dismissal of the health threat from depleted uranium.
Several studies by Congress' Government Accountability Office,
or GAO, note that getting an accurate picture of nuclear
workers' health is difficult. That's in part because for years,
the government encouraged its contractors and managers to refuse
to acknowledge work-related diseases and health problems. This
helped mask the true death and illness rate to researchers.
As for whether the health standards are adequate, there's also a
great deal of debate. The GAO says the government will probably
need to spend more than $1 billion this decade to compensate
nuclear workers for health problems - a higher cost than
estimated because the number of workers with legitimate claims
keeps rising.
In addition, the GAO says, there's little or no scientific
agreement on what constitutes an acceptable radiation risk, even
among U.S. government agencies.
SCIENTIFIC MODELS NEED TESTING TO PROVE ACCURACY
Kilpatrick and Melanson say the Capstone study's data-gathering
enabled them to determine how much depleted uranium dust would
be inhaled in the worst of battle circumstances. They say the
calculations on that volume of dust, using mathematical and
other models of human health adopted by government occupational
and safety agencies, prove little or no adverse health effect
from use of the weapons.
Those calculations create a new standard for discussing the
issue, Kilpatrick says.
Ritz and Miller say the Capstone work doesn't change the fact
that there has been insufficient experimentation on animals to
prove or disprove the assertions of safety.
The calculations and models that the Pentagon points to are
nothing more than theory waiting to be tested, they and other
scientists say.
"You know the problem with models, don't you?" Ritz asks. "You
get out of them what you put in."
The type of models that the Capstone study relies on for its
conclusions are frequently shown to be flawed, she says. That's
much of what health science is all about - testing the models
and showing whether they work.
A recent example of how these models can be flawed occurred with
the chemical paraquat, Ritz says.
For decades, the U.S. government had been using it - and giving
it to other countries - to eradicate marijuana and other plants
used to make drugs. Critics questioned the wisdom of those
programs, noting that the possible effects of ingesting the
drugs were not known.
Government officials dismissed the caution warnings.
For one thing, they noted that long-established scientific
models said paraquat couldn't cause brain damage because its
chemical composition kept it from penetrating through a layer of
cells that protect the brain from impurities in the blood.
The layer of cells is called the "blood-brain" barrier.
"All that was true," Ritz says. But just a few years ago, one of
her colleagues found that paraquat could get into the brain
anyway.
Like other parts of the body, the brain needs amino acids to
make proteins to keep going.
The brain has special nerves to directly transfer those acids to
the brain, bypassing the brain-blood barrier. Paraquat is made
of molecules that look like amino acids.
So the brain sucks up the paraquat molecules, thinking that
they're amino acids, she says. "And it can cause brain damage
when it happens."
That's one of many examples where the models aren't good enough.
And it's why sufficient research involving human cells and
animals should be done to test the models thoroughly before
declaring something safe, she and Miller say.
Vernon Walker, a cancer biologist at the Lovelace Respiratory
Research Institute in New Mexico, conducted a study that found
that when rats inhaled depleted uranium, they developed genetic
mutations indicative of cancer.
He says the government exposure standards and scientific models
used to determine workplace safety - the barometers of safety
used in the Capstone study - don't include the potential for
developing cancer in the way that his experiments showed is
likely.
The military has drugs, developed in the World War II era for
troops exposed to radiation, that can reduce those mutations to
safer levels, he says.
Experiments are being conducted to see whether they have the
same effect on depleted uranium inhaled from the battlefield, as
well as from shrapnel.
He says that based on his experiments and what he's seen from
other science on the subject, he'd be taking those drugs if he
were a soldier in Iraq and was exposed - especially if he were
hit by depleted uranium shrapnel.
"I'd be taking the pills for the rest of my life," Walker says.
Miller says her research has found that a single particle of
depleted uranium can deform cells and DNA, the basic building
block of life, in ways thought to lead to cancer.
Others have shown that uranium in the body and inhaled uranium
can make its way to the brain.
Those findings haven't solved the riddle of Gulf War vets'
illnesses, but they're far from comforting about how safe the
black dust from the explosions must be, Miller says.
Someone practicing good science shouldn't be closing the book on
the subject and declaring a particular level of exposure safe
under those under-researched circumstances, she says.
TOO FEW PEOPLE HAVE BEEN STUDIED TO KNOW THE TRUTH
Ritz says the same thing about the possibility that cancer risks
might increase after inhalation of depleted uranium.
"Our human research, as valuable as it is, has a lot of severe
limitations," she says.
At most, she says, it proves that we've been unable to detect
anything, not that there's no risk.
There might be 6,000 people involved in the studies that the
government is relying on, she says.
Perhaps that's enough to figure out whether something's toxic,
she says, but it's far from enough to determine whether it's
carcinogenic.
For cancer, if you had a million people and followed them for 50
years, you might be able to determine a safe level of exposure
with confidence, she says.
But no study has ever attempted to follow uranium workers on
that large a scale, not to mention people exposed to depleted
uranium, she says.
After the Pentagon tested the New York reservists and announced
that the soldiers tested negative for depleted uranium, a news
briefing was called.
William Winkenwerder Jr., a physician who is assistant secretary
of defense for health affairs, told reporters that 10 years of
health studies found that "low levels of depleted uranium that
our troops would be exposed to are neither a radiological or
chemical health threat to our service members."
He also said there was no evidence linking depleted uranium to
radiation-induced illnesses such as leukemia and cancers.
But Ritz says the failure to find a link to cancer at this point
isn't surprising at all.
It will take about 30 more years before soldiers from the
Persian Gulf War could reasonably be expected to start showing
evidence of most cancers spawned as recently as 1991, she says.
Lung cancer - which many researchers say is the most likely form
that might result from inhaling depleted uranium - would take a
few years longer to show up, she says.
Some forms of leukemia and lymphomas might have started showing
up in the past year or two, she says.
Those forms of cancer have also been identified as possible
problems because lymph nodes are vulnerable when particles are
inhaled.
Even if an outbreak of leukemia and lymphomas has begun among
veterans of the Gulf War, it's unlikely that the data to prove
it would have been collected and that anyone would know about
it, the GAO says.
No one is comparing a list of cancer deaths in the 50 states
with the names or Social Security numbers of veterans from the
Gulf War, the GAO says.
And no one is likely to begin doing it anytime soon because the
money has not been made available, the agency says.
NO MONEY TO TRACK VETS' CANCER RATE ANYWAY
In the past 13 years, only two studies have been financed to
determine cancer incidence among Gulf War veterans, the GAO
says, and both of them had limited ability to study the problem.
The studies' access to data is being curtailed as a result of
financial and legal issues, the report says. Veterans in only a
few states were included.
VA officials say they're studying ways to fill this gap in the
data.
In the meantime, Ritz says, the best that we can do is guess
what a safe level of exposure to depleted uranium might be.
Depleted uranium isn't alone in this respect.
Of all known carcinogens, "none of those in the carcinogenic
fields have accepted a threshold level," where safe and unsafe
can be identified with a measurable number, Ritz says.
Threshold levels are set by government agencies, not scientists,
Ritz says.
"These are all policy decisions about what is acceptable," not
to be confused with scientific proof, she says.
There are many critics of the military's approach to
establishing safety levels and standards, but there are also
many scientists who agree with how Kilpatrick, Melanson and
others have handled the problem that they're faced with.
Terry C. Pellmar - who works at the same lab as Miller -
co-authored the first research paper citing that depleted
uranium from pellets embedded in the bodies of rats might
migrate to their brains.
Still, she says, she doubts that depleted uranium is responsible
for the neurological problems suffered by veterans of the
Persian Gulf War. And she doubts that the government is making a
mistake in the policies it's established regarding the safety of
depleted uranium on the battlefield.
"As a scientist, I'm not sure of anything" that could be deemed
absolutely safe, she says.
"As an individual, I would have no personal concerns."
Knowing the science as well as she does, she thinks that a
soldier can trust the Pentagon's assessment of the risks.
If she were a soldier on a battlefield, she says, she would feel
safe, as far as the danger from inhaling depleted uranium dust.
"We all live in a world that's filled with things that increase
the chances of getting cancer," Pellmar says.
Even if Miller's research shows that a single particle of
inhaled depleted uranium might increase the risk of cancer, that
degree of increased risk is accepted by people all the time in
everyday life. There's an increased risk of cancer if you spend
time in smoky bars, she says. "Yet, we all walk into smoky bars."
Similarly, she says, there's increased risk from living in
Colorado, for instance, because there's more uranium in the
environment there naturally, compared with most states.
Yet thousands of people have been moving to Colorado for years.
So given the battlefield advantages that depleted uranium gives
soldiers, she says, taking that little extra risk might be a
good bet.
Copyright ©2004 Daily Press
*****************************************************************
42 BusinessWeek: When Water Can Be Bad for Kids
Burt Helm
Adults can tolerate perchlorate-contaminated water, but too
much might hurt fetuses and the young. Exactly how much is too
much may soon be known
Perchlorate is its name, and it has plenty of people worried. A
primary ingredient in rocket fuel and fireworks, the chemical
has been found in the water supply of at least 20 states. If
ingested in high-enough amounts, perchlorate blocks iodide
uptake into the thyroid gland, an essential function that aids
the development of fetuses, newborns, and children (see
"Perchlorate Facts" below).
Just what constitutes a sufficient risk level is unclear, and
this lack of clarity is at the root of a six-year controversy
pitching the Pentagon, the Energy Dept., NASA, and
defense-industry contractors against the Environmental
Protection Agency. The two sides have turned the matter over to
the National Academy of Sciences, the "Supreme Court" for
science debates, in the words of an EPA spokesperson.
BEYOND GUIDANCE. What's at stake? Potentially hundreds of
millions of dollars in cleanup costs, a headache for the Defense
Dept. et al., and a bonanza for the water-remediation companies
that can handle perchlorate.
Resolution may be on a fast track -- perhaps much faster than
the EPA, defense-industry groups, and the American Thyroid Assn.
believe. All sides are expecting no more than general guidance
from the NAS, such as an opinion on the current research on
perchlorate and a recommendation for further scientific studies.
Yet, BusinessWeek Online has learned from two sources close to
the study that the NAS, in an uncharacteristic move, will
recommend a specific reference dose (the amount judged safe for
consumption by even the most at-risk groups) when it releases
its findings in the first half of January, 2005. While the NAS
won't confirm what number it will release and declined to
comment publicly about the results, the fact that it will be
tendering specific numbers is significant.
"AWFUL PR." Scientists have known about perchlorate's effects
on the human body since the 1950s. But it was only in 1997 they
discovered how to detect the chemical at low levels in water.
That kicked off a serious evaluation of the pollutant's presence
in drinking water, with the EPA finishing its initial risk
assessment in 2002. The agency recommended a reference dose of
one part per billion -– the equivalent of roughly a half a
teaspoon of perchlorate dissolved in an Olympic-size swimming
pool of water. The Pentagon & Co. complained the level was
onerously low and demanded a reevaluation.
So now the NAS is reviewing the EPA's assessment. And although
its findings aren't legally binding in any way (and the EPA must
still go through the process of actually regulating
perchlorate), they'll carry a great deal of weight in the
political debate. An unfavorable decision will undercut
Defense's already tenuous position against regulation. "The
Pentagon is trying to [oppose the EPA] quietly, because [doing
so] is awful PR," says Debra Coy, an analyst with Washington
Research Group. Defense officials didn't return phone calls
seeking comment for this story.
Meanwhile, aerospace and chemical companies are hedging their
bets. Lockheed Martin (LMT ), Kerr McGee (KMG ), GenCorp (GY )
unit AeroJet, and perchlorate manufacturer American Pacific are
either setting aside reserves or actively conducting cleanups in
California and Nevada, even while fighting against the
establishment of standards for the contaminant in Washington,
D.C.
COSTLY CLEANUPS. A clear recommendation by the NAS for levels of
the chemical considered acceptable in water supplies could mean
more cleanup funding from individual companies, even as they try
to solve the problem well before actual regulation by the EPA.
Defense will eventually be forced to pick up the bill as well.
"Nobody wants to be liable down the line, when there's a
mandate," says Peter Jenson of Basin Water, a privately owned
filtration company based in San Bernardino County, Calif.
"Ultimately all [the responsible parties] are going to move into
treatment –- but a lot of of them are delaying because of this
NAS study."
So far, Lockheed has listed $180 million as a liability for the
future cleanup of a former test site in Redlands, Calif., while
Kerr McGee added $32 million to its reserves for a cleanup in
Nevada. AeroJet says it has spent between $35 million and $40
million removing perchlorate at its site in Rancho Cordova,
Calif., alone. Kerr McGee stopped making the chemical in 1998,
and aerospace companies like AeroJet and Lockheed Martin now do
their testing at military bases -- firmly on government property
where they're farther from populated areas and free from
liability if perchlorate or other chemicals seep into the
ground.
Cleaning it up isn't cheap. Filtration systems for
municipal-level wells can cost several hundred thousand dollars
to install. But the real issue is the operating cost. The going
rate for cleaning the equivalent of one family's yearly supply
of water is roughly $50 to $75, according to Siemens-owned (SI )
USFilter and Calgon Carbon (CCC ), two filtration companies.
"DOWN THE ROAD." Costs can pile up when you consider the
pollutant has turned up in 4% of the nation's water systems so
far, according to a recent Food & Drug Administration
investigation. Purging the chemical from the San Gabriel basin,
a site covering just the eastern portion of Los Angeles County,
would cost at least $100 million over the next 15 years,
according to Carol Williams, an executive officer of the San
Gabriel Basin Watermaster.
And perchlorate could be just the beginning. If the NAS sets a
safety standard for traces of the chemical in drinking water,
other governmental research groups could use the process to set
standards to regulate additional contaminants. "A stringent
[ruling] represents what's down the road for emerging
contaminants," says Doug Gillen of USFilter.
Because pollutants have different chemical makeups, removing two
different substances often means buying two separate filtration
systems, thus doubling the cost. Cleanups themselves can often
take over 20 years, meaning that water must be constantly
filtered for that period before the threat is gone.
READY TO SUE. While the remediation of each individual
substance may not create a huge market on its own, the
combination of all of them could generate a thriving, new
industry in chemical decontamination -- much to the dismay of
aerospace and chemical companies, and to the Pentagon, which
several of the contractors have said they plan to sue to help
cover the costs.
"If you add all those little bits and pieces together, you have
a market in the tens of billions of dollars," says Gillen. For
the handful of remediation companies already in the business
such as USFilter, Calgon Carbon, and Basin Water, there's a lot
on tap.
Perchlorate Facts
• While some perchlorate occurs naturally, most of the
drinking-water contamination has been linked to rocket test
sites, military bases, and perchlorate-production plants, where
the chemical was improperly disposed of and soaked into the
ground.
• Perchlorate has turned up in an estimated 4% of U.S. water
systems as of 2003. Significant levels of arsenic (above the
EPA's protective level) are estimated to be in 5.3% of
groundwater systems. Elevated levels of lead are estimated to be
in roughly 3% of water systems that serve over 3,300 people
each.
• Perchlorate isn't regulated on the state or national level
right now, but companies are cleaning up because of local
agreements.
• The presence of the contaminant in drinking water won't harm
adults, but it may hinder the development of newborns and
fetuses. Studies have so far looked only at perchlorate
consumption in healthy adults, and in animals, so firm
conclusions have not been reached.
Helmis a reporter for BusinessWeek Online in New York
Edited by Patricia O'Connell
Copyright 2004, by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights
*****************************************************************
43 Nuclear Terrorism, "Poofing," rad waste piling up (1000
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:39:00 -0800
To: California Papers, including dailies such as LA Times, Orange County
Register, Sacramento Bee, San Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury-News,
San Luis Obispo Tribune, San Diego Union-Tribune, and the Lompoc Record, as
well as weeklies such as San Diego City Beat, Pasadena Weekly, the various
Readers, and others.
Date: December 14th, 2004
Re: Proposed Op-Ed for California Papers (as published in the North County
Times and the Coast News)
To The Editor,
The 800 word "Perspective" item about San Onofre, shown below, was
published last Sunday (12/12/04, pg. E-4) in the North County Times, an
award-winning paper in San Diego County. They had requested a shortened
version of a letter I sent to a number of papers and nuclear activists on
12/06/04 (URL for the original version appears below).
I learned on 12/13/04 (yesterday) that my original letter of 12/6/04 was
also published (sans bio) in the Letters section of The Coast News (a
weekly San Diego North County paper) on 12/9/04.
My thanks to both papers for publishing my comments. It's possible other
publications also printed the original letter, and several activists
distributed it fairly widely as well.
Dr. Helen Caldicott (co-founder, Physicians for Social Responsibility and
Nobel Peace Prize nominee) said of the original, "an excellent letter."
The North County Times also published, adjacent to my essay, a statement
(not a response per se) by the CEO of Southern California Edison. SCE owns
the San Onofre Nuclear WASTE Generating Station (SONWGS).
In his statement, he estimated that by repairing San Onofre now, California
would somehow save $1 billion over the next two decades. He did not
specify any of the assumptions used in his estimate, such as which
alternatives would provide the energy.
Even if, by some lucky streak, nothing serious goes wrong at the plant, is
that potential $1 billion savings worth creating an estimated 4 million
ADDITIONAL pounds of high-level radioactive waste which would then sit,
exposed and vulnerable, along our coastlines?
Is it worth the additional danger from having operational nukes in our
midst (vastly more dangerous than shuttered nukes)? Is it worth letting
nuclear power plant owners line their pockets with gold while offering us
NO real security protection, and NO guarantee their billions of dollars in
upgrades will protect us from nuclear catastrophe?
There is no question the SCE CEO assumed San Onofre's nuclear dry cask
storage system would not be breached by a jetliner, whether intentionally
or by accident. Or by an earthquake, tsunami, asteroid, or act of war. Or
be poorly designed (the casks use a unique, non-industry-standard system),
or be poorly installed.
The SCE CEO offered NO long-term renewable energy solution to our
generations-old "energy crises," yet any good scientist or engineer can
tell you there are clean solutions which won't generate any hazardous waste
of any sort whatsoever (some wind turbines, for instance, are lubricated
with mineral oil or other harmless substances). Nuclear power generates
the most hazardous of all hazardous wastes possible!
SCE is a 30+ billion-dollar company with a vested interest in the continued
creation of nuclear waste. The opinion of its CEO certainly matters --
because it is ruining our state.
When you're stuck in a hole, you don't dig deeper! California should stop
all rebuilding of our nuclear power plants immediately. It's time to pull
the plug on this dangerous mistake.
I am requesting that you publish the letter shown below (or, if you prefer,
the longer version) in your paper as soon as possible. If you choose to
publish the version included here, please indicate that it was originally
published in the North County Times on December 12th, 2004.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can answer any questions.
Thank you in advance.
Sincerely,
Russell Hoffman
Concerned Citizen
Carlsbad, CA
(760) 720-7261
=================================================
The original (~1150 word) version:
=================================================
http://www.animatedsoftware.com/environm/onofre/2004/Shut%20San%20Onofre%2020041206.htm
=================================================
Below is the ~800-word letter as it appeared in the NC Times on 12/12/04:
=================================================
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/12/12/opinion/commentary/21_06_2812_11_04.txt
Editions of the North County Times Serving San Diego and Riverside Counties
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Last modified Saturday, December 11, 2004 9:13 PM PST
Shutter the nuclear nightmare on I-5
By: RUSSELL D. HOFFMAN - For the North County Times
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station should be shut down permanently. It
is brittle, frail, old. Its bones are hardened. Its arteries are clogged
and stiff. It keeps popping and poofing, bursting and spilling, leaking,
spraying, steaming, venting, dripping, gushing, pouring out poisons into
our environment.
The tritium alone released from the nuclear power plant is a serious
environmental concern. Tritium (half-life: about 12 years) is readily
absorbed by all parts of the human body. It does occur naturally, but that
is no good reason to increase the dose to people.
In normal daily operation, the facility also releases cesium-137,
strontium-90, uranium, plutonium (both in a variety of isotopes) and
hundreds of other radioactive "daughter products" created by the nuclear
chain reaction. Although the plant owners say these legal releases are
harmless, many insidious mechanisms for biological damage by radioactivity
are now well-known in the scientific community and undeniable to any
unbiased observer.
In fact, no energy source is as damaging to our biological structure as
ionizing radiation. One atomic decay inside your body can directly destroy
20,000 or more chemical bonds, including those that bind your DNA. A single
damaged DNA strand can lead to fetal deformities or cancer.
Radiation accelerates aging (including in humans). Additionally, salty air
and water destroy most metals.
Right now, San Onofre's steam generators are failing and need to be
replaced (as do Diablo Canyon's). Cost: at least $680 million for San
Onofre, and at least $706 million for Diablo Canyon.
San Onofre's water heaters also all need to be replaced (about 30 per
unit). Cost: an additional $7 million for each plant, plus $30 million or
so for the "downtime." Pipes and joints at the plant have been cracking,
and undoubtedly many need to be replaced ---- there are about 100 miles of
pipes at the site. Last August, a pipe accident at a 27-year-old nuclear
plant in Japan killed five workers. The pipe had eroded to 10 percent of
its original thickness.
In 2002, more than 700 pounds of unnoticed corrosion at Davis-Besse, a nuke
plant in Ohio similar to San Onofre, brought us, in some ways, nearer to a
full-scale meltdown than Three Mile Island did.
Replacing San Onofre's pipes, and maybe her reactor pressure vessels ----
both now more than two decades old ---- could cost ratepayers billions of
dollars. Failure to replace critical parts could result in a meltdown.
Old breakers and transformers have exploded and burned, causing outages
costing more than $140 million. But the 150 or so identical breakers were
not replaced. That's tens of millions of dollars more work that should be
added to the list.
Everything at the facility is suspect ---- including the record-keeping.
The power plant is practically immune from state and local inspections,
even in areas the Nuclear Regulatory Commission won't inspect because they
are not "nuclear" areas!
Even if all these (and many more) problems were fixed, nuclear power does
not actually generate any "net" energy whatsoever, because of the
incredibly energy-intensive processes needed to mine and refine uranium
into fuel, as well as construction costs, reconstruction costs, and
dismantling costs. Add to that the cost of guarding the hazardous
radioactive waste for thousands of generations. Additional funds could also
be needed to care for the sick and dying that would result from a serious
nuclear accident.
Besides being a financial rat-hole, nuclear power plants are terrorist
targets. Dry casks are especially vulnerable, but dry cask storage could be
stopped at San Onofre if we shut the facility permanently now.
San Onofre makes money only for its owners, who are practically given
uranium fuel by the federal government, which also promises to take it away
after it has been turned into radioactive waste (at great profit) by
Southern California Edison. Yucca Mountain shouldn't open, probably never
will, and if it does, it's more than a decade away at best and will take
about 25 years to fill. Meanwhile, new waste accumulates at the rate of 500
pounds every day at the plant; that waste may not fit at Yucca Mountain
---- it may need to wait for Yucca Mountain II! An operating nuclear plant
is thousands of times more vulnerable to terrorism, forces of nature,
design flaws or operator error than one that is shut down. A terrorist with
an armor-plated bulldozer packed into a jacked-up house trailer and
off-loaded at the state park could ruin San Onofre in minutes and take
Southern California with it.
If properly harvested, the sun provides all the energy we need, through
wind, wave, hydro, biomass, and by direct solar power. Currently, the vast
majority of that nearly-free energy spills into the biosphere, becomes
disorganized, and is wasted.
San Onofre's power is replaceable. Our land and our lives are not.
Carlsbad resident Russell D. Hoffman is an independent researcher on energy
solutions, a computer programmer, and a small-business owner. He has
studied nuclear issues for more than 30 years and writes a newsletter that
is distributed to nuclear physicists, doctors and activists in more than a
dozen countries.
=================================================
Author contact information:
=================================================
*************************************************
** THE ANIMATED SOFTWARE COMPANY
** Russell D. Hoffman, Owner and Chief Programmer
** P.O. Box 1936, Carlsbad CA 92018-1936
** (800) 551-2726
** (760) 720-7261
** Fax: (760) 720-7394
** Visit the world's most eclectic web site:
** http://www.animatedsoftware.com
*************************************************
IF YOU RECEIVED THIS EMAIL IN ERROR AND/OR DO NOT WISH TO RECEIVE ANY MORE
EMAILS FROM US FOR ANY REASON, PLEASE CONTACT RUSSELL HOFFMAN AT:
rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com
MailTo:rhoffman@animatedsoftware.com?Subject=Unsubscribe-me-please .
Please be sure that "Unsubscribe-me-please" appears in the subject line.
*****************************************************************
44 Deseret news: Nuclear waste facility may 'raise bar'
[deseretnews.com]
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Planned Tooele County plant hopes to import higher-level material
By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News
Cedar Mountain Environmental Inc., a
planned nuclear waste facility in Tooele County, might seek to
import and dispose of the more radioactive Class B and C waste.
Company president Charles Judd acknowledges he must
overcome high hurdles in the project, if Cedar Mountain does
decide to seek B- and C-level waste. And Bill Sinclair, deputy
director of the state Department of Environmental Quality, says
that if attitudes against that type of material coming into the
state don't change, "that makes it look very unlikely."
The controversy over B and C waste has a long history in
the Beehive State. The material, mostly byproducts of
decommissioned nuclear power plants, is more radioactive than
the low-level Class A waste accepted by Envirocare of Utah at
its disposal facility in the Tooele desert, about halfway
between Salt Lake City and Wendover.
When Envirocare expressed interest in accepting B and C
waste, the public uproar was so loud that the Legislature passed
a law requiring its specific approval before the material could
be imported.
The possibility that Cedar Mountain would seek a permit
was raised in the Dec. 13 issue of "The International
Radioactive Exchange," a journal that keeps tabs on the nuclear
industry.
"It's a possibility," Judd confirmed to the Deseret
Morning News. "That's one of the things we're looking at. We are
pursuing a disposal site and the type of waste we'll take has
not been set yet, but B and C is an option."
He plans to file an application with state officials in
about six months, Judd said. The type of waste would be
specified in the application.
The Cedar Mountain site is located directly north of
Envirocare's facility, said Judd, who is a former president of
Envirocare. Cedar Mountain has an option to buy the private land
involved, which is three or four miles south of I-80 and can be
served by the freeway and by the Union Pacific Railroad line
that runs through the area, he said.
Cedar Mountain has completed siting criteria, receiving
an approval from state regulators at that step after a year and
a half of work, he said. This step involves checking whether a
site is acceptable for waste disposal.
"We haven't gone out and begun constructing any
facilities," Judd added. "We're hoping for 2006, to get licenced
and begin construction."
Sources of the Class B and C wastes could be the U.S.
Department of Energy, nuclear power plants and material used in
research, he said.
Earlier, he said, he was opposed to Cedar Mountain
accepting B and C waste. The reason is that Envirocare was
pursuing a permit to import that kind of waste, and he did not
want to compete with the earlier facility on that, according to
Judd.
"Just recently, they (Envirocare) changed their
philosophy and said they would no longer pursue B and C waste,"
he said. Also, Tooele County refused to approve his facility
because of problems in showing a need for another project doing
the same thing as Envirocare.
Because of that, he said, Cedar Mountain changed its
position and decided it might seek the higher classes of
radioactive material.
The project requires a $3 million investment, Judd
believes. State law allows the Department of Environmental
Quality to charge up to $1 million for the expensive process of
reviewing a nuclear waste disposal application.
Several investors have talked with him about the project
and are "very interested in it," and Judd is putting in his own
money too, he said.
He denied a suggestion that the move was an attempt to
get leverage on Envirocare in a lawsuit it filed against him.
"Envirocare sued me when I started this process," he said. The
Radioactive Exchange says that suit involved an allegation by
Envirocare that Judd was breaking a non-competition clause in
his contract.
Sinclair said that while Cedar Mountain has received
approval as an appropriate site, it is far from winning state
approval.
The next step, "which is much more difficult process," is
to seek a license, he said. "That's certainly a long process."
Judd has not yet submitted his license application.
Judd would need approval from Tooele County, "and that
has not happened to date. In fact, he's been rejected by the
county for a conditional use permit."
If Cedar Mountain overcomes those roadblocks, it still
requires permission both from the Legislature and the governor.
In light of the opposition to Envirocare's efforts,
legislative approval could be extremely hard to get.
Before the gubernatorial election, Republican candidate
Jon Huntsman Jr. responded to a Deseret Morning News
questionnaire, "I strongly oppose any hazardous or radioactive
waste of a higher degree of toxicity allowed into Utah storage
facilities." Since then, Huntsman was elected as Utah's next
governor.
But Judd remains undaunted about the chances of importing
B and C waste, should Cedar Mountain decide to pursue the permit.
"We won't be investing $3 million in something we don't
think there's a chance," he said. "We do think there's a chance."
E-mail: bau@desnews.com
© 2004 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
45 San Bernardino County Sun: Percholorate treatment facility OK'd by county
www.sbsun.com
Article Published: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 -
By BEN SCHNAYERSON and BRAD A. GREENBERG, Staff Writers
The San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors approved a $4.6
million contract for a perchlorate-treatment facility in Rialto
on Tuesday, despite protests from two neighboring water
providers.
Steven J. Elie, a lawyer representing the Fontana Water Co. and
the West Valley Water District, accused the supervisors of
hastily approving a treatment plan when there is no guarantee it
will be implemented.
The state Department of Health Services, the Federal Aviation
Administration and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control
Board all need to OK the plan before the county can dig six wells
at the Rialto Municipal Airport. The wells would pump polluted
water flowing southeast from county property near the Mid Valley
Landfill out of the ground and treat it before putting it into
the Rialto water supply.
Perchlorate, a rocket-fuel ingredient that at certain levels can
cause thyroid malfunctions, has been detected in 20 wells in
Rialto, Fontana and Colton. It has not been found in Rialto Well
No. 3, which provides 15percent of the city's potable water. That
well would be protected by the treatment system.
The water board has ordered the county to replace polluted water
by April 1. The city and the water quality board said the county
is moving at an appropriate speed.
"Our only concern is that we are not moving quickly enough,'
said City Attorney Robert A. Owen. "The sooner we begin to clean
up and treat the plume, the less wells that will be impacted and
the better we will all be in the end.'
The head of the water district said Monday the county's plan
makes sense for Rialto, but "there needs to be some equity.'
"I'm glad for Rialto,' said A.W. "Butch' Araiza. "But I'm not
happy for me.'
West Valley services half of the homes in Rialto most are north
of Base Line or south of Interstate 10. Six of its wells have
been polluted by perchlorate.
At Tuesday's county board meeting, Elie said neighboring water
districts should benefit from any county treatment.
But the supervisors quickly shot back at him, saying his water
district has done little to solve the problem while it was under
their noses.
"What you would have us do would involve many months, if not
years, to get to this point,' said 3rd District Supervisor Dennis
Hansberger. "As a consequence, this board would be criticized ...
for not acting in a proper manner.'
The county expects to have approval from the other governing
agencies next month and could begin digging the wells in late
January.
The treatment system would be operated until July by GeoLogic
Associates, which received the $4.6 million contract Tuesday and
was previously paid $477,000 to develop the plan. Rialto will
take over maintenance and operation in July, but the county will
continue to foot the bill until perchlorate levels meet
drinking-water standards.
Copyright © 2004 San Bernardino County Sun
Los Angeles Newspaper Group Feedback
*****************************************************************
46 Australian: With uranium, our interests come first
[December 16, 2004]
ROBERT GOTTLIEBSEN
THE debate over who should control the world's uranium has now
intensified.
Two companies will dominate the market Canada's Cameco and
Australia's WMC and whoever controls them will have unparalleled
global power and profit potential.
The Canadians, realising what could happen, demand that Cameco be
controlled in Canada. As I explained yesterday, Australia is in
grave danger of transferring control of our slice to Xstrata,
part of "Zug Inc", which is based in the small Swiss tax haven
village of Zug and includes Glencore, a company with an
unfortunate history.
But WMC this week also confirmed earlier reports in The
Australian that it was negotiating with the Chinese, either to
take equity of about 25 per cent in Olympic Dam or to buy a big
chuck of uranium on a forward basis.
The price being discussed for the equity would put a proper value
on WMC's uranium resources and make an $8 a share takeover bid
look too low.
The current $6.35 a share bid by Xstrata has always been totally
ridiculous it's simply an attempt to discover what the
institutions will accept.
In selling uranium forward, WMC should be aware that Morgan
Stanley says current uranium long-term prices are $US3-5 above
the spot price, and it forecasts close to a doubling of the
uranium price in 2006 because supplies are so tight.
This is why Xstrata chief Mick Davis is trying to panic
Australia's under-researched institutions.
As of a week ago, Xstrata had not yet applied to the Treasurer
for permission to buy WMC it needs its shareholders to approve
the move at a meeting next month.
Nominally, Peter Costello has 30 days to approve it, but can ask
for an extra 10 days or an extra 90 days.
He should take the 90 days as he did with Woodside so he can
look at it closely. When he takes his time, I am sure he will
never let this globally strategic Australian resource be
controlled by Zug Inc.
But should we allow the Chinese to own, say, 20 per cent?
In about 10 years, the largest uranium consumer will still be
the US, which will take about 34 per cent of global production.
Then will follow France with 15 per cent, Japan 13 per cent and
fast-growing China with around 6 per cent. Should we allow one
customer (the smallest of the big four) to take a key stake?
In my view, provided the Chinese don't take exclusive rights to
purchase most of the uranium, we should allow them to buy, say,
20 per cent of Olympic Dam.
Given the world's need for this material, similar rules should
apply if they buy uranium forward.
There must be a clear caveat that this resource must remain in
Australian control, given its global strategic significance.
To buy Australian uranium, the Chinese will of course need a
separate agreement with the Government.
Australia is heading for an even closer relationship with China
in minerals, education, tourism and the overall region.
So, declaring the Chinese unacceptable shareholders of Olympic
Dam would not be in Australia's interest.
We should use the national interest provision of foreign
investment rules very sparingly.
While there are other parts of the Xstrata bid that are not in
the national interest, they would not warrant its rejection by
the Government.
MIM had one of Australia's best exploration teams but Xstrata
dismantled it.
WMC used to have Australia's best exploration operation, and
although it is not as good as at its peak, it is still one of
the country's best.
Xstrata would almost certainly also dismantle it, too, which
would be a long-term tragedy for the nation.
WMC is also doing work in China which could be of enormous
benefit to Australia in future years and that would probably be
axed.
It is hard to discover exactly how much tax Xstrata pays in cash
but it looks to be less than 5 per cent. In the case of MIM,
Xstrata was able to substantially slash Australian taxes by
financing the takeover via loans from Zug. And Zug Inc, via
Glencore, which controls 40 per cent of Xstrata, markets
Australian coal and copper, taking a high 3 to 5 per cent
commission. Almost certainly, they will do the same thing should
they get control of WMC except that in this case the whole
exercise is boosted by the enormous benefits coming from
virtually controlling the tight uranium market.
gottliebsenr@theaustralian.com.au
© The Australian
*****************************************************************
47 Bradenton Herald: Harris looks to expand testing
| 12/15/2004 |
POLLUTION IN TALLEVAST
DONNA WRIGHT
Herald Staff Writer
On the eve of the county's beryllium screening program, U.S.
Rep. Katherine Harris announced four possible initiatives to
expand blood tests to former Loral American Beryllium Co.
workers living outside of Manatee County.
The Harris initiatives came at the same time Manatee County
Commission voted to spend $60,000 to offer beryllium blood tests
to 250 people through the Manatee County Health Department.
Harris plans to ask Sarasota County Commissioners to fund a
beryllium testing program for workers similar to the one
approved Tuesday by the Manatee County Commission.
She also plans to ask the Department of Energy to include former
American Beryllium workers in their beryllium screening
programs.
Harris, R-Sarasota, plans to ask Lockheed Martin, the aerospace
giant, to be on her list of possible donors to cover testing
costs.
Lockheed Martin Corp., which at one time owned the plant where
groundwater contamination was discovered, has assumed
responsibility for cleanup of the waste.
"If Lockheed has assumed responsibility for clean-up," Harris
said, "we should ask them if they are willing to assume
responsibility for health impacts as well."
Lockheed spokeswoman Gail Rymer said Harris has not yet
contacted the company.
"It is premature to comment until we have had a conversation
with Congresswoman Harris," Rymer said Tuesday.
Harris' fourth approach would be earmarking money in the next
federal budget cycle to pay for the testing, an option she said
is her least favorite because it would take a year to achieve.
While Harris works the federal channels, Manatee County Health
Department director Gladys Branic is pursuing help from the
state.
Branic has asked the Florida Department of Health to seek funds
from the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry, which is funding an investigation into Tallevast
health concerns.
Harris is hoping one or more these options will prove
successful.
"We have to move heaven and Earth to help former workers and
Tallevast residents," Harris said after addressing the Manatee
County Commission on Tuesday.
"There are so many problems, so many complex issues, including
the issue of relocation, but what I care most about is getting
medical tests for workers and residents."
The congresswoman lauded Manatee commissioners for starting the
first testing program.
Tests will be provided to former workers who are Manatee
residents and include their family members if they were living
in the same house as the worker during their period of
employment.
Tallevast residents will also be tested if they live within one
quarter mile of the former American Beryllium plant, Branic
said.
Branic and her staff will begin testing the first group of 125
workers and residents at 7 a.m. Thursday at Mount Tabor
Missionary Baptist Church.
The health department will then ship the blood samples for
testing at National Jewish Medical and Research Center in
Denver, the leaders in beryllium screening.
The beryllium blood test can indicate if a person has developed
sensitivity to the toxic metal, which can lead to beryllium
disease, a severe and sometimes fatal respiratory condition.
Workers at the Tallevast plant were known for their expertise in
precision machining skills. They manufactured parts for nuclear
weapons and a missile guidance system for both the Department of
Defense and the Department of Energy.
Because of the dust created in the milling of the metal,
precision machinists carry the highest risk for beryllium
sensitivity, said National Jewish center scientists.
A compensation program through the Department of Energy offers
medical benefits for workers who test positive for the beryllium
sensitivity. The program also offers workers with chronic
beryllium disease a lump sum compensation of up to $150,000.
But to qualify, workers must pay for the expensive blood test
themselves. The test is available from only a handful of
specialty labs around the country and can cost from $210 to
$600.
Only workers testing positive are reimbursed through the federal
compensation plan.
Paying for the test has been an obstacle for many workers.
Moreover, the compensation program covers only those years
American Beryllium had contracts with the Department of Energy -
the entire year of 1968 and from Jan. 1, 1980 through Dec. 31,
1989.
The number of defense contracts held by American Beryllium far
exceeded the the number of energy contracts, former workers say.
Yet the risk they incurred from working the toxic metal was the
same regardless of which federal agency held the contract.
That doesn't make sense to Harris, who said she will look into
sponsoring a bill to create a compensation program for defense
workers that is similar to the one in existence for beryllium
workers.
"And that," Harris said, "will open another can of worms."
Harris' proposals are welcome news to Branic.
"It is encouraging," Branic said, "that there are so many of us
working to bring more funds to bear on this important issue."
Donna Wright, health and social services reporter, can be
reached at 745-7049 or at dwright@bradentonherald.com.
*****************************************************************
48 Bradenton Herald: Tallevast residents seek relocation
| 12/15/2004 |
DONNA WRIGHT
Herald Staff Writer
Tallevast residents want out.
They want those responsible for the toxic contamination of their
community to pay for relocating their homes and businesses.
The stress of living on top of a hazardous waste site is just
too much for most Tallevast families to bear, says Laura Ward,
president of the community group FOCUS.
Tallevast residents want to live somewhere safe, Ward says. And
they want compensation for their property, which they say has
been rendered worthless by a past spill of cancer-causing
solvents that leaked from the former Loral American Beryllium
Co. sometime over the past four decades.
Lockheed Martin Corp., which acquired Loral American Beryllium
in 1997, has assumed responsibility for cleaning up the toxic
waste after the contamination was discovered in 2000.
Three years passed before either the state of Florida or
Lockheed informed Tallevast residents of the potential poisons
in their backyards and water.
Therefore Ward and other FOCUS members think Lockheed should
also be responsible for relocating their homes.
Not so, said Gail Rymer, Lockheed's director of corporate and
community affairs.
"We do not feel it is necessary to relocate the residents,"
Rymer said Tuesday. "There is no exposure pathway to put
Tallevast residents at risk. We have taken every precaution to
make sure the community is a clean environment in which to
live."
But Tallevast residents still fear for their health.
An ongoing relocation survey by FOCUS has already tallied the
votes of more than half of Tallevast's 85 households.
All but three of the 45 families responding so far want to move,
said Ward.
Ward and Wanda Washington, vice president of FOCUS, think they
may have found the perfect spot: two parcels of vacant property
on University Parkway bordered by Tallevast Road and Tuttle
Avenue.
Ward and Washington picked up information on the property and
its owners Tuesday from the Manatee County Appraiser's office.
They don't know if the land is for sale and they don't know for
sure who would purchase it for them if it could be had.
But they like the location.
"We really like it because it keeps us close to where we already
are," said Ward.
Washington estimated nearly 100 acres of land would be needed to
relocate most of Tallevast's current residents.
FOCUS has also identified a 22-acre parcel on the southeast
corner of Tallevast Road and U.S. 301 that could serve as a
business center for the new Tallevast, including two churches, a
dentist's office and other retail centers.
FOCUS has not yet contacted any owners of any property.
Other parcels of land in Manatee County are also possible, Ward
said.
"The next step would be trying to come to an agreement with
whomever," said Ward. "That may include the county or Lockheed
Martin. We would have to go back to our attorneys to see which
direction we would be going in."
The sources of potential liability could be many, said Amy
Stein, a Manatee County commissioner.
"I think that under Superfund or some other rubric there is some
kind of relief available if there is continued harm," said
Stein. "I don't know what the whole panoply of possibilities."
Superfund is a federal program set up to aid in cleaning
hazardous waste sites.
But Stein warned a relocation solution won't happen any time
soon.
"Superfund takes years," said Stein. "Those people may be living
there five years from now."
U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris, R-Sarasota, is looking into
relocation possibilities as well, a Harris spokeswoman said
Tuesday.
Washington said that whatever the source of funding for
relocation, Tallevast residents want decent homes in a safe
place to live.
"There is no way we would accept low-income housing because that
would not match what we have lost," said Washington. "We are not
looking at equal market value. We are looking at getting land
and getting homes."
Washington said the burden of proving that the contamination
made Tallevast residents sick should be borne by those
responsible for the toxic waste.
FOCUS leaders said they have discussed the relocation issue with
two of their attorneys, Ed Cottingham with Motely Rice of Mount
Pleasant, South Carolina and Rob Walker of Richmond Virginia.
Neither Cottingham nor Walker could be reached for comment late
Tuesday night.
*****************************************************************
49 ThisisLondon: UK to keep foreign nuclear waste
thisislondon.co.uk/
By Jason Beattie Political Correspondent, Evening Standard
15 December 2004
The Government has overturned a 30-year-old policy by agreeing to
bury other countries' nuclear waste.
Britain has agreed to take waste from Japan, Germany, Italy,
Switzerland, Spain and Sweden. All these countries use the
nuclear fuel reprocessing facility at Sellafield in Cumbria.
Previously any waste from the reprocessing was returned to the
country of origin. But Trade and Industry Secretary Patricia
Hewitt has announced Britain will now keep and dispose of it. She
said the extra income, up to ?680 million, would be used to clean
up Britain's own nuclear waste problem.
"The benefits are both environmental and economic," she said.
The revenue would be used "for nuclear clean-up which will
result in savings for the UK taxpayer over the longer term," she
added.
Environmental groups said the decision would leave Britain with
thousands of tonnes of waste and no means of disposing of it.
Greenpeace's Jean McSorley told the Guardian: "The Government is
trying to encourage Japanese utilities, and others, to sign more
reprocessing contracts at Sellafield knowing they will not have
their nuclear waste returned."
copy;2004 Associated New Media| Terms | Privacy policy
*****************************************************************
50 BBC: 'Nuclear dumpsite' plan attacked
Last Updated: Wednesday, 15 December, 2004
[Nuclear fuel flasks]
Sellafield receives spent fuel from all over the world
Plans to allow foreign nuclear waste to be permanently stored in
the UK have been branded "deeply irresponsible" by the Liberal
Democrats.
The government has confirmed intermediate level waste (ILW) that
was to have been shipped back to its home countries will now be
stored in the UK.
The cash raised will go towards the UK's nuclear clean-up
programme.
But Lib Dem Norman Baker accused ministers of turning Britain
into a "nuclear dumpsite".
Waste shipments
Under current contracts, British Nuclear Fuels should return all
but low level waste, but none has ever been sent back.
In future, only highly-radioactive waste will be sent back to its
country of origin, normally Germany or Japan, under armed guard.
Intermediate waste from countries such as Japan, Germany, Spain,
Italy, Switzerland and Sweden will be stored permanently in the
UK.
At the moment, this waste is stored at Sellafield, in Cumbria, in
the form of glass bricks, untreated liquid waste or solid
material in drums.
In a statement, the Department of Trade and Industry said the new
policy meant there would be a "sixfold reduction in the number of
waste shipments to overseas countries".
And it said highly-radioactive waste would be returned to its
home country sooner, ensuring there would be no overall increase
in radioactivity.
'Environmental millstone'
Trade Secretary Patricia Hewitt said the new arrangements,
revealed in a Commons written statement, would raise up to Ł680m
for Britain's nuclear clean-up programme, under the new Nuclear
Decommissioning Agency.
But the move has been criticised by environmental groups and the
Liberal Democrats.
Mr Baker, the Lib Dem environment spokesman, said: "I have been
warning for months that this would happen and raised it with
government several times. But now our worst fears have been
confirmed.
"Once again Britain's environmental and health needs are being
ignored in policies driven by the Treasury and DTI.
"This is a terrible attempt to offload some of the Ł48bn cost of
cleaning up nuclear sites.
"The Energy Act was supposed to help Britain clean up, but in
order to pay for it we are becoming a nuclear dumpsite.
"The nuclear industry is an economic, social and environmental
millstone that hangs around Britain's neck."
*****************************************************************
51 Canada NewsWire: Major additional uranium acquisitions at Saddle Hills
December 16, 2004 Quick
TSX Venture Symbol: WNP
OTC:BB: WEPGF
VANCOUVER, Dec. 15 /CNW/ - Western Prospector Group Ltd. is
pleased to report the acquisition of three additional uranium
properties in the Saddle Hills Uranium Basin in northeastern
Mongolia. These acquisitions bring Western Prospector's total
holdings to 100,659 contiguous hectares within the Saddle Hills
Basin.
Mardaigol Property
------------------
Under an agreement with Adamas Mining Co. Ltd., a private
Mongolian corporation, Western Prospector has the option to
acquire a 70% interest in the approximate 40,000 hectare
Mardaigol property. The Mardaigol property includes the partially
defined Mardaigol Uranium deposit and a number of uranium
exploration targets proximal to the previously operated Dornod
uranium mine now controlled by Khan Resources Inc.
Western Prospector has paid Adamas Mining an initial
US$50,000 for the right and option to earn a 70% joint venture
interest in the Mardaigol property. In order to maintain the
option in good standing, Western Prospector must make additional
staged payments totaling US$700,000 and make exploration
expenditures of US$1,350,000 prior to December 31, 2007. Adamas
Mining will then retain a 30% joint venture participating
interest and a 3% royalty due after repayment of all exploration
and capital costs.
Gurvanbulag Target Area -----------------------
Western Prospector has also purchased two additional mineral
exploration licenses covering approximately 2,000 hectares within
the Gurvanbulag target area of the Saddle Hills Uranium Basin.
The acquisitions complete coverage of the western portion of the
Saddle Hills Uranium Basin, not previously held by Western
Prospector.
The two newly acquired contiguous licenses contain one of the
largest uranium radiometric anomalies identified in Western
Prospector's recently completed airborne survey.
One hundred percent interest in each of the two licenses were
purchased outright from a private Mongolian individual and a
private Mongolian company for a single payment of US$25,000 per
license.
"John S. Brock"
John S. Brock President
The TSX Venture Exchange has not reviewed and does not
accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this
release.
For further information: contact Blaine Monaghan, Manager,
Investor Relations at (604) 687-4951 or toll free 1-800-403-2988,
or email ir@badgerandco.com
WESTERN PROSPECTOR GROUP LTD. - More on this
© 2003 Canada NewsWire Ltd. Privacy
*****************************************************************
52 Salt Lake Tribune: Huntsman hedges on B N-waste
Article Last Updated: 12/15/2004 02:30:49 AM
Governor-elect doesn't feel 'any need for action,' says aide
By Patty Henetz The Salt Lake Tribune
During his campaign, Gov.-elect Jon Huntsman Jr. declared he
was adamantly opposed to any nuclear waste coming to Utah that
was hotter than that already accepted at Envirocare.
"If elected governor, I shall use the full force of my office
to oppose all efforts to bring into our state any radioactive
waste other than what is currently permitted. This includes
those levels classified as B and C waste," he said.
Now, he's hedging.
Once sworn in, Huntsman could kill Envirocare of Utah's
conditional permit to accept the waste by sending the state
Department of Environmental Quality a letter expressing official
disapproval. But he won't.
"He doesn't believe there's any need for action," Neil
Ashdown, Huntsman's deputy chief of staff, said Tuesday.
Ashdown said Huntsman believes B and C wastes already are
illegal under state law, and sending a letter or issuing an
executive order "could create legal challenges that could be
unproductive."
State regulators in 2001 signed off on Envirocare's technical
plan for taking class B and C wastes. The material is hundreds
to thousands of times more radioactive than class A waste, which
is mostly tainted soil. The wastes all are considered low-level,
but can be dangerous for centuries.
A clause in the state permit says if either the Legislature
or governor does not approve the facility to receive class B or
C waste, "this license is immediately terminated."
Envirocare and state officials have generally interpreted the
permit's clause to mean the governor and Legislature would have
to actively approve the waste before it could come here. But
Bill Sinclair, DEQ deputy director, and legislative counsel
Robert Rees said it could also be construed to mean the governor
could kill the permit via written disapproval.
"Something official with his signature," Sinclair said.
"There's no reason he couldn't."
In October, after meeting over two years, a legislative task
force on hazardous waste regulation recommended Envirocare not
be allowed to accept hotter radioactive waste, but by a single
vote decided not to advance a bill that would ban such waste in
Utah.
Sen. Patrice Arent, D-Murray, crafted the proposed ban. But
Sen. Curt Bramble, the Provo Republican whose legislation
established the task force and placed a moratorium on accepting
B and C waste, said an overt ban wasn't necessary and could be
unconstitutional. The moratorium expires in February.
Rees has said a ban wouldn't be unconstitutional.
And critics claimed that without a ban, there is still a
possibility hotter waste could be approved.
A former Envirocare official already is trying to push
through that door. Charles Judd, once the company's president,
said Tuesday that he will pursue a permit to accept B and C
waste and highly radioactive material from a Fernald, Ohio,
Superfund site at his proposed Cedar Mountain waste site in
Tooele County.
"This is exactly why we need to ban B and C waste. Utah is
going to be continued to be pestered by these applications,"
said Jason Groenewold, spokesman for the nonprofit Healthy
Environment Alliance and anti-Envirocare activist.
Such applications could draw strength from a GAO study this
summer that concluded 36 states would have no place to send B
and C waste when a facility in South Carolina closes in 2008.
Judd's Cedar Mountain facility has gotten siting approval
from DEQ. But Tooele County commissioners in April rejected
Judd's proposal for his 500-acre site adjacent to Envirocare's
mile-square facility 80 miles west of Salt Lake City, saying
there was not enough demand for another facility to take class A
waste.
Judd said he revised his plans after Envirocare officials
said they wouldn't pursue B and C waste. He said the GAO's
findings strengthen his argument that his facility would be
necessary. "There is clearly a need in Utah and the nation," he
said.
Envirocare officials have said they have no current plans to
pursue their permit to accept the hotter waste, but neither
would they relinquish it.
"It took a lot of time and effort and money to get that
draft license," said company attorney Craig Thorley. "Maybe
there will be a change in the future."
© Copyright 2004, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
53 CCDR: Company won’t be allowed to accept radioactive waste from other
sites for disposal
12-15-04
[Canon City Daily Record - Canon City and the Royal Gorge Region,
Colorado]
State renews Cotter license
By Bruce Plasket Daily Record News Group
DENVER - State health officials today approved a
heavily-conditioned, five-year extension of the
uranium-processing license that the Cotter Corp. has had for more
than 46 years but turned down the company’s request to become the
state’s first nuclear-waste storage facility.
“We’re pretty happy with (the licensing and conditions),” said
Steve Tarlton, the head of the Radiation Management Unit of the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. “This
allows them to operate and allows us to make sure it is being
done right.”
The license renewal comes with conditions that will change the
way Cotter operates the mill that has operated south of Cańon
City since 1958 - including a requirement that Cotter move away
from the use of leak-plagued containment ponds and toward the
“dry-placement” of mill tailings at the site in the next few
months.
The new license also requires Cotter to improve groundwater
testing, security and worker-safety monitoring at the site.
The license renewal issued today is also subject to a hearing if
requested by Cotter or any other party in the next 60 days.
Cotter president Richard Cherry and vice president Rich Ziegler
did not return phone messages seeking comment on the decision
this morning.
The license decision included a denial of Cotter’s request to
store 470,000 tons of radioactive waste from a Superfund site in
Maywood, N.J. Still at issue, however, is the proposed first
shipment of 24,000 tons of Maywood waste. The health department
last year denied that request, but Cotter went to court to have
the decision overturned. An arbiter is expected to issue a
decision on that proposed shipment early in 2005.
In denying the Maywood soil storage, health officials cited an
“overwhelmingly negative” community response to the proposal -
including testimony at public hearings and several petitions
opposing the shipments. The health department noted that 35 of
Fremont County’s 36 physicians signed such a petition, as did 145
business owners and nearly 5,000 Fremont County residents.
The Fremont County Commissioners and the City Council in Cańon
City also have passed resolutions opposing the Maywood shipments,
as has the Colorado Medical Society.
The CDPHE decision also said that while “Cotter has indicated
that direct disposal (of the Maywood material) is highly
lucrative for the company,” the benefits to the local economy
“are relatively minor.”
The health department decision claimed, “Cotter has considered
and disregarded impacts associated with the community-perceived
stigma from the disposal of out-of-state radioactive Superfund
wastes.”
The decision added that, “The perception that a ‘dumping-ground’
will negatively impact tourism and in-migration of retirees
presents a direct threat to the expansion of the community
economic base.”
Tarlton said the new conditions placed on the uranium-processing
license are critical to insuring the safety of the surrounding
area.
“All of these things have to happen for the mill to operate
properly,” he said.
In addition to switching the containment areas to ‘dry placement’
and establishing procedures to insure dust mitigation those
conditions include:
- Enhanced monitoring of groundwater. Tarlton said this could
include improving the methods and frequency of evaluating ‘test
wells’ on the Cotter site and could lead to “the drilling of some
new wells.” It will not, however, include additional wells or
testing on private land in the Lincoln Park Superfund site
surrounding the mill. Tarlton said the monitoring of those wells
will continue under the Remedial Action Plan approved under the
settlement of a 1984 state suit against Cotter. “(Landowners’)
concerns are not being ignored,” he said.
- The development of “the best available control technology” to
replace the uranium-cake baking, or calcining, system, to reduce
airborne pollution. Cotter will also be required to monitor
particulate releases from the “yellowcake stacks” in the drying
area.
- Increased security. The health department, citing homeland
security concerns, called for security improvements that could
include increased security personnel, fencing and the use of
video monitoring.
- Increased worker-safety. In addition to the moving of the
administration building away from the processing area, the health
department required Cotter to augment the use of room monitors,
lapel monitors, urine testing and other means of increasing
worker safety.
Tarlton said that under the new license, Cotter will be allowed
to process uranium ore and “alternate feed” material under a
pilot program using pre-approved processes until the health
department gives clearance for full-scale operations. Alternate
feed material, he said, often requires different processing than
uranium ore material and the health department must approve those
processes. He said the containment-pond system will be developed
“within the next six months or so.”
The license also allows Cotter to process zirconium and so-called
“off-specification” uranium cake on a pilot basis only.
Off-specification yellow cake, Tarlton said, is uranium cake that
is of poor quality or difficult to process. “This is a better
plan than just putting the off-specification material in the
containment area,” he said.
Tarlton said that while the license allows the processing of
calcium fluoride on a “case-by-case basis,” all of the calcium
fluoride known to be at the mill already has been processed.
News and information is updated Monday - Friday at 5:00pm. Entire
contents Copyright Ó 2004 Royal Gorge Publishing Corporation. All
Rights Reserved. CUSTOMER SERVICE
*****************************************************************
54 www.tbsource.com: Nuclear Waste Organization In Thunder Bay
Thunder Bay's Source Local News 2004
Web Posted: 12/15/2004 9:34:02 PM
Canada's future management of Nuclear fuel was up for discussion
last night, as the Nuclear Waste Management Organization made a
stop in Thunder Bay.
The NWMO is conducting a nationwide study on what Canadians
think should be done to manage used fuel. It will present the
findings to the Federal Government, the discussion was met with
plenty of concern from local residents.
The Nuclear Waste Management Organization is on its last leg of
a 35 city tour. They hope to help Canadians understand the
options that exist when it comes to the future management of
used nuclear fuel.
The fuel is currently placed in wet and dry storage at the power
plants but Krazank says these facilities were never meant for
long term use. He says nuclear fuel can be harmful to humans and
the environment. Krazank says the majority of people they've
heard from want safety and security put first.
Elizabeth Arthur attended NWMO discussions held in Thunder Bay
last February and says most people want the fuel kept where it's
produced.
The NWMO is expected to make a recommendation to the Federal
Government by November 2005.
Copyright Thunder Bay's Source © All Rights Reserved 2004
*****************************************************************
55 Scotsman: Foreign Nuclear Waste to Be Dumped in Britain
"Scotsman.com"
Wed 15 Dec 2004
By Amanda Brown, PA Environment Correspondent
The Government was today under attack over plans to bury foreign
nuclear waste in Britain as a money-making venture.
The move to bury Japanese, German, Italian, Spanish, Swiss and
Swedish nuclear waste, to help pay for the UK’s own unresolved
nuclear waste problems, is disclosed in The Guardian newspaper.
The decision was announced on Monday in a Commons written
statement by Trade and Industry Secretary Patricia Hewitt and
details were placed in the Library of the House of Commons.
However, Britain does not yet have a depository for the waste
and it overturns a 30-year-policy that the UK would not become a
dumping ground for other countries’ nuclear waste.
Both Conservative and Labour Governments have previously said
that waste arising as a result of lucrative nuclear fuel
reprocessing contracts at Sellafield in Cumbria should be
returned to the country of origin.
Liberal Democrats criticised the Government for a “deeply
irresponsible environmental decision”.
The party’s environment spokesman Norman Baker said: “Once
again Britain’s environmental and health needs are being
ignored in policies driven by the Treasury and Department of
Trade and Industry.
“This is a terrible attempt to offload some of the £48
billion cost of cleaning up nuclear sites.
“The Energy Act was supposed to help Britain clean up, but in
order to pay for it we are becoming a nuclear dumpsite.
“The nuclear industry is an economic, social and environmental
millstone that hangs around Britain’s neck.” [
©2004 Scotsman.com
*****************************************************************
56 courier post: Camco's suit against GEMS plan rejected
http://www.courierpostonline.com
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Groundwater from landfill will be discharged into sewers
By LAWRENCE HAJNA Courier-Post Staff
A federal judge has rejected Camden County's attempt to hold up
the controversial discharge of groundwater from a Gloucester
Township Superfund site to county sewer mains.
U.S. District Judge Jerome B. Simandle said he does not have the
authority to delay the discharge, already held up for 2 1/2 years
by legal challenges.
He also denied the freeholder board's request for a financial
disclosure it sought from a trust of former users paying for the
landfill's cleanup. The freeholders wanted the disclosure to
investigate why the GEMS Phase II Trust won't build a full-scale
plant that would inject treated water back into the ground at the
closed municipal dump.
The county pushed for the alternative after a storm of protests
from residents and state lawmakers, who feared uranium and radium
in the water could contaminate the public with radiation if the
sewer mains malfunctioned.
In a decision dated Friday, Simandle ruled that he does not have
jurisdiction to interfere with the cleanup plan, authorized by
the federal Environmental Protection Agency. It calls for the
water to be discharged to the Delaware River after final
treatment at the Camden County Municipal Utilities Authority
plant in Camden.
The judge noted that an on-site pretreatment plant the GEMS
Phase II Trust built several years ago brought the levels of
radionuclides below the amounts allowed in drinking water during
a trial run but has not been given a chance to operate on a
full-time basis.
"Without a doubt, the purpose of this lawsuit is to delay,
prevent or interfere with the implementation of a remedy selected
by the EPA," Simandle wrote.
M. Lou Garty, the county's counsel, said the freeholders are
disappointed but "remain committed to finding the best on-site
remedy possible" through talks with the EPA and trust.
She said the freeholders are particularly disappointed that
Simandle did not compel the trust to disclose its financial
situation "given the public outcry" over the discharge plan.
Sharon Finlayson, chairwoman of the New Jersey Environmental
Federation, said opponents remain "firm in our position that
(full on-site) treatment is needed to ensure protection of
public health and the environment not just today, but into the
future. We really don't believe radioactive elements at any
level should be put into our water."
Gary Lesneski, an attorney for the trust, said the decision
"removes one more obstacle to getting the remedy going, which is
helpful to the public."
Without the pretreatment plant, groundwater tainted with
conventional landfill contaminants in addition to radionuclides,
continues to flow naturally into Holly Run, a tributary of Big
Timber Creek. "It's not a matter of just turning on the switch,
but it's ready to go," Lesneski said of the pretreatment plant.
Simandle characterized the county's suit, filed in March, as
"the kind of piecemeal litigation and attendant delays in
cleanups" that the federal Superfund law seeks to avert.
Simandle expects to soon rule on a separate lawsuit the state
filed at the end of 2003. It seeks to force the trust to build a
more elaborate treatment plant by raising concerns that the
radionuclides may result from past dumping.
The state argued that levels of uranium found in the untreated
water were "several orders of magnitude" higher than what would
be expected if the contamination resulted from naturally
occurring minerals, as the trust asserts.
This, the state argued, could result in hot spots of
contamination that the pretreatment plant would not be able to
handle.
Reach Lawrence Hajna at (856) 486-2466 or
lhajna@courierpostonline.com
*****************************************************************
57 PE.com: County OKs plan to clean tainted water
| Inland Southern California | San Bernardino Metro
07:42 AM PST on Wednesday, December 15, 2004
By SHARON McNARY / The Press-Enterprise
San Bernardino County has decided to remove pollution from water
bound for Rialto city utility customers, a $4.5 million project
that was contested by Fontana and another water utility as
premature.
Perchlorate, used in weapons stored in World War II-era bunkers
on a site near today's Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill north of
Rialto, was released into area groundwater by a gravel-washing
plant on county land in the 1990s. Perchlorate can interfere
with thyroid function.
The perchlorate plume moved underground toward wells that supply
drinking water to residents of Rialto, Colton and Fontana.
Under a state Regional Water Quality Control Board order to
replace Rialto's lost water supplies by April 1, 2005, the
county Board of Supervisors decided to install a treatment plant
that would remove the perchlorate and then supply the treated
water to Rialto.
Both Rialto and county officials have said they approve the
strategy, but Steven J. Elie, a lawyer representing Fontana and
the West Valley Water District, told the supervisors that they
should do an environmental impact report. He said the location
of the actual perchlorate plume is not known.
"This doesn't begin to address or fix the 20-plus contaminated
wells of my clients," Elie told the supervisors.
Board Chairman Dennis Hansberger said he was unwilling to delay
action by months or years.
"We would be criticized for not acting in a prompt manner,"
Hansberger said.
Supervisor Josie Gonzales, who represents Rialto and part of
Fontana, said the decision to treat the water is correct.
Reach Sharon McNary at (909) 806-3062 or More headlines...
*****************************************************************
58 CCDR: Public reaction mixed over decision
12-15-04
[Canon City Daily Record - Canon City and the Royal Gorge Region,
Colorado]
Alexa Hoffman Daily Record Staff Writer
Reactions were mixed this morning following the state health
department’s renewal, with provisions, of Cotter Corp.’s license.
“I think it sounds like the state is trying to meet both the
needs of the citizens and health of the community,” said Cańon
City Councilor Catherine Mortensen, but also “they’re trying to
allow Cotter to continue to operate.
“Cotter has worked hard to meet the state’s requirements,” and it
appears the state is recognizing that, she said.
The uranium mill’s license expired in 2000 but spelled out the
terms under which Cotter could operate until the next license was
issued. Since then, Colorado Citizens Against Toxic Waste and
other groups of citizens have worked to prevent Cotter from being
relicensed and instead called for its decommissioning, citing
health and environmental worries.
The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment chose to
allow the facility, south of town on Oak Creek Grade Road, to
contine processing uranium and vanadium ore but not accept
radioactive waste from other sites solely for disposal.
State Rep. Buffie McFadyen, D-Pueblo West, deemed the health
department’s decision as a “victory.”
“While it’s not the decision that I hoped for, I am happy they
are not allowing radioactive waste to be there,” she said.
“Certainly, the health department needs to maintain stringent
oversight over Cotter.”
Other provisions also were included in the approval, which
Mortensen said was important to the decision.
“It sounds like the state health department isn’t just granting
their license and giving them free rein,” she said.
Mortensen referenced comments she had heard from Cotter officials
regarding the difficulty with which CDPHE authorities were to
work, causing frustration.
“Maybe this new license’s requirements are more clear,” she said,
“so that Cotter will know what is expected of them.”
Being more specific and clearing up potential gray areas in
expectations of Cotter’s operations is “a good thing,” she said.
“It sounds like they’re doing the right thing, trying to meet
everybody’s needs.”
Cańon City resident Howard Steiner said he is not as happy with
the state’s decision, despite Cotter’s inability to accept
radioactive waste from other sites for disposal.
“I don’t think that it’s necessarily a great idea,” he said. “I
guess maybe we have enough pollution around here anyway.”
Steiner added, however, that he thought the controversy
surrounding Cotter and its licensing “has kind of been blown out
of proportion.”
Richard Dodge agreed with Mortensen, saying the decision to allow
Cotter to continue operating, but with a number of conditions,
was the best way to go.
“That’s the best way to resolve it,” he said. “It was exactly
what I expected. The result is perfectly satisfactory.”
Dodge, a chemical engineer and economist who has spoken out about
what he says is Cotter’s low level of risk to the community at
Cotter meetings, said he could understand CCAT’s position on the
potential for health dangers, but added “Cotter presents no
particular risk” from radiation levels.
He said plenty of radiation appears in the state from natural
sources and there is no evidence to support, from health
statistics compared with those around the state and country, that
Cotter is to blame for more health problems.
“All life is risk,” Dodge said.
“I’m not for or against Cotter,” he added, but “it has a
perfectly legitimate right to remain in business.”
And, Dodge said, the decision couldn’t have come too soon, as the
community has hosted more and more meetings to discuss Cotter,
and it’s gotten to the point where “the same people are saying
the same things.”
“I think it’s about time it got resolved, and we stopped crapping
around,” he said.
News and information is updated Monday - Friday at 5:00pm. Entire
contents Copyright Ó 2004 Royal Gorge Publishing Corporation. All
Rights Reserved. CUSTOMER SERVICE
*****************************************************************
59 Casper Star-Tribune: Cotter loses bid to accept N.J. waste
By SANDY SHORE
Associated Press Writer
DENVER (AP) - Amid strong opposition from residents, state
health officials on Wednesday denied Cotter Corp.'s request to
accept contaminated waste from New Jersey at its Canon City mill.
The decision could bring to a close to Cotter's multiyear effort
to boost revenue by storing toxic waste at the 46-year-old site
in south-central Colorado.
In a statement, Cotter said it did not believe health officials
gave enough consideration to studies that the company said
supported its proposal.
''Direct disposal of high-volume, low-activity materials at
uranium milling facilities such as Cotter's increases the
nation's capacity for disposing of higher activity materials and
more appropriate facilities elsewhere,'' the statement said.
Cotter said it will decide within 60 days whether to appeal.
The state did renew Cotter's license to process uranium and
vanadium ore for an additional five years.
Fremont County Commissioner Larry Lasha said he was pleased with
the decision. ''It's been an issue that's kind of held our
community in check for too long,'' he said.
Cotter initially sought state permission to accept 24,000 cubic
yards from the Bergen County, N.J., site, which has an estimated
470,000 cubic yards of waste. Some of it is contaminated with
thorium, which was used to make lantern mantles.
Cotter sought permission to accept a maximum of 400,000 cubic
yards of soil from the site, where the Maywood Chemical Co.
processed thorium ore between 1916 and 1955.
Both sides are awaiting the decision of an administrative
hearing officer on that shipment after the state denied the
request, saying it was concerned about ensuring there were
adequate procedures in place to safely handle the material. The
company appealed.
The license renewal decision will not affect that proposed
shipment, said Steve Tarlton of the health department's hazardous
materials and waste management division.
In the fall of 2003, Cotter proposed accepting an additional
40,000 cubic yards from the Maywood site, which fell under new
state laws requiring the health department to consider social and
economic impacts.
Canon City and Fremont County leaders, residents and activists
were concerned about the effects that the contaminated waste
storage would have on the tourism industry and an effort to
attract more retirees and independent professional workers,
Tarlton said.
''What we ended up doing was deciding that the local community
knew more about how to determine whether or not there would be an
impact than my organization would be able to do,'' Tarlton said.
''So we went with the nearly unanimous opposition to the receipt
of that material by that local community.''
Health officials are continuing to work with Cotter on the
environmental and health issues related to the proposed storage,
Tarlton said.
Based in suburban Lakewood, Cotter is owned by General Atomics
of San Diego.
--
On the Net:
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment:
General Atomics:
AP-WS-12-15-04 1833EST
*****************************************************************
60 Daily Times: There could easily be an accidental nuclear war = Anand
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Patwardhan
By Mariam Mushtaq
LAHORE: Though relations between Pakistan and India are
improving, the two countries continue to spend lots of money on
newer and more powerful missiles, meaning there is still a real
risk of nuclear war, says Anand Patwardhan, an Indian filmmaker
in Pakistan for a screening of his documentary ‘War and Peace.
In an exclusive interview to Daily Times, Patwardhan also speaks
about his development as a filmmaker, his frequent run-ins with
the Indian censor board, Bollywood, and his hope that India will
disarm its nuclear weapons.
Daily Times: Tell us about your early years. How and when was
your political consciousness formed?
Anand Patwardhan: My family was actively involved in the freedom
struggle but politics wasn’t something that I actively thought
about while growing up. When I was 20, I got a scholarship to
study Sociology in America during the Vietnam War. My university
was very active in the anti-war movement. So I think that’s the
first time I became politically active, fighting against the war
in America, even ending up in jail twice for non-violent
protests. This was also the period during which I made my first
film, borrowing equipment and filming the anti-war protests and
demonstrations.
DT: What made you choose filmmaking as the medium to get your
message across?
AP: It happened quite by accident. I was involved in an
anti-corruption student movement in Bihar in 1974 and police
repression was rife. One day, I was asked to photograph a
demonstration to record police atrocities. Instead, I borrowed a
Super 8 movie camera and filmed the day’s events. That footage is
what eventually became my first documentary, ‘Waves of
Revolution’. Unfortunately, the film had to go underground
immediately because a state of emergency was declared in India
and many of the activists in the movement were arrested. I went
abroad for the duration of the emergency and on my return, filmed
another documentary. Over a period of time, filmmaking became my
means of being politically active.
DT: Why a documentary, considering that it’s the least mainstream
form of film-making?
AP: I didn’t set out to be a filmmaker or to tell a fictional
story. I was actually using my films to react to real life
events. I find documentary, in many ways, to be more interesting
than fiction because in an imperfect democracy, it’s very
important to provide people access to other people’s voices. That
can only be achieved through documentaries. Fiction can have
Amitabh Bachan playing a coolie but in a documentary, you can
actually see and hear that working class person.
DT: How has your political consciousness evolved over the course
of thirty years of making documentaries?
AP: In some ways, it hasn’t changed much. The issues that
originally motivated me to make films are the issues that
motivate me today. I’m very lazy and I don’t do hard work unless
I’m really upset about something. People ask me why I keep on
making controversial films. It’s not that I choose to do so. But
when the events around me become intolerable, I have to do
something about it and this is the medium I’m able to work and
respond in best. It’s usually the bad things, whether a communal
riot or the nuclear bomb, that put me into action, which is
somewhat unfortunate. I would like to make happy films for a
change.
DT: Your films often run into trouble with the state and censor
board and are not allowed onto national television. How
politically useful is the message if its reach remains limited?
AP: Ironically, the more trouble the state has tried to heap upon
my films, the more they’ve given them publicity. It’s not like
the films are not being shown. For instance, when ‘War and Peace’
was made in 2002, the government held it up for a year and a half
and asked for 21 cuts. The case went to court, which eventually
ruled in my favour. But even before that, the film was shown a
lot because of the hype created. We had private screenings all
over the country and abroad. Still, I’m not satisfied at all with
the actual use of the film. I think ‘War and Peace’, and others
like it, have the potential to be in the mainstream and reach out
to a much larger audience in the way that Michael Moore’s
‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ did.
DT: Don’t you feel that because of the protracted legal battles
involved in screening your films, the issues in question lose
relevance by the time the film is cleared?
AP: I wish that were true. I wish the films that I made became
outdated quickly. I talk about issues such as religious
fundamentalism, jingoism and other nasty things. If those things
became outdated, I would be thrilled. I don’t mind putting my
films away and going to sleep peacefully. Unfortunately, the
films remain relevant decades later because these problems are
intractable.
DT: Do you think ‘War and Peace’ is as relevant today as it was
two years ago, considering the recent thaw in relations between
India and Pakistan?
AP: Very much so. Yes, there is better friendship between India
and Pakistan. Yes, we had cricket matches where the audience in
both countries were extremely friendly and cheered for the other
team. That goes to show that people are realising the futility of
war and the need to make peace. But when it comes to the people
who make decisions – our defence analysts and politicians
–there’s no serious change in the mindset. Both countries have
witnessed a surge in defence spending despite the détente.
They’re developing newer, longer-range missiles. Their ability to
do lethal warfare is increasing every day and that’s a real
recipe for disaster. Whether anyone wants it or not, there could
easily be an accidental nuclear war.
DT: Do you find any change in public opinion about the
desirability of nuclear weapons?
AP: I don’t think in either country, the politician who starts
brandishing the bomb is taken seriously anymore. That initial
euphoria has subsided, but the dominant thinking still remains
that weapons of mass destruction are necessary, that they’re a
deterrent. Unfortunately, that’s the formula for an unending arms
race. I believe one of the two countries needs to take a very
bold step and unilaterally disarm. And I hope India takes the
first step, because it’s the bigger country and has less reason
to fear Pakistan than Pakistan has to fear India.
DT: We’ve recently witnessed a pleasant change in mainstream
Bollywood cinema, a shift from rabidly anti-Pakistan movies to
ones advocating friendship.
AP: And that’s very healthy sign. I think the market does tell
you a lot. The same person who made the blockbuster ‘Border’ five
years ago made the similarly jingoistic ‘LoC’ recently and it
flopped. In the wake of that, all other militaristic films
bombed. Which means the box office realised that the ‘hate
Pakistan’ motif was not working and switched to a ‘make peace’
motif. The recent hit, ‘Main Hoon Na’ was an incredible film with
respect to its message. The villain is someone trying to sabotage
Indo-Pak friendship and that is a thrilling thing to see
onscreen.
DT: With the comparatively liberal Congress replacing the BJP
nationalist government at the centre, how has the scenario
changed for filmmakers?
AP: We’ve been provided a breathing space. I’m personally
thrilled that the BJP is not in power any longer and most
filmmakers who are critical of the state and fundamentalism would
feel the same. Which is not to say that I’m in love with the
Congress party. I’ve made film critical of it as well. But at
least under its government, we can shout louder, we can protest
and be heard.
DT: There are a lot more filmmakers in India than in Pakistan
producing work that is critical of the state and based on
controversial subjects. Why do you think that is?
AP: I think it’s to do with the nature of the democratic system.
We’re protected by a very strong constitution that guarantees
freedom of expression. The worst that can happen to us in India
is that our films get stuck in the censor board and we have to
fight it out in court. For instance, now that I have a censor
certificate for my film after going to court, no one has the
right to stop it. Even if rightwing groups threaten it, it’s the
job of the state to allow the film to run in cinemas, provided I
find a theatre owner with guts to screen it. But we must not lose
sight of the fact that this had happened over a period of 25
years. I think Pakistan has reached that stage now where critical
films are being made and watched, at least at an informal level.
* Home | National
16 including 3 Polish soldiers killed in Iraq Haqiqi leader
given 10 years in jail 2 troops injured in mine blast SAARC
ministers adopt 11-point plan for cooperation MMA leads in
Malakand bypoll Court orders re-arrest of journalist POL prices
up Turkish engineer killed in Afghanistan SC takes exception to
jail term remissions Dispute over Zardari’s passport US missile
defence test fails Suspected drug trafficker catches police on
tape Police use tear gas on protesting university students CM
wants speedy work on New Murree project Arms race must stop to
ensure regional peace: seminar Mughal-e-Azam could come to
Pakistani cinemas LHC stops authorities from razing bus-stand SC
adjourns PMDC appeal till January 18 JUI-F ‘baton force’ to check
new year zeal Punjab government facing major challenges in
education: secretary Minister implicated in land scam I am not
afraid of a minister, says registrar Plot owners name names Local
research stressed to combat breast cancer Five-year-old Kashaf’s
kidnappers arrested: SSP 33rd ‘Fall of Dhaka’ day today GSC
student was ‘killed’ by ex-hostel superintendent There could
easily be an accidental nuclear war: Anand Patwardhan Nationwide
Hepatitis-B campaign: $10m needed per year from 2007 Amir’s
conviction termed political victimisation Devolution of town
development authorities: SLGC overrules nazim’s orders New
building planned for Sindh Assembly NARA, NADRA criticised
Musharraf wants briefing on agri development Article writing
competition for journalists India and Pakistan should utilise
atmosphere to resolve issues: Kasuri SAARC be made platform to
resolve mutual disputes: Soomro
Shujaat to start negotiations with Opp on return Senate
body wants Afghan refugees repatriated by 2006 Under-trial
prisoners suffering in bakhshi khana Senate Committee on Railways
informed about retrieved land
Bangladesh seeks NADRA’s help with passports Terror
suspects block opening of trial involving Zarqawi Israeli army
kills Palestinian on Gaza road CBMs key to resolution of
disputes: PM China backs Musharraf’s peace initiatives ‘Kashmir’s
1947 accession to India was conditional’ 1m euro ransom demanded:
Hijackers of Greek bus threaten to blow up vehicle Nepali rebels
ambush army patrol, 26 dead Eight militants killed in Kashmir
Kashmiris from both sides want solution in phases: Farooq
Daily Times - All Rights Reserved Site developed and hosted by
WorldCALL Internet Solutions
*****************************************************************
61 UC loses nuclear weapons program (2/9)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:00:15 -0600 (CST)
http://www.sfbayview.com/092204/nuclearweapons092204.shtml
UC Regents lose control of nuclear weapons program
Five admirals, Carlyle Group and Rand take over
Part 2
by Leuren Moret Admiral George P. Nanos
As Admiral George P. Nanos, appointed director of the Los Alamos
lab in January 2003, and Admiral S. Robert Foley Jr., appointed UC
vice president for laboratory management in November 2003, sat down
at the table where the UC 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 universitys chances of retaining its Los
Alamos contract. This erodes your position, without any question
at all, he said. Its about as bad as it could be when youre 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: Jacks our guy.
He was with Wackenhut, and hes our guy.
Wackenhut has ties to (Lockheed) Martin-Marietta 70 percent of
Lockheed is now owned by the Carlyle Group - going back to 1958.
By 2001, Wackenhuts revenues topped $2.8 billion as the leading
provider of security at U.S. national defense sites, with a global
presence on six continents.
UC Regent Richard Blum UC Regent Ward Connerly UC Regent Gerald
Parsky UC Regent Sherry Lansing
Among nuclear weapons lab employees, Wackenhut was better known for
wacking radiation whistleblowers like Karen Silkwood and attempting
to run Dr. Rosalie Bertell off the road. The story of Karen Silkwoods
courageous life and mysterious death are told in the 1983 movie
Silkwood, starring Meryl Streep. Dr. Bertell, a Catholic nun, is a
world renowned scientist and humanitarian and winner of the 1986
Right Livelihood Award, the environmental Nobel Prize.
Wackenhut has a well-deserved reputation for being a nasty outfit
(see Eye on Wackenhut in the reference list below). President Bush
and his brother, Gov. Jeb Bush, are known to spend time together
hanging out with cronies at the Wackenhut country club in Florida.
Admiral S. Robert Foley Jr.
Admiral Nanos continued, complaining that employees simply 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. The regents should have
fired Foley on the spot when he himself predicted that he would
fall 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. They were presenting a good excuse for
cleaning house and removing the old guard who would stand in the
way of changes now planned for ramping up the nuclear weapons
program.
Admiral Nanos calls Los Alamos staff cowboys and butt-heads
The decision by Admiral Nanos, director of Los Alamos, to suspend
classified work at Los Alamos in July 2004 following the UC Regents
meeting is an over-reaction which has hurt the nation, according
to Brad Lee Holian, a physicist and 32-year lab veteran. Holian
believes the reason for misplaced classified data is probably
insufficient attention paid to inventory procedures rather than
loss of the data or espionage.
There has still been no explanation or mention of real espionage
by high level Mossad agent Robert Maxwell, who sold PROMIS software
to Los Alamos with a back door in the software for Mossad, the
Israeli intelligence agency, to spy on the lab (see Robert Maxwell).
Quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle Sept. 18, Holian said, The
damage to Los Alamos National Laboratory and to the country from
this shutdown could be incalculable. In a 1,500 word article he
submitted to Physics Today, he says a two-month shutdown is the
squandering of hundreds of millions of tax dollars and the climate
of blame and zero tolerance for errors has been devastating to the
morale of the scientists (see Los Alamos crackdown).
Holian said that at earlier meetings, Admiral Nanos used colorful
language and referred in harsh terms to certain staff members as
cowboys and butt-heads and was yelling or slamming down viewgraphs
onto the projector. This kind of conduct by the most senior staff
member at the lab will put a chill on recruiting young scientists,
and young staffers are so disheartened that some are already leaving,
as well as older staff, who are taking early retirement. Holian
reported that a recruiter he knows was told by young students, Were
not sure we want to put our careers in jeopardy by going to a place
like Los Alamos.
DOE culture at the labs: the fox guarding the henhouse
An editorial in the Oakland Tribune the day before the UC Regents
meeting on Aug. 17 remarked that the NNSA (the National Nuclear
Security Administration) was established by the Department of Energy
in 1999 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 in Nevada, and
the Superfund Project at Livermore, to Richard Berta, the Western
Regional Inspector in the DOE Inspector Generals office for the
nuclear weapons labs, Site 51 and the Nevada Test Site. After
bringing two DOE and EPA inspectors to my house and recording my
testimony, he reported to Duane Sewell, the secrets keeper at the
lab, and Bert Hefner, lab PR person.
When I called Berta a month later to inquire 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. I told him I was not
surprised, that my allegations had been reported many times to the
FBI by other more senior lab staff and they were ignored as well.
I informed him that he had missed out on the teak furniture, given
to the really important players at the lab.
The Oakland Tribune 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 regents meeting ended before Dr. Walter Kohn, a Nobel Prize-winning
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 she 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 and the Fiat Pax website
Right after the regents meeting, I contacted a group of University
of Texas students and Texas State Rep. Lon Burnam, who are opposed
to the University 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 and their ties to corporations (see
Fiat Pax below).
The UC Regents with ties to the defense industry were listed with
detailed bios. Regents Chair Gerald Parsky is the top fundraiser -
after Ken Lay - for George W. Bush in both his 2000 and 2004
presidential election bids and a member of the Council on Foreign
Relations.
Vice Chair Richard Blum is tied to the Carlyle Group, invested in
URS Corp., a leading contractor with the Defense Department, and
Korea First Bank - Carlyle is moving into Korea and taking over
banks - and sits on the board of Northwest Airlines. A document
obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (see FOIA below)
revealed in 2001 that Northwest was the first airline to collaborate
with NASA to install mind-reading technology in U.S. airports to
catch terrorists.
Regent Sherry Lansing was a trustee of the RAND Graduate School, a
branch of the RAND Corp., which had been involved in war-gaming
nuclear wars between the U.S. and the USSR and acts as a bridge
between U.S. universities and the military.
I also learned that the Carlyle Group manages large amounts of
endowment funds for the University of Texas.
CalPERS, the California state workers pension fund, which, at nearly
$1 trillion, is the largest in the nation, owns 5.5 percent of
Carlyle with a $730 million investment and an outrageous 20-30
percent annual return (see CalPERS). CalPERS has an option to buy
another 5 percent in a few years, giving them 10 percent ownership
of Carlyle (see Carlyle Documentary Video).
For decades, many politicians and corporate interests have tried
to loot the CalPERS pension fund. This could be the takeover that
finally grabs the CalPERS pot of gold.
Fiat Pax sums it up: The University of Californias system wide
finances are incredibly entangled with weapons manufacturers. The
UCs 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.
Business journalist Dan Briodys book, The Iron Triangle: Inside the
Secret World of the Carlyle Group (2003), reveals that the Carlyle
Group is one of the most powerful and well-connected private equity
firms in the world. Their incredible profits are due to investments
primarily in defense and aerospace industries. Briody says the
Carlyle Group operates within the so-called iron triangle of industry,
government, and the military and that it leaves itself open to any
number of conflicts of interest and stunning ironies. This is
precisely what President Eisenhower warned against as he was leaving
office over 40 years ago.
And then I knew that the admirals, and the vested regents, were the
kiss of death to the UC contract bid.
References for Part 2
1. Robert Maxwell Was a Mossad Spy: New claim on tycoons mystery
death by Gordon Thomas and Martin Dillon, Daily Mirror (UK), July
10, 2004,
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12419168&method=full&siteid=50143.
2. 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,
Feb. 14, 2002,
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/02_14_02_microbio.html.
3. Eye on Wackenhut: Know the Facts About Wackenhut,
http://www.eyeonwackenhut.com.
4. Media coverage of Los Alamos security lapse, July 2004,
http://www.4law.co.il/lanl1.htm.
5. NASA plans to read terrorists minds at airports by Frank J.
Murray, Washington Times, Aug. 17, 2002,
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020817-704732.htm.
6. 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.
7. Stop Carlyle! website,
http://isuisse.ifrance.com/stopcarlyle/enindex.htm.
8. Our Opinion: NNSA must share blame for Los Alamos mistakes,
Oakland Tribune, Aug. 16, 2004,
http://ucnuclearfree.org/articles/2004/08/16_oped_nnsa-must-share-blame.htm.
9. CalPERS, Carlyle profit from Afghan war by David Lazarus, San
Francisco Chronicle, Dec. 2, 2001,
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/12/02/BU172807.DTL.
10. Carlyle Documentary Video, Dutch documentary on the Carlyle
Group, updated 2004 version:
rtsp://streams2.omroep.nl/tv/vpro/tegenlicht/bb.20040125.rm (200
MB, 500 kbps), rtsp://streams2.omroep.nl/tv/vpro/tegenlicht/sb.20040125.rm
(100 kbps); Dutch documentary on the Carlyle Group, original 2003
version: rtsp://streams2.omroep.nl/tv/vpro/tegenlicht/bb.20030516.rm
(180 MB, 500 kbps),
rtsp://streams3.omroep.nl/tv/vpro/tegenlicht/sb.20030516.rm (100
kbps).
11. Los Alamos crackdown imperils U.S., lab physicist warns: Director
accused of overreacting by Keay Davidson, San Francisco Chronicle,
Sept. 18, 2004, p.A-4,
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/09/18/MNGMF8R34I1.DTL.
12. 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. UCs retirement
fund investments, http://www.fiatpax.net/iilinks2.html.
13. The Iron Triangle: Inside the Secret World of the Carlyle Group
by Dan Briody, Wiley, 2003.
To read Part 1 of this series, go to
http://www.sfbayview.com/091504/ucregents091504.shtml. The rest of
this expos will appear in the Bay View in the coming weeks. Leuren
Moret, a geoscientist who worked at the Livermore nuclear weapons
lab where she became a whistleblower in 1991, has survived 13 years
of retaliation from the Livermore lab and the University of California
and has lived firsthand the experiences of Karen Silkwood. A radiation
specialist, she works around the world educating citizens, the media
and lawmakers about the impact of radiation globally on the health
of the public and the environment. She assisted with Al-Jazeeras
recent report on depleted uranium weapons which quickly became one
of the most read articles produced by the website. DU: Washingtons
Secret Nuclear War can be read at
http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Secret-Nuclear-War14sep04.htm. She
is an independent scientist, an environmental commissioner for the
City of Berkeley, and can be reached at leurenmoret@yahoo.com.
Carlyle and Bechtel are watching
Shortly after Part 1 of this story, UC Regents lose control of
nuclear weapons program: Five admirals, Carlyle Group and Rand take
over, appeared on the Bay View website, these email messages were
sent to writer Leuren Moret and the Bay View by the Carlyle Group
and Bechtel Corp. Both were discussed in the story.
From the Carlyle Group
Subject: Message From The Carlyle Group
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 16:52:11 -0400
From: Christopher Ullman
To: leurenmoret@yahoo.com
Dear Leuren,
Greetings. I saw your article in the SF Bay View. Your claim that
Carlyle is taking over management responsibility for a nuclear
facility in Texas is completely false. How could you print such a
thing without first contacting us? Where did you hear of this?
Please call me to discuss.
Chris Ullman
Christopher W. Ullman
V.P. for Corporate Communications
THE CARLYLE GROUP
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 220 South
Washington, DC 20004
Tel: 202.729.5450
Fax: 202.347.5550
Mobile: 202.641.2234
christopher.ullman@carlyle.com
www.carlyle.com
From Bechtel
From: Martinez, Debbie
To: leurenmoret@yahoo.com
Subject: UC Regents lose control of nuclear weapons program.
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 09:49:14 -0700
Hi Leuren
Please e-mail parts 2-4 of this article to me I would like to use
it in my report. Thank you
*****************************************************************
62 ABQjournal: LANL In Need of Upgrades
the Albuquerque Journal newspaper.
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Albuquerque Journal--> By Adam Rankin
Journal Staff Writer
Whoever wins the contract to run Los Alamos National
Laboratory will inherit one of the nation's leading research
institutions, but they will also get a complex of aging,
out-of-date buildings that are in poor condition.
More than a third of LANL's 2,000-plus buildings, totaling
nearly 9 million square feet, are in either poor or failing
condition, according to the National Nuclear Security
Administration, which disclosed the status of LANL's facilities
during a site tour on Monday for bidders interested in competing
to operate LANL.
The current contract to run LANL, operated by the
University of California since 1943, expires at the end of
September 2005. NNSA and the U.S. Department of Energy plan to
choose a new operator by next summer based on a series of
criteria released earlier this month.
So far, the University of California hasn't decided whether
it will compete for the contract. Other interested parties
include the University of Texas, Northrop Grumman, Washington
Group, CH2M Hill and others.
NNSA's Anthony Lovato, who led the tour, said about 50
people attended, but did not say which companies or entities
they represented.
According to NNSA's figures, 22 percent of the buildings
are in excellent shape, and 28 percent are in adequate or good
condition, while about 16 percent are in fair condition.
"Our buildings and infrastructure are one of our biggest
challenges," said LANL spokeswoman Kathy DeLucas.
She said the average LANL building is 30 years old.
"But thanks to our congressional folks and the (Department
of Energy) we are rapidly updating them," she said.
Since 2000, Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., has made facility
and infrastructure funding a focus throughout the DOE complex.
He pushed for a new initiative to bring in $500 million or more
a year to replace aging factories and laboratories.
That effort has resulted in the construction of a few new
buildings— including a $93 million strategic computing facility,
a $63 million Non-proliferation and International Security
Center and the $122 million National Security Sciences Center,
now under construction— as well as plans for several more.
In all, planned infrastructure upgrades and buildings now
in the design stage total about $1.3 billion. The most expensive
is a planned $700 million metallurgy laboratory slated to
replace the 50-year-old Chemistry and Metallurgy Research
building.
NNSA reports that the laboratory has as much as $500
million in deferred maintenance, or about 8.9 percent of the
total estimated replacement cost ($5.6 billion) of LANL's
facilities.
DeLucas said there is no one cause for the accrual of
deferred maintenance over the years.
"Our mission has changed, safety and security requirements
have changed and science and technology have changed, and old
buildings can't keep up with those changes," she said. "But
we've had a lot of success lately in putting up new buildings."
Copyright 2004 Albuquerque Journal
*****************************************************************
63 Tri-City Herald: Opinions Keeping wastes here at 'heart' of initiative
This story was published Wednesday, December 15th, 2004
Monday's Seattle Times included some revealing comments from
Gerald Pollet, executive director of Heart of America Northwest,
sponsors of Initiative 297.
"I believe if Yucca Mountain is not safe, it shouldn't be open,"
Pollet told The Times. It's hard to argue against safety, but
Pollet went on to say, "Glassified, high-level waste should stay
at Hanford. That's the safest thing."
Funny, we can't remember any election ads for the anti-nuclear
waste initiative mentioning its potential to strand high-level
nuclear wastes at Hanford, let alone any rhetoric endorsing the
idea.
Certainly, when Pollet described I-297 as a way to stop the feds
from turning Hanford into a nuclear waste dump, he left out the
part about keeping its most dangerous wastes here.
Critics of I-297 warned that by encouraging every state to fend
for itself, the measure threatened plans to ship Hanford's most
dangerous waste to Nevada for burial beneath Yucca Mountain.
The Herald lent its editorial voice to the small chorus,
suggesting that if Heart of America had its way, Hanford wastes
would have nowhere to go and no way to get there.
But we thought that was just an unintended consequence of a
badly written initiative. Pardon our naivet.
© 2004 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
64 RGJ: Finally, an idea Nevada can use
RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL
12/14/2004 10:07 pm
2004 Fire agencies deserve money
Agreement should help ensure Yerington mine is cleaned up
Among the best land use ideas to come from the federal
government of late is the proposal to build a new facility at
the Nevada Test Site to manage some of the nation’s secure
documents and to house special Government Printing Office
projects. Unlike the dangers posed by a repository at Yucca
Mountain, this facility would be a non-toxic, non-threatening
use of the Nevada desert, and it might create economic benefit.
Years of secrecy surrounding the site and tests conducted there
leave little doubt that whatever takes place can be kept under
wraps, at least for a while. Even in this age of viruses,
hackers and intelligence leaks. The state and the nation should
have a reasonable expectation that storing and producing
sensitive documents (paper and digital) would offer a clean use
of the desert, an efficient national security site and a new job
sector.
Growth in Las Vegas from employees, suppliers to support the
facility and businesses to serve all the people would be the
worst foreseeable fallout to come from the project. Is it
significant that a Nevadan came up with the plan?
Even with the necessity to manage the growth, it would be more
acceptable than some other federal projects.
© Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Newspaper.
*****************************************************************
65 lamonitor.com: Lab contract proposal seeks big changes
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor
ALBUQUERQUE - Change was in the air as officials in charge of
recompeting the contract with Los Alamos National Laboratory
drilled down into the details of the gargantuan task of
designing a proposal to run the nation's flagship nuclear
weapons lab.
"No matter who wins," said Tyler Przybylek, the chairman of the
Department of Energy's Source Evaluation Board, "we expect
something different."
A preliminary conference for bidders drew well over a hundred
people to an all day session at the Wyndham Hotel Tuesday that
attempted to compress the work of the laboratory into a
nutshell, while making a lot of straightforward suggestions
about what the board will be seeking in a new manager.
"This is about change," said David H. Crandall, who gave a
presentation on the defense programs at LANL, and who will chair
the science and technology panel reviewing the proposals.
He added, "We really care a lot about and are seeking ways to
keep the strengths."
After he met with employees from LANL last week, Przybylek said,
somebody wrote to him asking why they call what the laboratory
does "world-class science."
Why not cosmic or galactic science?
There may be something to that, he suggested, in light of the
laboratory's recent showings in major R awards and DOE employee
recognitions like the Lawrence Awards.
"That work has to continue," Przybylek said, but he asked other
interested parties not to take that as implying favoritism,
adding, "Our charter is to run a full and open competition."
Przybylek said the meeting, to examine the draft Request for
Proposal, was intended to hear from the bidders about any
barriers that stand in the way of competition, as well as what
they thought was right or wrong about the RFP.
Crandall and Ed Wilmot, the Los Alamos site director, both
overseeing LANL as part of the National Nuclear Security
Administration, offered their ideas and views about
characteristics they wanted to see in the lab of the future.
Crandall called for "adequate rigor" in safety and environmental
compliance, with "zero" as the goal for accidents and
environmental violations.
"We don't expect it to be simple, and we don't expect it to be
cheap," he said."
Looking toward the end of the five-year period of the next
contract, Wilmot wanted to see a better integrated management,
where science could excel, "not despite good management
systems," but because, "If you do things right, you'll be able
to do the science easier."
Whoever takes over will inherit the lab's current "get well"
program for improving operations efficiencies, he said, a
reference to business problems that brought about the
competition in the first place and safety and security issues
that caused the lab to cease operations for varying periods
starting in July of this year.
The board officials said they were looking for continuous
improvement, a demand reflected in the RFP.
The bid proposal in the spring of 2005 is supposed to include
what the new contract manager expects to accomplish in FY2006.
"We want to see performance. That's the bottom line," said
Wilmot.
Both NNSA officials emphasized the need for strong environmental
stewardship and improvement in meeting schedules and project
deadlines.
The changes called for in the draft RFP are meant to be
accomplished by a new manager, or at least a newly configured
manager, along with a change in key personnel, according to the
RFP.
When Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham announced the competition
in April 2003, UC officials said their participation would
depend on the request for proposal and its priorities.
The priorities are reflected in the evaluation criteria.
Science receives 325 of 1,000 points, almost a third of the
score. Laboratory operations count for 175 points and business
operations for 75.
On the other hand, as Przybylek explained, key personnel (150
points) and oral presentation (100) points combine to represent
250 points.
Taking it another step, with another 75 points available for
past performance, management alone represents the same weight as
science.
The balance will be of interest to the University of California,
the current manager, as it will be to other bidders.
The UC Board of Regents meets on Jan. 15, and at least one
relevant item has already appeared on the agenda - to approve
actions needed to preserve the option of continuing to manage
the university's three nuclear weapon's labs, including LANL.
The relatively few public questions asked at the end of each
presentation may have indicated clarity and understanding of a
vast subject on the part of those in attendance, but may also
have been a sign of proprietary discretion.
A round of one-on-one meetings with individual bidders is
scheduled through the week.
A number of questions were submitted with the idea that they
would be answered at the end of the session, but Przybylek said
the responses would instead be prepared for the recompetition
website.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
66 DOE: recommendation are due on or before January 14, 2005.
FR Doc 04-27426
[Federal Register: December 15, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 240)]
[Notices] [Page 75047-75049] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr15de04-45]
ADDRESSES: Send comments, data, views, or arguments concerning
this recommendation to: Defense Nuclear
[[Page 75048]] Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue, NW.,
Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004-2001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth M. Pusateri or Andrew L.
Thibadeau at the address above or telephone (202) 694-7000.
Dated: December 10, 2004.
A.J. Eggenberger, Vice Chairman.
Recommendation 2004-2 to the Secretary of Energy, Pursuant to 42
U.S.C. 2286a(a)(5), Atomic Energy Act of 1954, As Amended Dated:
December 7, 2004.
There is a long-standing safety practice in the design,
construction, and operation of nuclear facilities to build-in and
maintain structures, systems, and components that contain or
confine radioactive materials. The Department of Energy (DOE)
establishes requirements to ensure such containment or
confinement. In the hierarchy of safety controls, passive design
features are preferred over active systems; however, controls
must be capable of performing their intended function. Passive
confinement systems are not necessarily capable of containing
hazardous materials with confidence because they allow a quantity
of unfiltered air contaminated with radioactive material to be
released from an operating nuclear facility following certain
accident scenarios. Safety related active confinement ventilation
systems will continue to function during an accident, thereby
ensuring that radioactive material is captured by filters before
it can be released into the environment.
The enclosed technical report, DNFSB/TECH-34, Confinement of
Radioactive Materials at Defense Nuclear Facilities, compares the
benefits of including a safety-related active confinement
ventilation system to those of relying only on a passive
confinement system. This technical report illustrates that using
only a passive confinement system for an existing or new defense
nuclear processing facility would not account for many safety
considerations such as post-accident monitoring and response, and
may result in the release of an undeterminable amount of
radioactive materials, the consequences of which could approach
that of the unmitigated scenarios.
The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) has advised
DOE in various ways during the past decade regarding the need to
pay increased attention to the design and operational reliability
of the confinement ventilation systems at defense nuclear
facilities.
These Board efforts include transmittal of a technical report on
May 31, 1995, Overview of Ventilation Systems at Selected DOE
Plutonium Processing and Handling Facilities, a letter to the
Deputy Secretary of Energy dated July 8, 1999, and Recommendation
2000-2, Configuration Management, Vital Safety Systems, on March
8, 2000. This advice has helped DOE improve the reliability of
its confinement ventilation systems. However, DOE requirements
have become less prescriptive during the last decade as DOE Order
6430.1A, General Design Criteria Manual, was replaced with DOE
Order 420.1, Facility Safety, and its subsequent revisions.
Furthermore, it has become apparent that the Board's advice on
confinement systems is not being rigorously pursued as evidenced
by the following: On December 27, 2002, the Board sent a letter
to the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) regarding
the confinement concept used for the Highly Enriched Uranium
Materials Facility at the Y-12 National Security Complex. The
proposed confinement concept was based on isolating the
radioactive material in the building using a passive confinement
system under certain abnormal events. The Board communicated
safety concerns associated with this concept in the letter;
subsequently, the confinement concept for HEUMF was modified to
adopt a safety-related active ventilation system.
On April 12, 2004, the Board sent a letter to the Administrator
of NNSA regarding similar safety issues related to the
confinement systems for the plutonium facility at the Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory. The proposed approach utilized
passive confinement of radioactive material from the facility
during certain accident scenarios. Further, because the offsite
dose consequences of such an unfiltered release were calculated
to be below DOE's evaluation guideline (25 rem), the proposal
included downgrading the existing safety-class active confinement
ventilation system to a safety-significant system. The Board
believed that the new approach was inconsistent with a
defense-in-depth philosophy. Subsequently, the Livermore Site
Office commissioned an independent calculation of the amount of
the unfiltered release. These calculations yielded results that
were an order of magnitude greater than the original building
leakage estimates--clearly indicating that significant
uncertainties existed in the analytical techniques. As a result,
NNSA decided to maintain the existing safety-class active
confinement ventilation system.
On August 27, 2004, the Board sent a letter to the Under
Secretary of Energy regarding the confinement approach proposed
for the Salt Waste Processing Facility at the Savannah River
Site. The confinement concept for this new facility is based on
isolation of the process building using passive confinement
during accident scenarios. The Board suggested that the salt
waste facility should be designed with a safety-related active
ventilation system.
A number of existing facilities (including the TA-55 Plutonium
Facility, the Device Assembly Facility, and the Hanford
Evaporator) rely on passive or non-safety related confinement
systems. More importantly, designs for proposed facilities
(including Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement Facility
and the Salt Waste Processing Facility) are based on the same
passive confinement concept and use an assumed quantitative value
for the building leak path factor as a design criterion.
These examples illustrate two primary concerns. First, a reliance
on calculations that do not appropriately account for large
uncertainties is not defensible. These analytically determined
building leak path factors are based on a combination of several
computer programs that were not specifically designed for this
purpose. Furthermore, it is generally impossible for these
programs to model the true conditions of a real accident because
of the uncertain behavior of the workers and emergency crews
responding to the event.
Second, these examples represent a fundamental change in DOE's
approach to protection of the public near defense nuclear
facilities. DOE appears to be using the evaluation guideline of
25 rem exposure at the site boundary as a design criterion and an
allowable dose to the public. This is contrary to the Board's
July 8, 1999 letter to the Deputy Secretary of Energy that states
``the 25 rem evaluation guideline is not to be treated as a
design acceptance criterion nor as a justification for nullifying
the general design criteria relative to defense-in-depth safety
measures.'' It is also contrary to DOE-STD-3009 that states that
the 25 rem evaluation guideline ``is not to be treated as a
design acceptance criterion.'' However, the Board continues to
see 25 rem at the site boundary used as an acceptance criterion
for the performance of confinement systems. The Board is
concerned that in these examples DOE and its contractors are
underestimating the significance of the performance requirements
for a confinement ventilation system and are relying on
questionable calculations of offsite doses to evaluate
performance. The Board reiterates that the 25 rem evaluation
guideline is solely to be used for guidance for the
classification of safety controls, and not as an acceptable dose
to the public for the purpose of designing or operating defense
nuclear facilities.
Notwithstanding the concerns discussed above, DOE continues to
pursue a passive confinement approach in the design of some new
nuclear facilities that have the potential for a radiological
release. The Board recognizes that DOE's defense nuclear complex
is comprised of a wide variety of nuclear facilities with an
equally diverse range of materials, forms, activities, and
proximities to the public. For this reason, it is difficult to
prescribe a single, broadly-applicable design requirement.
However, in light of the examples discussed above, the Board
believes a more prescriptive design requirement is needed.
The Board further recognizes that certain Hazard Category 2 and 3
defense nuclear facilities may not benefit significantly from an
active confinement ventilation system. An example would be a
facility that stores radioactive material in protected,
safety-class containers. Other examples may be certain tritium
facilities, outside storage locations, burial grounds, or
facilities with planned declining nuclear material inventories
and scheduled for decommissioning in the near future. This
recommendation is not meant to require an active confinement
ventilation system in all such cases.
Therefore, the Board recommends that DOE: 1. Disallow reliance on
passive confinement systems and require an active confinement
ventilation system for all new and existing Hazard Category 2
defense nuclear facilities with the potential for a
[[Page 75049]] radiological release. These systems are expected
to be classified as safety-class or safety-significant as
required by a conservative application of DOE-approved
methodology, and should be designed and maintained to function
during abnormal and accident conditions. Exceptions to such
classifications should be approved at a level in DOE that ensures
a consistent, conservative approach throughout the complex.
2. Disallow reliance on passive confinement systems and require
an active confinement ventilation system for all new and existing
Hazard Category 3 defense nuclear facilities with the potential
for a radiological release. These systems would not ordinarily be
classified as safety-class or safety-significant unless such
designation is required by the DOE-approved methodology.
3. Revise all applicable DOE directives pertaining to operation
of existing facilities, design and construction of new
facilities, and major modifications to existing facilities, in
accordance with Items 1 and 2 above. These revisions should
include guidance for determining when a facility would not
benefit from an active confinement ventilation system.
4. Assess existing facilities, ongoing major modifications, and
new design/construction projects, to ensure that: (a) The
confinement strategy described above is implemented, and (b) The
25 rem evaluation guideline is used solely for classification of
safety controls.
Section 42 U.S.C. 2286d(e) provides authority to the Secretary of
Energy to ``implement any such Recommendation (or part of any
such Recommendation) before, on, or after the date on which the
Secretary of Energy transmits the implementation plan to the
Board under this subsection.'' The Board suggests that the
Secretary of Energy consider taking action on Item 4 above in
parallel with the development of an Implementation Plan for this
Recommendation.
In addition, the Board's Recommendation 2004-1, Oversight of
Complex, High-Hazard Nuclear Operations, addresses the need for
complex-wide consistency in the application of DOE requirements
and expectations. The Board expects the mechanisms established in
response to Recommendation 2004-1 would likewise ensure
consistent, conservative implementation of the confinement
requirement provided here.
John T. Conway, Chairman.
[FR Doc. 04-27426 Filed 12-14-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3670-01-P
*****************************************************************
67 [du-list] link SR DailyNews Part 5: The best test
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:40:28 -0800
I am sorry. Again I forgot the link.
The URL is:
http://www.dailypress.com/news/specials/dp-du5,0,4881579.story?coll=dp-
breaking-news
On this site you will also find the links to the previous parts.
Henk
How Good Is Good Enough?
Chapter 5: The best test
The world's most accurate test for depleted uranium exposure is now
available - but only in Britain and Germany. The Pentagon says U.S. vets
don't need it.
BY BOB EVANS
247-4758
December 15, 2004
I
----------------------------------------------------------------------
stichting Laka Laka foundation
documentatie en onderzoeks- documentation and research
centrum kernenergie centre on nuclear energy
Ketelhuisplein 43 Ketelhuisplein 43
1054 RD Amsterdam NL-1054 RD Amsterdam
tel: 020-6168294 Netherlands
fax: 020-6892179 tel: +31-20-6168294
fax: +31-20-6892179
www.laka.org
laka@antenna.nl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
68 [du-list] SR DailyNews Part 5: The best test
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:40:28 -0800
How Good Is Good Enough?
Chapter 5: The best test
The world's most accurate test for depleted uranium exposure is now
available - but only in Britain and Germany. The Pentagon says U.S. vets
don't need it.
BY BOB EVANS
247-4758
December 15, 2004
In Great Britain, veterans of the 1991 Gulf War are signing up to take the
world's most precise test for determining exposure to depleted uranium.
The U.S. government advertises a test for its veterans of that war too. But
the test that it offers can't detect uranium in low amounts, has a high error
rate and uses equipment that's less sensitive and accurate than the
machines the British are using. U.S. vets and soldiers who've had this test
say they've been told they weren't exposed when, in fact, the tests were
simply incapable of detecting whether depleted uranium was present.
Members of Congress have asked the Pentagon to look into testing
programs in other countries. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
promised to do that in April. But after that promise was made, the officer in
charge of U.S. testing said he had no reason to gather such data because
his test was good enough.
"Our labs would easily detect depleted uranium levels approaching U.S.
peacetime safety standards," says Lt. Col. Mark Melanson, who runs the
health physics program at the Army Center for Health Promotion and
Preventive Medicine.
One of those labs handles all depleted uranium testing for the Department
of Veterans Affairs.
Randall Parrish, a scientist who played a big role in developing the British
test, says he can't understand why the United States is satisfied with an
inferior test.
"It is incorrect to assume that a low concentration of uranium in urine
means there is no contamination," he says, because there's no good data
to support that conclusion.
The U.S. government's refusal to adopt a state-of-the art test also prevents
researchers from finding out why tens of thousands of veterans of the Gulf
War have debilitating illnesses, says Mohamad B. Abou-Donia, a
researcher at Duke University.
Abou-Donia has conducted many significant experiments into the causes of
illnesses suffered by Gulf War vets. He also recently published a study that
reviewed available scientific work on the health effects of depleted uranium.
Knowing which veterans were definitely exposed to depleted uranium - not
just those who might have been exposed to huge doses - would fill a huge
gap in the research, he says.
But until a better test is adopted and used on a larger number of vets, that
data isn't available, he says.
So there's no certainty about who was exposed and who was not. Until
scientists can reliably determine who was exposed and who was not, they
can't prove or disprove links between depleted uranium and individual
veterans' health problems, Abou-Donia says.
Veterans and scientists have questioned for several years whether the use
of depleted uranium weapons in the Gulf War is one of the reasons that so
many veterans of that war came home weak and full of pain.
The weapons provided a decisive edge in tank warfare in the 1991 and 2003
battles in the Persian Gulf region. They also left behind millions and
millions
of pieces of easily inhalable black dust that's toxic and mildly radioactive.
The dust is a necessary result of using the weapons to hit and destroy hard
targets.
In recent years, researchers have shown that laboratory animals that
inhaled depleted uranium dust developed cancerous tumors. They've also
found that a single particle of depleted uranium can alter the genetic
structure of nearby cells in ways consistent with widely held scientific
beliefs about the way cancer starts in the human body. And they've found
evidence that once depleted uranium gets in the body, it migrates through
the bloodstream to the brain, testicles, lungs, kidneys and bones, where it
can reside for years.
But all that research constitutes preliminary steps toward figuring out how
big a problem the dust from depleted uranium weapons might be,
researchers say. Meanwhile, the military plans to significantly reduce its
investigations into possible health effects resulting from depleted uranium,
as well as other possible causes of Gulf War-related illnesses.
IN BRITAIN, SAME COMPLAINTS PROMPTED DIFFERENT RESPONSE
The government's attitude toward critics of the weapon isn't much different in
Britain. British and U.S. troops are among the few who actually used
depleted uranium weapons in battles. A large number of British vets have
also been complaining about health problems similar to those experienced
by U.S. armed forces from that war.
Parrish says his government paid to develop the more accurate tests for
veterans in part because of political pressure and in part because of medical
experts' suspicions that existing tests yielded inconclusive and inadequate
evidence of exposure.
Those tests were being used to dismiss the veterans' benefits claims.
Some British veterans went to independent labs and received results that
proved depleted uranium was in their urine. Analysis of 24 hours' worth of
urine is the commonly accepted method of determining whether someone
has been exposed to uranium of any kind.
The British veterans' pleas for a better depleted uranium test also got
support from the British Royal Society, an invitation-only group of prominent
scientists. The Royal Society carries clout in Britain: It dates to 1660, and
its members are readily acknowledged as among the best scientific minds
in the country. Society members decided to tackle the problem of Gulf War
illnesses independent of the government, and after several years, they
issued a series of findings.
While those findings didn't contradict the government's official viewpoint in
many ways, the society did call for a testing program that could more
accurately detect whether someone had depleted uranium in their body.
That, coupled with activism by veterans groups, left the government little
political choice.
It took about two years to develop the highly accurate tests, says Parrish, a
professor of isotope geology at the University of Leicester.
In addition to his teaching, he runs a laboratory at the British Geological
Survey supported by Britain's Natural Environment Research Council. The
council is independent of the government and is similar to the National
Science Foundation in the United States, Parrish says.
Parrish and David Coggon, a scientist and chairman of the board that runs
the testing program, say there are only four labs (three in England, the other
in Germany) that have adopted the more rigorous testing regimen so far.
Part of the difficulty of testing for depleted uranium in someone's body is
that you can't cut up a person and look for the uranium like you would if it
were in a rock, soil sample or lab rat. That's why scientists look for it in
urine. While not a perfect source, it's the best available right now, Parrish
and others say. Even the U.S. military agrees.
Finding depleted uranium in the body gets complicated. Natural uranium is
in everyone's body because it's in the food and water we ingest. Therefore,
there's natural uranium in everyone's urine. It's difficult to accurately
identify
the depleted uranium as opposed to the natural uranium, in part because
the amounts of both are so small.
Once obtained, the uranium in a 24-hour urine sample is typically measured
in nanograms. A nanogram is one-billionth of a gram or one billion times
lighter than a dollar bill. If a total of 1 nanogram of natural and depleted
uranium are involved, the quantities of each are even lower. It takes
extremely sophisticated machines to help find and identify the microscopic
bits of depleted uranium.
The British and U.S. governments have been giving veterans and soldiers
urine tests for depleted uranium for years. But unless the soldiers had
relatively large quantities of uranium in their bodies, the tests couldn't
detect
depleted uranium apart from natural uranium without a high margin of error,
Parrish and other scientists say.
LIMITATIONS ON TESTS CREATE QUESTIONABLE RESULTS
U.S. military testing officials say that unless a sample has a relatively high
total uranium level, no attempt is made to determine how much uranium is
natural and how much is depleted uranium. The level is deemed safe, and
there's no need to tell the difference, they say.
As a result, U.S. and British veterans have been told for years that they
tested negative for depleted uranium, Parrish and others say. Instead, all
that had been demonstrated was that the methods used in testing were
incapable of detecting depleted uranium in such small quantities.
Painstakingly careful methods to collect the urine and separate the uranium
from the liquid and other chemicals in the sample are important, Parrish
says.
Axel Gerdes, a German scientist who worked with Parrish to develop the
tests, says a crucial difference involves the methods used to concentrate
the uranium in urine before it's analyzed.
He says the labs used by the U.S. Army dilute the urine with water, which
makes it easier to examine, and take other shortcuts that reduce the time
and manpower to do the tests. That comes at the cost of losing the ability
to detect small quantities with accuracy, he says, by a factor of about
1,000.
SUPERIOR SPECTROMETER USED BY BRITISH LABORATORIES
The British testing program also calls for using superior hardware to aid the
analysis, Gerdes and Parrish say.
Several machines are employed for that task, they say, including a
multicollector ICP mass spectrometer. A mass spectrometer is a machine
used to determine the contents of an unknown substance. A multicollector
ICP mass spectrometer is an even more sophisticated version that's
specially equipped to accurately measure minute quantities of radioactive
substances, including the various forms of an element known as isotopes.
The way that scientists tell the difference between natural uranium and
depleted uranium in a sample is by counting these isotopes, a process that
at times involves tiny amounts of an element.
Scientists using the procedures and hardware developed for the British test
are now able to reliably identify the difference between depleted uranium
and regular uranium in samples with as little as 0.1 nanogram of total
uranium per liter of urine, Parrish says. That's 10 billion times lighter
than a
dollar bill. All this is done with a margin of error of less than 1 percent,
making it a very accurate test.
Lt. Col. Melanson, who oversees much of the Pentagon's scientific research
into the health hazards of depleted uranium, says the most exacting lab
test used on U.S. veterans and active-duty military personnel must have at
least 3 nanograms of total uranium to examine per liter of urine. That's 30
times more than the minimum for the new British test.
The most sophisticated U.S. testing labs use a quadruple ICP mass
spectrometer, Melanson says. Parrish and other experts in using mass
spectrometry to identify materials say that's a much less capable machine
than the multicollector type that the British are using, a machine that's been
available for about 10 years.
Gerdes now works at a university in Germany and does testing there for
privately financed groups. He has an even more sensitive version of the
machine than the British labs do. He says it enables his lab to accurately
detect even smaller quantities of depleted uranium.
Earlier this year, nine soldiers from a New York-based National Guard unit
who had health problems after serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom had their
urine tested at Gerdes' lab at the University of Frankfurt.
Gerdes says the nine veterans had anywhere from 1.6 to 5.7 nanograms per
liter of uranium in their urine. Of those, five had little or no depleted
uranium
in their samples, while the others' samples contained 1.2 percent to 8.2
percent depleted uranium.
After publicity about the tests in the New York Daily News, those veterans
were tested by the labs used by the U.S. military, says Michael J.
Kilpatrick, deputy director for the Pentagon's office of health protection for
deployed troops. None had enough total uranium in their urine to be
concerned about, Kilpatrick says, and the U.S. labs didn't find any depleted
uranium. The cause of the soldiers' illnesses remain undiagnosed.
Gerdes says the use of total uranium as a guide to the level of depleted
uranium in someone's body is a mistake because there's often no
correlation between how much total uranium is in a sample and what
percentage of it was depleted uranium. That's an important point that the
U.S. military seems to overlook, he says. The U.S. military says the only
difference is that depleted uranium is less radioactive and therefore less
harmful.
After initial reports about the results from Gerdes' lab involving the New
York
veterans, several members of Congress questioned whether the U.S.
military should be looking at more rigorous testing. They directed the
questions to Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a
congressional hearing April 20.
They specifically asked about tests being developed in other countries, in
light of the different results involving the New York National Guard unit.
JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN SAID STAFF WOULD LOOK INTO TESTS
Myers told them he didn't know about the other countries' testing but that
he would look into the matter.
Coggon, head of the board that oversees the British testing, says he's not
aware of any effort from the United States to get information about the
processes or procedures developed there. Melanson, the U.S. military
official deemed the most knowledgeable about depleted uranium testing,
says he's not familiar with the British program and sees no need to inquire.
The tests available in the United States are good enough, he says, and are
capable of determining the presence of depleted uranium at levels nearly
1,000 times lower than the health safety standards established in the
United States.
When U.S. troops or veterans are tested, they're usually told that their
results didn't contain uranium outside the normal background levels of
uranium intake and therefore aren't considered a health risk.
That standard is set by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and is
based on a representative sample of 1,006 people given urine tests
collected and analyzed by another federal agency. But the NRC attaches a
warning to those standards, noting it's "unknown" whether the levels of
uranium in the survey "represent cause for health concern." It's merely a
level of uranium in urine for a cross section of the population 6 years and
older and says nothing of how healthy or unhealthy they are or will be, the
NRC says.
The NRC further cautions that "more research is needed" to determine what
the healthy level is.
In the draft of a 2002 report outlining the issues involved in using urine
testing for soldiers' exposure to depleted uranium, Melanson's own staff
pointed out those same limitations and warnings.
One thing everyone agrees on is that no one has been able to credibly
determine how much depleted uranium is in someone based on the level of
depleted uranium in their urine.
Research shows pretty clearly that when any uranium is swallowed, it
passes through the intestines and is excreted quickly. Particles created by
the use of depleted uranium weapons, when inhaled, stay in the body much
longer, Pentagon research shows.
The tiny bits of depleted uranium created when the weapons hit hard targets
tend to be what chemists call ceramic, which means they don't easily break
down in liquid. Various forms of uranium have a wide range of solubility,
Parrish says. The effect of the high heat from the explosions and other
factors make this particular kind of uranium a big unknown regarding how
much and how fast it breaks down in the body and enters the blood and
urine.
DUST IN LUNGS DOESN'T DISSOLVE QUICKLY, STUDY FINDS
The Army's recently completed five-year $6 million Capstone study of those
tiny pieces of depleted uranium concluded that there's "a significant source
of uncertainty" regarding how fast inhaled particles would dissolve in
simulated lung fluid. Still, the study concluded, there was no significant
health risk from inhaling particles of depleted uranium that result from
use of
the weapons in combat.
The Capstone study said the vast majority of the particles created from use
of the weapons and small enough to be inhaled took 100 days or more
before dissolving halfway in simulated lung fluid. Generalizations were not
easy, it said, but the smallest particles tended to be the least soluble. That
means that pieces more likely to get more deeply into the lungs last longer.
Anywhere from less than 1 percent to 35 percent of the inhalable-sized
pieces tested in Capstone dissolved halfway in 10 days or less, the study
found, while 58 percent to 99 percent took more than 100 days to dissolve
half their mass. Dissolution of half of the mass of a contaminant is the
government's standard measure of how long it might take to clear
something from the lungs after occupational exposures.
That data indicates that even the smallest particles could stay in the lungs
for several years, Melanson says, though he doubts that they would pose
any significant health risk.
So far, the British have tested only about 30 troops as part of making sure
that their procedures are accurate. None of those people had depleted
uranium in their samples.
Parrish says it's possible that by now, all the inhaled depleted uranium that
will ever dissolve in these soldiers' lungs has dissolved and the rest will
remain inside without a way to detect it. He also says it's possible that all
the uranium is dissolved.
That's one reason why the testing program is so important, he says - to find
out, instead of speculating.
U.S. government scientists still find evidence of depleted uranium in the
urine of troops with shrapnel wounds. But those larger particles tend to be
more soluble than the dust that's inhaled, the Capstone study says.
Some researchers say the relatively lower solubility of depleted uranium
dust could spell even more trouble for the veterans than thought. If those
little pieces in the lungs and nearby lymph nodes aren't dissolving quickly
and getting flushed out of the body through the blood and urinary tract, then
they're sitting next to live tissue and blood cells, emitting DNA-altering
alpha particles for years.
Under this theory, it would be extremely important to know how much of the
uranium in someone's body is natural uranium, as opposed to depleted
uranium, even if there are small quantities involved. That's because the level
of natural uranium in someone's body is mostly swallowed, and more than
90 percent of it is flushed from the body within a day or two through
excretory systems. The swallowed uranium therefore doesn't stay in one
place to irradiate tissue or blood for hundreds of days.
Richard J. Albertini, a cancer researcher at the University of Vermont, says
those pieces of radioactive dust in the lungs, as opposed to the digestive
system, are important for another reason.
LOCATION OF THE METAL MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE
Research indicates that inhaled depleted uranium can cause genetic
mutations in blood, he says. Those mutations signal what very well might
be the first step toward cancer. Because all of a person's blood passes
through the lungs to pick up oxygen to be distributed throughout the body,
large quantities of blood are subject to mutations from exposure to depleted
uranium. In contrast, he says, veterans with shrapnel in isolated parts of the
body aren't irradiating as much of their blood because their wounds are
rarely in places where most blood circulates.
Kilpatrick dismisses these arguments, in part because natural uranium is
even more radioactive than depleted uranium. He also dismisses a possible
link between inhaling depleted uranium and the neurological problems that
seem to form the bulk of complaints by Gulf War veterans.
None of the neurological problems associated with those vets has been
noted in the 50 years of research involving workers in the uranium industry,
he says. So if the quantities of either form of uranium are lower than the
Pentagon testing program shows, there shouldn't be a problem, he says.
The British Royal Society's final report on the hazards of depleted uranium
basically agreed with the Pentagon's views of the health risks. But it called
for better testing to help scientists get a better understanding of the
relationship between intake and risks, as well as help figure out what might
be ailing individual veterans.
Abou-Donia, the Duke University scientist who recently published a survey
of available research on depleted uranium, says data from better tests -
such as the ones being done in Britain - could prove very helpful.
"Absolutely. Any monitoring of this chemical would be helpful," he says.
Abou-Donia has been conducting experiments and other studies on various
possible causes of Gulf War veterans' illnesses for several years. One of the
biggest problems that scientists have in that field is a lack of fundamental
data, he says.
If thousands of veterans in the United States got the new tests, the lack of
data regarding depleted uranium might be eased, he says.
Scientists might be able to tell, for example, whether veterans who definitely
have depleted uranium inside them also have a type of brain abnormality
thought to be characteristic of the neurological symptoms among Gulf War
veterans, he says.
But until now, no one has had a test considered reliable enough to detect
small enough quantities to determine who was probably exposed and who
wasn't.
Scientists don't know what causes the brain abnormalities in those vets,
Abou-Donia says. But unlike other chemicals and causes under suspicion,
the depleted uranium in urine is measurable and might still be in the body.
The level of exposure to chemical weapons, bug spray and other suggested
causes of the veterans' illnesses isn't detectable at this late date because
those toxins are long gone from the body and no one kept accurate records
of doses and other information on the 1991 battlefield, Abou-Donia says.
Those toxins have done their damage and are gone. That's one reason that
finding the cause of the veterans' complaints has been so difficult.
ACTUAL BENEFITS OF NEW TESTS NOT DETERMINED YET
Gerdes, an environmental geochemist, says he questions whether there's a
link between depleted uranium exposure and the illnesses suffered by
veterans. But doing the science and the testing is an important step toward
understanding the problem. "There is simply a need to do further research in
this topic," he says.
Parrish says he's not sure what the testing is going to find. He notes that
though the British government agreed to finance use of the new tests for
veterans of the Persian Gulf War and peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and
Kosovo, veterans of the continuing war in Iraq are tested with the less
precise measurement.
A British Ministry of Defense spokesman says the new testing is
considered important for veterans of the other wars because of the long
period that's elapsed since the exposure and therefore the need to identify
what might be smaller quantities.
He says the military is satisfied with the less-exact testing for veterans of
the current fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, though some will be given the
more sophisticated tests as an expedience.
The new testing program for the British veterans is just starting.
Advertisements and notices directed at veterans started in late September,
and about 300 people have signed up so far, Coggon says. About 1,500 are
expected to sign up, says Charles Williams, a spokesman for the Ministry
of Defense.
Williams and Parrish say it will probably take six months to a year before
enough tests are concluded to get an accurate picture of how many vets
have been exposed and at what level.
Parrish says that as long as Britain and the United States refuse to let
outside independent laboratories handle the testing, there will be suspicions
that the truth about exposures and possible problems are being concealed.
The two labs in Britain performing the tests are considered independent.
He says he and other lab workers do the testing and analysis, but they
don't know whether they're working on "dummy" samples or actual veterans'
urine. That's one of the many levels of exactitude they've built into the
process to help ensure accuracy. Some dummy samples might be "spiked"
with known quantities of uranium and depleted uranium in another lab and
sent out with the vets' samples, but others are taken from people known to
have no depleted uranium in their urine. That keeps the labs on their toes,
Parrish says.
In the United States, the most precise testing that the Pentagon does is
handled at a national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention laboratory,
Melanson says.
When that federal agency does testing for the military, it won't release any
information about the tests conducted there and won't even answer
questions about the procedures, error rates or scientific standards for the
tests, says Kathy Harben of the disease control agency.
She referred all questions about the agency's testing for the military to the
Pentagon.
VETS SAY U.S. DOESN'T WANT TO PAY FOR BETTER TESTING
Steve Robinson, executive director of the Gulf War Resource Center Inc., a
veterans rights group, says he suspects there are two reasons that the
United States uses the less sophisticated testing method.
First, he says, is the cost.
Pentagon officials say their tests cost $200 to $400 a sample, depending
on whether there's enough total uranium in the urine sample for the
government to attempt to determine whether it contains depleted uranium.
Melanson initially refused to divulge the cost of this testing, saying it
wasn't
a factor in his decision-making.
Parrish says his test costs about $1,000 each.
Robinson and other veterans advocates say the second reason that the
U.S. government doesn't want to use the more sophisticated tests is they're
afraid the tests might help show possible links between the highly valued
depleted uranium weapons and veterans' health problems.
"These are very effective weapons, and they want to keep them," says
Steve Smithson, assistant director of the American Legion's Veterans
Affairs and Rehabilitation Division.
Kilpatrick says the critics are wrong.
He and Melanson say there's no need to identify the low levels of depleted
uranium that the British can find because the tests that the United States
uses can detect depleted uranium 1,000 times less than what's dangerous
to health.
They cite World Health Organization, or WHO, and U.S. Institute of
Medicine reports as authorities, based on 50 years of health research
involving uranium miners, millers and processors. The Institute of Medicine
is part of the National Science Foundation and is considered the country's
best impartial health research organization. Kilpatrick and Melanson also
cite the recently completed Capstone study. It involved measurements of
inhalable-sized particles of depleted uranium that resulted from test-range
firing of the weapons into a real tank, the hulls and turrets of tanks, and
other combat vehicles.
Kilpatrick and Melanson say the Capstone research got its title because
officials think that it provides the last pieces of data necessary to
determine
the health effects of depleted uranium.
Scientists who have been working outside the Pentagon to answer that
question say there are still some important pieces missing before drawing
such final conclusions.
Carolyn Fulco is one of the authors of the Institute of Medicine's reports on
Gulf War illnesses. She says it would not be accurate to say her
organization was as conclusive as the Pentagon officials when it comes to
how much depleted uranium can harm someone.
"There was almost no literature on depleted uranium," she says. Nearly all
of it was on uranium before it became depleted and in circumstances very
different from the possible exposure resulting from use of the weapons, she
says.
As a result, the institute recommended additional study into nearly all the
health questions raised by the use of depleted uranium in warfare. The
WHO report says the same.
Beate Ritz is an epidemiologist at the University of California, Los Angeles,
who specializes in how internal radiation sources cause cancer. She's also
the primary author of several of the most recent studies of the health effects
of working with uranium.
SCIENTISTS SAY SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE ISN'T REALLY KNOWN
When the Institute of Medicine needed an expert to review the report that
Melanson cited to support his view that the U.S. testing program is
adequate, it turned to her for approval. That's because she's one of the few
people in the world qualified to pass judgments of that type, Fulco says.
Ritz now sits on an advisory panel for the institute's continuing review of
possible causes of the illnesses suffered by Gulf War vets.
She says no one knows what the safe level of depleted uranium is inside
someone's body when it comes to cancer and risk from radiation.
The field is rife with errors and misclassifications because actual testing to
settle the matter with scientific assurance is almost impossible, she says.
"When you're looking at humans, you need large numbers of subjects," to
make sure that you have accurate results, she says. "But you can't cage
humans and feed them uranium and count the exposure for 20 years."
The next best thing is to pick an animal - and hope that you've picked the
right one, she says.
Even then, rats, mice and monkeys often have genetic and other differences
that can't tell you whether a human will react the same way, she says.
So to be sure, you have to try things out on humans. Or see what happens
to them after exposure.
Lots of them.
Kilpatrick, Melanson and others say 50 years of experience watching the
health and health problems of people who have worked as uranium miners,
millers and processors during the Nuclear Age give them the number of
people and the confidence to say that enough research has been done.
They point out that they add in a large margin of error to make sure they're
right.
They also dismiss the idea that depleted uranium exposures resulting from
combat can be a serious radiation or cancer risk.
Ritz and Alexandra Miller, a researcher at the Armed Forces
Radiobiological Research Institute, say that isn't a justified conclusion, as
far as science goes.
"I don't see the data that supports that at all," Miller says.
The studies on people who worked in the uranium industry are often flawed
and don't involve the same issues and exposures as soldiers on the
battlefield, Miller says. The Institute of Medicine's report says the same
thing, and so does the Department of Veterans Affairs' educational program
for physicians and other health care workers.
Using uranium industry workers' health experiences as a benchmark might
not be a good measure either, say critics of the military's dismissal of the
health threat from depleted uranium.
Several studies by Congress' Government Accountability Office, or GAO,
note that getting an accurate picture of nuclear workers' health is difficult.
That's in part because for years, the government encouraged its contractors
and managers to refuse to acknowledge work-related diseases and health
problems. This helped mask the true death and illness rate to researchers.
As for whether the health standards are adequate, there's also a great deal
of debate. The GAO says the government will probably need to spend more
than $1 billion this decade to compensate nuclear workers for health prob
lems - a higher cost than estimated because the number of workers with
legitimate claims keeps rising.
In addition, the GAO says, there's little or no scientific agreement on
what constitutes an acceptable radiation risk, even among U.S. government
agencies.
SCIENTIFIC MODELS NEED TESTING TO PROVE ACCURACY
Kilpatrick and Melanson say the Capstone study's data-gathering enabled
them to determine how much depleted uranium dust would be inhaled in the
worst of battle circumstances. They say the calculations on that volume of d
ust, using mathematical and other models of human health adopted by
government occupational and safety agencies, prove little or no adverse
health effect from use of the weapons.
Those calculations create a new standard for discussing the issue,
Kilpatrick says.
Ritz and Miller say the Capstone work doesn't change the fact that there
has been insufficient experimentation on animals to prove or disprove the
assertions of safety.
The calculations and models that the Pentagon points to are nothing more
than theory waiting to be tested, they and other scientists say.
"You know the problem with models, don't you?" Ritz asks. "You get out of
them what you put in."
The type of models that the Capstone study relies on for its conclusions
are frequently shown to be flawed, she says. That's much of what health
science is all about - testing the models and showing whether they work.
A recent example of how these models can be flawed occurred with the
chemical paraquat, Ritz says.
For decades, the U.S. government had been using it - and giving it to other
countries - to eradicate marijuana and other plants used to make drugs.
Critics questioned the wisdom of those programs, noting that the possible
effects of ingesting the drugs were not known.
Government officials dismissed the caution warnings.
For one thing, they noted that long-established scientific models said
paraquat couldn't cause brain damage because its chemical composition kept
it from penetrating through a layer of cells that protect the brain from im
purities in the blood.
The layer of cells is called the "blood-brain" barrier.
"All that was true," Ritz says. But just a few years ago, one of her
colleagues found that paraquat could get into the brain anyway.
Like other parts of the body, the brain needs amino acids to make proteins
to keep going.
The brain has special nerves to directly transfer those acids to the brain,
bypassing the brain-blood barrier. Paraquat is made of molecules that look
like amino acids.
So the brain sucks up the paraquat molecules, thinking that they're amino
acids, she says. "And it can cause brain damage when it happens."
That's one of many examples where the models aren't good enough.
And it's why sufficient research involving human cells and animals should
be done to test the models thoroughly before declaring something safe, she
and Miller say.
Vernon Walker, a cancer biologist at the Lovelace Respiratory Research
Institute in New Mexico, conducted a study that found that when rats
inhaled depleted uranium, they developed genetic mutations indicative of
cancer.
He says the government exposure standards and scientific models used to
determine workplace safety - the barometers of safety used in the Capstone
study - don't include the potential for developing cancer in the way that
his experiments showed is likely.
The military has drugs, developed in the World War II era for troops
exposed to radiation, that can reduce those mutations to safer levels, he says.
Experiments are being conducted to see whether they have the same effect on
depleted uranium inhaled from the battlefield, as well as from shrapnel.
He says that based on his experiments and what he's seen from other science
on the subject, he'd be taking those drugs if he were a soldier in Iraq and
was exposed - especially if he were hit by depleted uranium shrapnel.
"I'd be taking the pills for the rest of my life," Walker says.
Miller says her research has found that a single particle of depleted
uranium can deform cells and DNA, the basic building block of life, in ways
thought to lead to cancer.
Others have shown that uranium in the body and inhaled uranium can make its
way to the brain.
Those findings haven't solved the riddle of Gulf War vets' illnesses, but
they're far from comforting about how safe the black dust from the
explosions must be, Miller says.
Someone practicing good science shouldn't be closing the book on the
subject and declaring a particular level of exposure safe under those
under-researched circumstances, she says.
TOO FEW PEOPLE HAVE BEEN STUDIED TO KNOW THE TRUTH
Ritz says the same thing about the possibility that cancer risks might
increase after inhalation of depleted uranium.
"Our human research, as valuable as it is, has a lot of severe
limitations," she says.
At most, she says, it proves that we've been unable to detect anything, not
that there's no risk.
There might be 6,000 people involved in the studies that the government is
relying on, she says.
Perhaps that's enough to figure out whether something's toxic, she says,
but it's far from enough to determine whether it's carcinogenic.
For cancer, if you had a million people and followed them for 50 years, you
might be able to determine a safe level of exposure with confidence, she says.
But no study has ever attempted to follow uranium workers on that large a
scale, not to mention people exposed to depleted uranium, she says.
After the Pentagon tested the New York reservists and announced that the
soldiers tested negative for depleted uranium, a news briefing was called.
William Winkenwerder Jr., a physician who is assistant secretary of defense
for health affairs, told reporters that 10 years of health studies found
that "low levels of depleted uranium that our troops would be exposed to
are neither a radiological or chemical health threat to our service members."
He also said there was no evidence linking depleted uranium to
radiation-induced illnesses such as leukemia and cancers.
But Ritz says the failure to find a link to cancer at this point isn't
surprising at all.
It will take about 30 more years before soldiers from the Persian Gulf War
could reasonably be expected to start showing evidence of most cancers
spawned as recently as 1991, she says.
Lung cancer - which many researchers say is the most likely form that might
result from inhaling depleted uranium - would take a few years longer to
show up, she says.
Some forms of leukemia and lymphomas might have started showing up in the
past year or two, she says.
Those forms of cancer have also been identified as possible problems
because lymph nodes are vulnerable when particles are inhaled.
Even if an outbreak of leukemia and lymphomas has begun among veterans of
the Gulf War, it's unlikely that the data to prove it would have been
collected and that anyone would know about it, the GAO says.
No one is comparing a list of cancer deaths in the 50 states with the names
or Social Security numbers of veterans from the Gulf War, the GAO says.
And no one is likely to begin doing it anytime soon because the money has
not been made available, the agency says.
NO MONEY TO TRACK VETS' CANCER RATE ANYWAY
In the past 13 years, only two studies have been financed to determine
cancer incidence among Gulf War veterans, the GAO says, and both of them
had limited ability to study the problem.
The studies' access to data is being curtailed as a result of financial and
legal issues, the report says. Veterans in only a few states were included.
VA officials say they're studying ways to fill this gap in the data.
In the meantime, Ritz says, the best that we can do is guess what a safe
level of exposure to depleted uranium might be.
Depleted uranium isn't alone in this respect.
Of all known carcinogens, "none of those in the carcinogenic fields have
accepted a threshold level," where safe and unsafe can be identified with a
measurable number, Ritz says.
Threshold levels are set by government agencies, not scientists, Ritz says.
"These are all policy decisions about what is acceptable," not to be
confused with scientific proof, she says.
There are many critics of the military's approach to establishing safety
levels and standards, but there are also many scientists who agree with how
Kilpatrick, Melanson and others have handled the problem that they're fa
ced with.
Terry C. Pellmar - who works at the same lab as Miller - co-authored the
first research paper citing that depleted uranium from pellets embedded in
the bodies of rats might migrate to their brains.
Still, she says, she doubts that depleted uranium is responsible for the
neurological problems suffered by veterans of the Persian Gulf War. And she
doubts that the government is making a mistake in the policies it's esta
blished regarding the safety of depleted uranium on the battlefield.
"As a scientist, I'm not sure of anything" that could be deemed absolutely
safe, she says.
"As an individual, I would have no personal concerns."
Knowing the science as well as she does, she thinks that a soldier can
trust the Pentagon's assessment of the risks.
If she were a soldier on a battlefield, she says, she would feel safe, as
far as the danger from inhaling depleted uranium dust.
"We all live in a world that's filled with things that increase the chances
of getting cancer," Pellmar says.
Even if Miller's research shows that a single particle of inhaled depleted
uranium might increase the risk of cancer, that degree of increased risk is
accepted by people all the time in everyday life. There's an increased
risk of cancer if you spend time in smoky bars, she says. "Yet, we all
walk into smoky bars."
Similarly, she says, there's increased risk from living in Colorado, for
instance, because there's more uranium in the environment there naturally,
compared with most states.
Yet thousands of people have been moving to Colorado for years.
So given the battlefield advantages that depleted uranium gives soldiers,
she says, taking that little extra risk might be a good bet.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
stichting Laka Laka foundation
documentatie en onderzoeks- documentation and research
centrum kernenergie centre on nuclear energy
Ketelhuisplein 43 Ketelhuisplein 43
1054 RD Amsterdam NL-1054 RD Amsterdam
tel: 020-6168294 Netherlands
fax: 020-6892179 tel: +31-20-6168294
fax: +31-20-6892179
www.laka.org
laka@antenna.nl
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/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/
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************