*****************************************************************
10/14/04 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 12.246
*****************************************************************
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 Nuclear Material Goes Missing In Iraq from today's Oread Daily
2 [NYTr] "Confusion" over Iraq nuclear assets
3 [NYTr] Blix Says US Failed to Control Nuclear Sites
4 [NYTr] The Saga of the Weapons of Mass Destruction
5 Daily Collegian: Former CIA analyst says Iraq policies manipulated
6 US: The Blade: Soros: Bush lied about Iraq weapons
7 Xinhuanet: IAEA to probe disappearance of nuclear materials in Iraq
8 UK Independent: Another day, another apology of sorts -
9 Interfax: Russian nuclear agency chief meets with Iranian delegation
10 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: China Continues North Korea Diplomatic Ef
11 Interfax: Russia, China stand for non-nuclear status of Korean Penin
12 US: USATODAY.com: Pollution cleanups pit Pentagon against regulators
13 US: UPI: Report: Cargo nuke inspections flawed -
14 US: Las Vegas Mercury: Enough is enough
15 US: AxisofLogic: Media Critiques
16 US: NRC: NRC to Hold Public Meeting on Proposed Rule on Requirements
17 Nuke Weapons Appeal Signed by 18 Nobels, 205 Organisations
18 The Heral: Scottish firms urged to make sparks in Chinas
19 DAWN: 'Khan network supplied N-parts made in Europe, Southeast Asia'
NUCLEAR REACTORS
20 Interfax: Russia-Iran nuclear energy cooperation doesn't involve mil
21 US: Tennessean: Environmentalists irked over firm making reactor fue
22 US: Platts: Domenici: Senate funding for nuclear exceeds House level
23 US: Times Argus: Federal regulators to hold hearing on Yankee power
24 US: Boston.com: NRC investigating report of operator napping
25 Iraqi govt: nuke sites now fully protected
26 US: NRC: NRC Begins Special Inspection at Hope Creek Nuclear Power P
27 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collecti
NUCLEAR SAFETY
28 US: Challis Messenger: Snake River Alliance meets with locals
29 Interfax: Russian soldiers to observe nuclear safety training in Eng
30 US: Times-Picayune: N.O. contractor unfazed by vote
31 US: NRC: NRC Proposes $3,000 Fine Against Integrated Production Serv
32 US: Boston.com: Report challenges US port security
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
33 News agency: Kyrgyzstan Blocks Nuclear Shipments
34 Findlaw: The Yucca Mountain Radioactive Waste Site Controversy -
35 US: deseret news: Nuclear waste transit safe?
36 US: Salt Lake Tribune: West states in dark on moving N-waste
37 US: Charleston.Net: Opinion: Editorials Progress on nuclear waste si
38 US: AU ABC: Uranium levels in NT water 'safe'.
39 KRNV: Attorney General says Yucca meeting was illegal
40 UK: News & Star: PLUTONIUM IN SHELLFISH ROW
41 US: NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste to Meet Oct. 19-21
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
42 Daily Camera: Tests on Flats deer show little radiation
OTHER NUCLEAR
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 Nuclear Material Goes Missing In Iraq from today's Oread Daily
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:20:56 -0500 (CDT)
Nuclear Material Goes Missing In Iraq - Oread Daily
Well, the invasion that was to make the world "safer" has been proven once
more to have made the world more dangerous instead. It now seems that the
removal of nuclear materials from Iraq's mothballed nuclear facilities
continued long after the U.S.-led invasion and was carried out by people with
access to heavy machinery and demolition equipment. The International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) told the Security Council this week that equipment and
materials that could be used to make atomic weapons had been vanishing from
Iraq without either Baghdad or Washington noticing. "This process carried on
at least through 2003 ... and probably into 2004, at least in early 2004,"
said a Western diplomat close to the (IAEA), which monitored Iraq's nuclear
sites before last year's war. Several diplomats close to the IAEA said the
disappearance of the nuclear items was not the result of haphazard looting.
They said the removal of the dual-use equipment -- which before the war was
tagged and closely monitored by the IAEA to ensure it was not being used in a
weapons program -- was planned and executed by people who knew what they were
doing. "We're talking about dozens of sites being dismantled," a diplomat said
on condition of anonymity. "Large numbers of buildings taken down, warehouses
were emptied and removed. This would require heavy machinery, demolition
equipment. This is not something that you'd do overnight."
Diplomats in Vienna say the IAEA is worried that these facilities, which
belonged to Saddam's pre-1991 covert nuclear weapons program, could have been
packed up and sold to a country or militants interested in nuclear weapons.
The diplomats said that among the sites that had been stripped were a
precision manufacturing site at Umm Al Marik, a site connected with Iraq's
nuclear weapons activities at Al Qa Qaa and an engineering facility at Badr.
One diplomat said there were "dozens of others" that gradually disappeared
from satellite photos analyzed by IAEA experts at its headquarters in Vienna.
Independent expert Alex Standish, editor of Jane's Intelligence Digest, said
Iraqi nuclear and weapons-related material that was monitored by the U.N.
before the invasion had since been found in Europe. Raw "yellowcake" uranium,
apparently from Iraq, was found in Rotterdam last December, he said. "It seems
extremely negligent for the authorities in Iraq to allow this quantity of
material to have been exported from the country," Standish said.
In a letter to the Security Council on Monday, the head of the International
Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, said satellite photos and follow-up
investigations show "widespread and apparently systematic dismantlement" at
sites related to Iraq's nuclear program which had been subject to monitoring
by the United Nations nuclear watchdog. While some industrial material Iraq
has sent overseas has been located in other countries, Dr ElBaradei said no
high-precision items - including milling machines and electron beam welders
that can be used commercially and in nuclear weapons - have been found.
An IAEA spokeswoman, Melissa Fleming, said the agency's assumption is this was
looting by people trying "to make a buck" and sell equipment and material to
the highest bidder.
Following the revelations, the former UN chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix,
said the US had failed to control suspected nuclear sites in Iraq after last
year's invasion, allowing crucial equipment to disappear. Dr Blix said it was
scandalous for the US to lose control of the situation after the end of the
war. Dr Blix's comments were echoed by the former senior American weapons
inspector, David Kay. He said it was inexcusable that the US had insufficient
troops on the ground to prevent widespread looting after the first phase of
military operations ended.
Anne Patterson, the US's deputy ambassador to the UN, said the US mission had
not yet received Dr ElBaradei's letter. "We're anxious to see what he has to
say and we'll do a full investigation," she said, adding quickly: "I mean,
we'll work with the government of Iraq on a full investigation."
During the period of UN inspections, the IAEA kept tabs on these nuclear
facilities, but, in the wake of the U.S. invasion, it was not allowed any on
the ground inspections and consequently has little or no idea where the
nuclear materials have actually gone.
Now, the UN weapons inspectors are preparing to return to Iraq to investigate
the disappearnces. "We are ready, subject to Security Council guidance and the
prevailing security situation, to resume our Security Council mandated
verification activities in Iraq," IAEA spokesman Mark Gwozdecky said.
The IAEA is also concerned about the health of Iraqi citizens living anywhere
near the atomic facilities. In that regard, Greenpeace charged that the
response of both the U.S. occupation authorities and the new interim Iraqi
government to the problem of looting and possible radiation exposure has been
inadequate. "Nothing has been done to date," the group said about providing
medical help to the surrounding communities. Greenpeace says, "When US troops
rolled into Baghdad, they ensured that the oil ministry was immediately under
guard. In the south, oil pipelines and wells were surrounded with armored
vehicles. Yet in Tuwaitha, where Saddam Hussein's nuclear research was
conducted, a site previously sealed by the UN International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) and containing nuclear equipment and materials had not a single
soldier outside its door. Local residents took what they could, including
barrels to use for cooking and water storage that they simply emptied of their
uranium yellowcake contents." Greenpeace's mission to Tuwaitha 16 months ago
was among the first by an independent organization investigating Iraq's
nuclear infrastructure. The mission actually collected radioactive materials
that had been looted from the site and returned them to the nuclear facility
there. In addition to the obvious absence of certain kinds of equipment,
Greenpeace found the site unguarded by U.S. soldiers or local security forces
and that local residents had taken much of the materials, including barrels
containing uranium yellowcake to use for cooking and water storage in their
homes. Among other things, the Greenpeace mission took measurements in
people's homes, finding in one case radiation levels 10,000 times greater than
the surrounding area. It also secured the contaminated barrels by exchanging
them with new ones it brought to the area.
And that ain't all folks.
The UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission - responsible for
overseeing the elimination of any banned Iraqi missile, chemical and
biological weapons programs - said Iraqi authorities have shipped thousands of
tons of scrap metal out of the country during the past year. A commission
report said the export was handled by the Iraqi Ministry of Trade, which was
under the direct supervision of US occupation authorities until June 28, when
the Americans handed power to Iraq's interim government. It said that the
shipments included at least 42 engines from banned missiles and other
equipment that could be used to produce banned weapons.
This all should be seen as a Bush Administration scandal of unprecedented
proportions. It should be on the front page of every US newspaper and the
lead story on all the TV news shows.
Why isn't it? Sources: Xinhua, RTE News, Sydney Morning Herald, Reuters,
Anti-War.com, Greenpeace International
To view the Oread Daily go to
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OreadDaily/
Subscribe to the Oread Daily at OreadDailysubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Contact the Oread Daily at dgscooldesign@yahoo.com
*****************************************************************
2 [NYTr] "Confusion" over Iraq nuclear assets
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 08:03:03 -0500 (CDT)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
sent by Simon McGuinness (cubanews)
BBC - Oct 12, 2004
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/3736158.stm
Confusion over Iraq nuclear assets
By David Bamford
BBC security correspondent
The statement by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the UN's nuclear monitoring
agency, on the disappearance of nuclear equipment and materials in Iraq,
may give rise to some confusion.
The IAEA director-general said entire buildings related to Iraq's former
nuclear programme appeared to have been dismantled, and that the agency
had lost track of high-precision equipment thought to have been inside
the buildings.
News headlines have been full for months of acknowledgements in the US
and elsewhere that Iraq had long ago abandoned plans to build nuclear
weapons.
Yet now the IAEA is talking of equipment known to have been in Iraq as
recently as last year that had potential nuclear use.
Back in the 1970s and 80s, Iraq did have a civilian nuclear programme,
being developed under close supervision by the IAEA.
It suffered a major setback in 1981 when the Israelis attacked and
destroyed Iraq's French-built Osirak nuclear reactor.
Since then, atomic energy inspectors have visited Iraq but they were
forced to leave last year because of the Iraq war.
Answers needed
The Americans have still not allowed them back for further inspections,
and this seems to be a key factor lying behind Mr ElBaradei's statement
now.
He says the agency knows in which buildings this sensitive equipment was
stored when it left Iraq.
Now satellite photos suggest the entire buildings have been dismantled.
The Iraqi interim Minister of Science and Technology, Rashad Omar, told
the BBC that the buildings concerned were comprehensively looted during
the days following the American-led capture of Baghdad last year and
before the coalition troops could secure the facilities.
He said the US did take control - with the approval of the IAEA - of
quantities of low-grade uranium.
Since the transfer of sovereignty, the Iraqi government has assumed
responsibility for the sites.
An IAEA spokesman, Mark Gwozdecky, said that the Agency has been
monitoring foreign ports to try to track the flow of nuclear-related and
'dual-usage' items out of Iraq.
He said there has been a steady flow of mildly radioactive scrap items,
including missile engines, turning up in locations including Jordan and
the Netherlands.
The IAEA says it cannot do its job of guarding the world against secret
nuclear proliferation if it is prevented from keeping track of such
equipment.
The Americans may well know what has happened to it - or they may not.
Mr ElBaradei does not know because he has been kept out of the
information loop - and he wants some answers.
(c) BBC MMIV
*
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
=================================================================
*****************************************************************
3 [NYTr] Blix Says US Failed to Control Nuclear Sites
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 08:03:53 -0500 (CDT)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
sent by Simon McGuinness (cubanews)
[Note the use of the world "claims" -- it's not TRUE, it's not something
Blix SAID, it's just a "claim" -- which carries with it the implication that
it's just not so. Shame on RTE. --NY Transfer]
RTE NEWS (Ireland) - Oct 13, 2004
http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/1013/iraq
Blix claims US failed to control nuclear sites
The former UN chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, has said the US failed
to control suspected nuclear sites in Iraq after last year's invasion,
allowing crucial equipment to disappear.
His comments came after the International Atomic Energy Agency expressed
concern at the loss.
Dr Blix said it was scandalous for the US to lose control of the
situation after the end of the war.
Dr Blix's comments were echoed by the former senior American weapons
inspector, David Kay.
He said it was inexcusable that the US had insufficient troops on the
ground to prevent widespread looting after the first phase of military
operations ended.
However, the US State Department spokesman, Richard Boucher, said the
IAEA had two opportunities since to inspect facilities and make sure
that materials were properly accounted for.
Mr Boucher said the US did not have detailed knowledge of what might
have disappeared.
*
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
=================================================================
*****************************************************************
4 [NYTr] The Saga of the Weapons of Mass Destruction
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 08:04:38 -0500 (CDT)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
ent by Cort Greene
In Defence of Marxism - Oct 11, 2004
http://www.marxist.com
The Saga of the Weapons of Mass Destruction
And when they got there the cupboard was bare
By Maarten Vanheuverswyn
Wait until Charlie gets back with the final report, George Bush said
confidently in June in reply to reporters fishing after a confession of the
president that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Last week,
on October 6, Charles Duelfer, chief US weapons inspector, finally presented
his report on the question. The outcome of the report comes as no surprise
but nevertheless caused a stir, not least in the ruling circles in the
United States and Britain. Despite some small reservations, the report is
indeed no less than a devastating blow to Bush and Blair.
The boomerang effect
When the US and British troops invaded, Saddam had no chemical weapons, let
alone nuclear or biological weapons. That is very roughly speaking the
synopsis of the 1,000-page report the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) came up with.
The ISG, ironically, had been set up by George Bush himself to prove the
existence of the much-feared weapons of mass destruction threatening the
whole of humanity. Twelve hundred inspectors scoured Iraq for more than one
year after the start of the war. The results, however, backfire on the
president as they prove exactly the opposite. What everybody already knew is
now official: Iraq had no nuclear weapons program and neither did it have
the technological capacity to build an arsenal. It took an army of hundreds
of UN weapons inspectors and a splendid little war to establish this
truth. Saddam had no weapons factories or top-secret chemical laboratories.
So what was all the fuss about then?
First we were told that Iraq was able to produce biological agents like
anthrax and that Saddam had existing and active military hardware for the
use of chemical and biological weapons which could be activated within 45
minutes. After the first cracks in the wall appeared, Blair was forced to
express his first reservations about his earlier bold claims. I have to
accept we havent found them [WMD] and we may never find them. We dont know
what has happened to them. They could have been removed. They could have
been hidden. They could have been destroyed. (6 July 2004) After that we
had the sad spectacle of the British prime minister having to make a mild
confession: I have to accept, as the months have passed, it seems
increasingly clear that at the time of the invasion, Saddam did not have
stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons ready to deploy. (14 July
2004) And now there is an official report demolishing their assertions.
Confronted with this unfortunate outcome, Bush and Blair are in a tight
corner now. But no worries, Bush and Blair seem to think. No matter the
report, there is still enough justification for a war that drags on
relentlessly. In an astonishing frank declaration, Bush told the press that
he would have gone to war anyway as even without the WMD there was a clear
case for war. Saddam may not have had any stockpiles, but he still had a
weapons programme and thus was a threat to world peace. Also Blair, though
carefully weighing his words, refused to apologise for his pack of lies. I
can apologise for the information that turned out to be wrong, but I cant,
sincerely at least, apologise for removing Saddam. One can only scratch
ones head in bewilderment. Thousands of innocent Iraqis have died in a
brutal and illegal war, two leaders of two big nations have blatantly lied
about the motives for the war, and the only thing they can come up with is
that the world is a safer place now and that it was a matter of time
before he was going to begin pursuing those weapons of mass destruction.
The comment that Saddam was capable of developing chemical weapons is
irrelevant anyway, as every industrialised country in the world can come up
with this weaponry provided sufficient investments in this area and the
biggest countries of course already have plenty of these weapons themselves!
A not so pleasant lesson in history
Of course, Saddam in the past did have a good amount of weapons of mass
destruction. So much is sure. But we also know who provided them. It is an
open secret that he got those weapons from his then American friends in the
White House. Chemical weapons were particularly useful in the 1980-88 war
between Iran and Iraq.
The eighties were the years in which US imperialism more and more started to
interfere in the Middle East. In 1980 president Jimmy Carter announced the
Carter doctrine. In response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan that
had just taken place, he stated: An attempt by an outside force to gain
control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the
vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be
repelled by any means necessary, including military force. This actually
meant that the US would intervene in the Persian Gulf region to secure its
oil resources. What followed was a cynical game of divide and rule.
Fearing the revolutionary consequences of the 1979 Iranian revolution, the
United States urged Saddam to attack Iran. The dictator was no more than a
US agent at the time, challenging the Islamic fundamentalist regime that had
overthrown the Shah, the major US ally in the region. A positive side effect
was that the US had access to the Iraqi market now and could make a nice
profit. That Saddam used these weapons against his own people and to
suppress the Kurds did not interest them at all.
The whole commotion about weapons of mass destruction is no more than a coup
de thibtre and has always reeked of hypocrisy. In the 1980s, Iraq was
dropped from the list of countries supporting terrorism. The Americans
stepped up diplomatic relations with the country, even after the proven use
of chemical weapons against Iranian troops. None other than Donald Rumsfeld,
the present Defence Secretary, was sent as a special envoy to Iraq in
1983-84 and shook the hand of Saddam. Through the CIA they gave significant
financial and logistic support to the Iraqi regime.
As a result of the support of Western imperialism and some Arabic states,
Iraq was winning the war in 1988. The victory, however, was a Pyrrhic
victory. Both countries were exhausted after eight years of war. The
imperialists had skilfully managed to play off Iran and Iraq against each
other, once supporting Iraq, then propping up Iran, as this was the best way
to serve their own interests. No wonder Saddam felt betrayed because his
American allies did not want to go too far in their support. We know how the
story ends. Just as Osama bin Laden turned his back on his former American
allies, Saddam also was the proverbial dog that turned around and bit his
master. It is only since then that he became a persona non grata and that
the hue and cry over his weapons of mass destruction started.
Weapons of mass deception
The whole WMD saga has a logic of its own it is the story about the master
and his rebellious slave. You dont obey me anymore? Then Ill punish you!
Although in the beginning of the 1990s Saddam accepted a very strict regime
issued by the United Nations and in effect dismantled his chemical weapons
facilities, the powers-that-be decided this abandonment would never be
enough. That is why for more than a decade, US imperialism has always been
harping on the same subject: the weapons of mass destruction. This
hypocritical policy of double standards started with George W. Bushs
father. However, let us not forget that the Clinton administration has also
been singing the same tune for eight years. It was under the Clinton
government that Iraq was paralysed by a vicious economic blockade that
resulted in anything between half a million and a million dead. Both the
Republicans and Democrats were involved in this crime up to their ears.
US imperialism and British imperialism should not even try to teach moral
lessons. It simply does not make sense, and they know it. History knows
enough examples of the crimes they have committed in the name of peace and
democracy. However, since any stick will do to beat a dog, the so-called
weapons of mass destruction are a convenient tool serving as an excuse for
something they would have done anyway (a fact which, ironically, they now
are forced to admit). What is more effective than to talk in the void about
these horrible weapons the United States have no lack of themselves? The
public has to be scared so that the leaders can do what they want, even
initiating a pre-emptive war against a country that had already been
brought to its knees through the scandalous UN sanctions.
If the truth is to be said, weapons of mass destruction never really were a
concern. They were merely used to create a smoke-screen with which to fool
the worlds public opinion. How else to explain that Bush and Blair have
not invaded North Korea? This country most certainly possesses weapons of
mass destruction in fact, quite a nuclear armoury. One wonders where the
consistency is as far as the benign interventionism of these moral
crusaders is concerned. Of course, political, economic and geostrategic
interests determine the agenda of the world powers. We have explained many
times that the war in Iraq was not merely a manoeuvre to get hold of the
oil, but was also motivated by the broader desire of US imperialism to get a
strategic advantage over its European and Asian competitors. Where theres
muck theres brass, as the British say. Muck and money go together, or as
Lenin was fond of saying: war is terrible, yes! Terribly profitable. Bush
and Blair most certainly never had a genuine concern about Iraq possessing
weapons of mass destruction. In fact, they would never have gone to war if
they had feared Saddam could launch some nuclear missiles on their troops.
They just calculated that Iraq was effectively powerless to defend itself.
In other words, the loot was there, they only had to grab it.
Problems not resolved
Yes, some people will say, that is all well and good, but the fact is that
the world has been freed from a ruthless dictator. That is true, but it
misses the point. The question we have to ask ourselves is: is Iraq a safer
place now? Are the Iraqis better off now than when Saddam was in power? Let
the facts speak for themselves: more than one year after the official end of
the war, there is no peace and prosperity at all. On the contrary, the
country is in total chaos and disarray. Even American Secretary of Defence
Donald Rumsfeld has been forced to admit the war is far from over. Ordinary
Iraqis are afraid to go out on the streets and have long ceased to see this
dirty war as a liberation. There is not much point in being happy to see
Saddam Hussein removed, only to then see that your country is being occupied
by several foreign powers that show no intent of leaving.
Similarly, the claim that the war in Iraq is part of a fight against
international terrorism is also sounding more and more hollow. Everybody
with eyes to see is able to notice that the terrorism in Iraq has not
decreased but increased. The link between Al Qaeda and Saddam has always
been a flawed one, but it is very clear that Al Qaeda does have a base in
Iraq now. It was peanuts for them to slip into the country after the havoc
created by US and British imperialism. Since then, one suicide attack after
another has paralysed the country. And Rumsfeld? The poor man himself is now
casting doubt on whether there was ever a relationship between Saddam and Al
Qaeda. To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that
links the two, he said, though a few hours later he stated he was
regrettably misunderstood. This somersault was Rumsfelds second in as
many days. Last week he also admitted U.S. intelligence on Iraqs
non-existent weapons of mass destruction was faulty. The man seems to have
lost his bearings.
Credibility is also a quality that could come in handy for Bush and Blair.
But what can Mr. Blair and Mr. Bush do? They are trapped in a vicious
quagmire in Iraq, they can no longer seriously maintain their lies so in
effect they are desperately clutching at straws. If it were not so tragic,
it would be comical to see how these two world leaders try to justify their
actions. Apparently, even from their point of view the war is not going
according to plan. The war is costing billions of dollars instead of being
profitable. A once flourishing culture is now trapped in a vicious spiral of
violence and Iraq may be on the brink of civil war. This cannot be separated
from the interference of the imperialist forces that see Iraq as a colony.
The arrogant intervention has solved nothing and only heralds a new period
of bloodshed, misery and instability. And the masses, as usual, are the
losers in this game.
October 11, 2004
*
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
=================================================================
*****************************************************************
5 Daily Collegian: Former CIA analyst says Iraq policies manipulated
[http://www.collegian.psu.edu/]
[ Thursday, Oct. 14, 2004 ]
Former CIA analyst says Iraq policies manipulated
By Kayur Patel
[kayur@psu.edu] Collegian Staff Writer
Ray McGovern, a former intelligence analyst, has seen the CIA
from the inside.
Last night, in a speech in front of more than 200, McGovern
shared how presidential administrations "cooked intelligence" to
fit their agendas.
He reflected on his own experience as a CIA analyst of 27 years,
including during the Vietnam era and related it to the current
situation in Iraq.
McGovern spoke of the way President George W. Bush's
administration handled Iraq.
"The decision to attack Iraq was made January 30, 2001," McGovern
said. "In a meeting with national security officials, Bush's
message wasn't about if or whether we should get Saddam, it was
when and where."
McGovern said the only thing left for Bush to do before attacking
Iraq was to convince Congress to go to war. He said Bush
convinced Congress with a forged document saying Iraq was seeking
uranium in Africa.
McGovern also discussed the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. He
said U.S. Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki needed 400,000
troops, but only received a fraction of that.
"If these guys get four more years, you'll see 500,000 troops in
Iraq," McGovern said. "We're not going to get 500,000 troops
without a draft."
McGovern mentioned the death toll in Iraq. While about 1,000
American soldiers have died, McGovern said the most conservative
Iraqi civilian death toll was 13,000, according to
www.iraqbodycount.net -- which he said uses two reliable sources
-- and a more accurate guess would be 37,000, from officials
inside Iraq.
"I'm heartbroken that kids [college students'] age, my age, went
to join the Army and now they're flags on a mantelpiece for no
reason," Brian Morrison (senior-film and video production) said
following McGovern's speech. [PHOTO: Randall Mortzfield] PHOTO:
Randall Mortzfield Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern speaks in 112
Chambers. Last night's crowd was so large that a closed-circuit
television was set up in another room in the building.
McGovern said the reason the Iraqi death toll is unknown is
because the media is not covering it.
"There's no free press anymore," McGovern said. "Talk about
fascism, when corporations and the government get together and
have control over the press, you get pretty damn close."
He began his speech with the original role of the CIA. He
explained that the non-partisan agency held one agent accountable
for gathering intelligence on a specific subject.
"It was an agency without an agenda," McGovern said. "We could
tell it like it is. We got to the truth as close as possible."
He continued by speaking about former President Lyndon B. Johnson
waging war in Vietnam. McGovern said one of his fellow agents,
Sam Adams, researched Vietnam's army size and uncovered about
500,000 fighting against the U.S. Army.
McGovern said the Army, in a secret memo, told Adams the press
would have a field day with those numbers. However, Army generals
told Adams to report the number of people in the Vietnamese army
at about 200,000.
McGovern said both he and Adams deeply regretted not giving that
memo to the press because many lives, both American and
Vietnamese, could have been saved.
Despite battling a cold, McGovern talked for more than two hours,
and fielded many questions from the audience.
"He gave a lot of insight that the average citizen does not know
and should know," Kristen Cortez (junior-biobehavioral science)
said. "I understand how you could see his talk to be politically
fueled, but he's getting out the truth."
Collegian Inc. Updated: 2004-10-14 0:49:47 -4
*****************************************************************
6 The Blade: Soros: Bush lied about Iraq weapons
toledoblade.com
Thursday, October 14, 2004
Frist blisters Kerry, Edwards for opposing medical liability
reform
BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU
COLUMBUS - Billionaire George Soros said yesterday that President
Bush and his two top advisers "deliberately deceived" the
American public, Congress, and the United Nations when they said
Iraq had imported material to make nuclear weapons.
"President Bush, Vice President [Dick] Cheney, and [National
Security Adviser] Condoleeza Rice knew that Saddam had no nuclear
capacity long before they invaded Iraq," Mr. Soros said in a
speech to about 350 people in the Columbus convention center.
Mr. Soros, a financier, philanthropist, and an author on society
and economics, cited an Oct. 3 story by The New York Times. The
newspaper reported that the White House claim that thousands of
aluminum tubes were intended for use in centrifuges for enriching
uranium was made despite warnings from the Energy Department and
the State Department that the tubes were too small for that use.
Dave Beckwith, a spokesman for Mr. Bush's re-election campaign,
referred to Mr. Soros' charges as "partisan and ludicrous."
"The Bush administration acted on the best available
intelligence. Their first motivation was protecting the American
public," he said.
A mile away from where Mr. Soros spoke, Senate Majority Leader
Bill Frist said Democratic Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards have
"opposed every initiative for reasonable and common-sense medical
liability reform."
"Look at their record, not what they say," said Mr. Frist, a
Tennessee Republican who met with area physicians. "They
basically talk. While John Edwards is talking, he's been out
suing doctors for a long period of time, which drives up the cost
and decreases the availability of liability [insurance]."
Brendon Cull, a spokesman for the Democratic coordinated campaign
in Ohio, said: "Less than 1 percent of the cost of health care is
from malpractice lawsuits. Ohio voters know the real expense is
coming from high drug costs and profits to insurance companies.
"The Bush-Cheney campaign is out of touch if they are telling
114,000 Ohioans who lost their health care in the last three
years that the real problem is medical malpractice," Mr. Cull
said.
Mr. Soros' speech and Mr. Frist's comments on medical malpractice
insurance in Columbus were another sign of how the presidential
race is focusing on swing states, including Ohio. He is on a
12-city tour to promote the paperback edition of his latest book
and build support for Mr. Kerry. Mr. Soros said the United States
faces a "vicious circle of escalating violence with no end in
sight" because of Mr. Bush's doctrine of pre-emptive strikes
against nations that harbor terrorists, used to justify the
invasion of Iraq.
"When he said that 'either you are with us, or you are with the
terrorists,' I heard alarm bells ringing," he said. "I am afraid
that he is leading us in a very dangerous direction. We are
losing the values that have made America great."
The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660
, (419) 724-6000
*****************************************************************
7 Xinhuanet: IAEA to probe disappearance of nuclear materials in Iraq
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2004-10-14 11:11:45
VIENNA, Oct. 13 (Xinhuanet) -- The International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) will send inspectors back to Iraq to probe
the disappearance of nuclear materials and equipment in the
country, aspokesman for the UN nuclear watchdog said Wednesday.
"We are ready, subject to Security Council guidance and the
prevailing security situation, to resume our Security Council
mandated verification activities in Iraq," IAEA spokesman Mark
Gwozdecky said.
His words came in response to an IAEA report submitted
Monday to the UN Security Council, in which its head Mohamed
ElBaradei said satellite images show equipment and materials
that could be used to make nuclear weapons have vanished from
Iraq.
Entire buildings once monitored and tagged by the agency
have been dismantled, and equipment and materials in open
storage areashave been removed, ElBaradei said, calling on
countries to provideinformation concerning their whereabouts
The chief inspector said that through visits to other
countries,the IAEA had been able to identify quantities of
industrial items,some radioactively contaminated, that had been
transferred out of Iraq from sites monitored by the agency.
"However, none of the high-quality dual-use equipment or
materials referred to above has been found," he added. The
equipment's disappearance could be "of proliferation
significance".
But Iraqi Science and Technology Minister Rashad Mandan Omar
said Wednesday that his country's nuclear facilities are under
full protection of the interim government. He invited the IAEA
to visit the sites at any time.
While noting that nothing had gone missing after the US-led
warin March 2003, Omar pointed out that several buildings at
Tuwaitha,a large compound for nuclear facilities in the south of
Baghdad, had been renovated to turn the area into a science
park.
Other officials of the ministry said the IAEA came back two
months ago to inspect some facilities and seal some equipment.
Theequipment has been transferred by the Iraqi government to
other heavily-guarded places.
Since 1991, the IAEA has been required by UN Security
Council resolutions to submit progress reports every six months
on its inspections of Iraq's nuclear weapons program. However,
the agencypulled out of the country on the eve of the war last
year, and since then has been concentrating on analyzing
information collected before. Enditem
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
8 UK Independent: Another day, another apology of sorts -
but still Blair fails to answer critics over the war and the
misuse of false intelligence
14 October 2004
14 July
"I have to accept, as the months have passed, it seems
increasingly clear that at the time of invasion, Saddam did not
have stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons ready to deploy
... I accept full personal responsibility for the way in which
the issue was presented."
Tony Blair, House of Commons statement on the Butler report
26 September
"I have been very happy to take full responsibility for
information that turned out to be wrong ... It's absolutely right
that we've apologised to people for the information that was
given being wrong."
Tony Blair, interview in "The Observer"
28 September
"The evidence about Saddam having actual biological and chemical
weapons, as opposed to the capability to develop them, has turned
out to be wrong. I acknowledge that and accept it. I can
apologise for the information that turned out to be wrong, but I
can't, sincerely at least, apologise for removing Saddam."
Tony Blair, Labour Party conference
7 October
"All of us, from the Prime Minister down, who were involved in
making an incredibly difficult decision, are very sorry and do
apologise for the fact that that information was wrong, but I
don't think we were wrong to go in."
Patricia Hewitt, Trade and Industry Secretary, BBC1's "Question
Time"
12 October
"As the Prime Minister did in his speech at our party conference,
of course I do accept that some of the information on which we
based our judgement was wrong."
Jack Straw, Foreign Secretary, House of Commons
12 October
"People have respect for someone who stands up in the Commons and
takes responsibility for his mistakes. He is clear about what he
is expressing regret for; the Prime Minister regrets mistakes in
intelligence, but that doesn't undermine the key point about the
reason for going to war."
Prime Minister's official spokesman
Yesterday, 13th October
"He [Mr Blair] has made it absolutely clear that he is sorry
about the sorts of issue - the information issue, the 45-minute
issue - he is very sorry about that. That's absolutely clear,
that is what the position is. We know the intelligence on which
it was based is flawed and we are sorry about that."
Lord Falconer, Lord Chancellor, BBC Radio 4's "Today" programme
Yesterday, 13th October
"I take full responsibility, and indeed apologise, for any
information given in good faith that has subsequently turned out
to be wrong."
Tony Blair, Prime Minister's Questions,
House of Commons
UK Independent Ltd.
*****************************************************************
9 Interfax: Russian nuclear agency chief meets with Iranian delegation
[http://www.interfax.com]
Oct 14 2004 2:57PM
MOSCOW. Oct 14 (Interfax) - Chief of the Russian Federal Nuclear
Energy Agency (Rosatom) Alexander Rumyantsev met with a
delegation of Iranian parliamentarians in Moscow on Thursday, a
Rosatom spokesman told Interfax.
Iranian Ambassador to Russia Gholamreza Shafei also attended the
meeting.
"The sides discussed aspects of cooperation between the two
countries in employing nuclear energy, developing economic ties
between Russia and Iran, and also constructing the first unit of
the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran," he said.
© 1991-2004 Interfax
All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
10 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: China Continues North Korea Diplomatic Effort
Updated Oct.14,2004 11:28 KST
Ning Fukui/AP
China is working to get stalled talks about North Korea's nuclear
weapons development back on track. This comes as South Korea's
military is on the lookout for North Korean submarines that may
have entered the South's waters.
Chinese Ambassador Ning Fukui arrived in Seoul Wednesday to
discuss ways to bring North Korea back to the negotiating table.
He was to meet with South Korea's chief nuclear negotiator,
Deputy Foreign Minister Lee Soo-hyuk and other officials, then
travel to Washington and Tokyo.
North Korea declined to participate in a fourth round of talks in
September with China, South Korea, Russia, Japan and the United
States. They are trying to persuade Pyongyang to abandon its
nuclear weapons programs.
Speaking during a visit to Tokyo Wednesday, U.S. Deputy Secretary
of State Richard Armitage said it is most important that China
continue to lead diplomatic efforts on the nuclear dispute. He
listed other key elements to the effort.
"And, number two, make sure that North Koreans will not see us
get impatient or nervous, that we're steady in the long run,
we'll prevail on this and they'll come to know it. Third of all,
to make sure we are very true to our allies in the Republic of
Korea and make sure we share fully and completely with them all
of our thoughts on this," said Mr. Armitage.
Also Wednesday, defense officials in Seoul said navy ships have
been hunting for two North Korean submarines thought to have
entered the South's waters. But they say there has been no trace
of the subs since the massive search began Sunday off the east
coast.
South Korean military officials have raised doubts about the
credibility of the intelligence on the submarines, which
apparently came from the United States.
In the past, the North has used subs to slip spies into South
Korea.
In another sign of the prickly state of North Korea's
international ties, South Korea's Red Cross on Wednesday said
Seoul might reject Pyongyang's request for 100,000 tons of
fertilizer.
Seoul is delaying the shipment because North Korea has boycotted
talks with it.
The two Koreas technically remain at war. However, in recent
years, the South has provided aid to Pyongyang, including
fertilizer to help improve meager harvests in North Korea.
Analyst Kim Tae-woo, at the Korean Institute for Defense Analysis
in Seoul, says South Korea may delay the shipment as part of its
strategy in dealing with the North.
"That doesn't mean any policy shift on the part of the South
Korean government," said Kim Tae-woo. "The [South] Korean
government is waiting for some clue on which South Korea can
justify its assistance to North Korea, so that doesn't mean any
major shift in ... policy."
He notes that four years ago after the North and South Korean
navies exchanged gunfire along their maritime border, South Korea
continued to send aid across the border.
VOA News
*****************************************************************
11 Interfax: Russia, China stand for non-nuclear status of Korean Peninsula
[http://www.interfax.com]
Oct 14 2004 4:03PM
BEIJING. Oct 14 (Interfax) - Russia and China stand for the
soonest peaceful solution of the nuclear problem on the Korean
Peninsula, says a joint declaration signed by Presidents
Vladimir Putin and Hu Jintao in Beijing on Thursday.
"The sides stand for the Korean Peninsula being free from
nuclear weapons. They stress the importance of the soonest
peaceful solution of the nuclear problem on the Korean Peninsula
through dialogue and regard the six-nation negotiations as an
efficient mechanism to achieve that goal. The sides positively
assess the results of the third round of the negotiations held
in June 2004," the declaration says.
© 1991-2004 Interfax
All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
12 USATODAY.com: Pollution cleanups pit Pentagon against regulators
Posted 10/14/2004 12:19 AM Updated 10/14/2004 12:43 AM
Pollution cleanups pit Pentagon against regulatorsBy Peter
Eisler, USA TODAY DENVER Amy Ford's baby girl was just
learning to crawl last year when men in respirators and
hazardous materials suits showed up at the family's suburban
home to tear out the yard.
Since then, workers have hauled away tons of asbestos-laced soil
from the new development of $500,000 houses. The pollution is a
vestige of Lowry Air Force Base, which closed in 1994 and was
sold for $8 million to a redevelopment agency set up by the
cities of Denver and Aurora. The 1,800-acre site now supports
2,800 homes, schools, shopping areas, offices and parks.
State health and environmental officials found bits of asbestos
in the ground in 2003 and ordered that all contaminated soil be
removed. They said that if the soil was disturbed by gardening
or by children playing, for example the asbestos fibers might
get into the air and raise residents' risks of debilitating lung
problems.
But Air Force officials have refused to pay for the $15 million
dig. They say the state used bad science to conclude that the
risks from the asbestos were high enough to warrant a cleanup.
That has left the redevelopment agency and builders to do the
work and pay the bill. And the Air Force has done no cleanup at
all on 22 vacant acres it still hasn't sold in the community.
Pentagon and environment
"You have citizens here who want to preserve property values,
who want to preserve the safety of their families and see this
community developed as it was promised," Ford says. "The Air
Force is refusing to take responsibility."
Lowry isn't the only neighborhood wrestling the military over
environmental damage. Across the nation, the Pentagon is taking
extraordinary steps to limit the military's accountability for a
50-year legacy of pollution, a USA TODAY investigation finds.
The moves reflect a Bush administration view that the armed
services' national security mission gives them special standing
to challenge environmental laws and the state and federal
agencies that enforce them. (Related graphic:
An in-depth look at military bases' cleanup efforts
That view has implications for millions of Americans who live on
or around thousands of current and former military sites where
soil and water are polluted by buried munitions, fuel spills,
solvents or other waste.
About one in 10 Americans nearly 29 million live within 10
miles of a military site that is listed as a national priority
for hazardous-waste cleanup under the federal Superfund program,
a USA TODAY analysis shows. In all, the Defense Department is
responsible for more than 10% of the 1,240 total sites listed
for priority cleanup under the program, which aims to restore
the nation's most polluted properties, both public and private.
Since 2001, Pentagon officials have stalled cleanups at scores
of military sites where contamination from training and
manufacturing has fouled soil and water. They've used their
political clout to sidetrack new regulations that could force
the services to spend hundreds of millions of dollars more to
deal with pollution. And they've challenged state and federal
regulators' power to make the military obey existing
environmental laws.
EPA backs off
At the same time, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is
backing off its oversight of the military. The agency is
inspecting military sites less often and has cut the use of
legal orders and fines to force the services to clean up
pollution.
Now the administration is pushing Congress to exempt millions of
acres of military land from major environmental requirements.
Four years after President Bush campaigned on a pledge to make
the military "comply with environmental laws by which all of us
must live," the White House is the Pentagon's chief ally in
pushing for relief from such laws.
Within the administration, "it's no secret that the EPA is
running into this wall with the Pentagon," says Linda Fisher,
who served two years as Bush's deputy EPA administrator the
agency's second-in- command before returning to private work
last year.
"Is the Department of Defense taking (regulatory disputes) to
the White House more often? Absolutely," says Fisher, who has
held environmental jobs in every Republican administration since
Ronald Reagan's. "Is the Department of Defense more powerful
than the EPA? Yes."
Defense officials say state and federal environmental agencies
have too much power to demand costly and intrusive cleanups on
military land. The Pentagon wants to cut its $4 billion a year
in environmental costs less than 1% of defense spending by
gaining more authority over where and how cleanups will be done.
"Some of these regulators are doing wrongheaded things based on
poor scientific evidence," says Raymond DuBois, deputy
undersecretary of Defense for installations and environment.
"Shouldn't we, as stewards of the taxpayers' money, decide how
we're going to clean up?"
By law, it's up to health and environmental agencies to assess
health risks on polluted property and direct any necessary
cleanup. Those responsible for creating the pollution get
relatively little say.
Congress, with support from both Republican and Democratic
administrations, reinforced that notion repeatedly over the past
two decades. It approved a series of measures to hold the armed
services to the same environmental rules as private industry.
The Pentagon responded with new efforts to control and clean up
pollution, and now the military generally does as well as
private industry in making current activities comply with
environmental laws.
But the military's big challenge is cleaning up messes from the
past, when less was known about the environmental risks
associated with building the world's mightiest fighting force.
That's where the Pentagon faces the biggest costs. And that's
where environmental regulators see the biggest threat to public
health.
Limiting accountability
USA TODAY reviewed thousands of pages of federal records, many
obtained through requests under the Freedom of Information Act,
and interviewed scores of current and former federal officials,
state regulators and independent authorities on environmental
and military policy. Key findings:
"The Pentagon is thwarting environmental agencies' efforts to
set cleanup rules.
Since 2001, the armed services have delayed more than 70 federal
cleanup agreements that would dictate the scope and timing of
restoration at contaminated military sites. The Pentagon
objected to language restricting future construction on sites
where hazardous waste would remain buried. The EPA and the
Pentagon agreed on principles for settling the dispute at the
end of last year, and many of the stalled agreements have since
been signed.But EPA memos and budget documents blame the impasse
for a "tremendous backlog" of unsigned agreements that play a
"major role" in delaying cleanups.
The Pentagon also is fighting EPA efforts to set new pollution
limits on two military contaminants: perchlorate, a munitions
ingredient, and trichloroethylene (TCE), a solvent. After
military officials complained to the White House that the EPA's
studies overstated the chemicals' health risks, the agency opted
to wait for years of additional study before making new rules.
State environmental regulators are facing military resistance,
too. In Colorado, California, Ohio and Minnesota, the services
are fighting state efforts to restrict the future use of
contaminated military property. In California, Florida, Hawaii
and Alaska, the military has challenged the authority of state
officials to fine the armed forces for pollution problems.
"The EPA is cutting efforts to make the military comply with
environmental laws.
Inspections are the EPA's chief tool for evaluating whether
federal environmental laws are being followed. But since the
Bush administration took office, the average number of annual
EPA inspections at military installations has dropped 26%. The
EPA averaged 117 inspections a year from 1997 to 2000 to check
military sites' compliance with laws on hazardous-waste
disposal, air pollution and wastewater discharges. From 2001 to
2003, the agency averaged 87 inspections a year.
The number of fines, cleanup orders and other EPA "enforcement
actions" against military facilities has dropped 25%. From 2001
through 2003, the EPA averaged 18 actions a year, down from an
average of 24 from 1998 through 2000.
When fines are issued, they tend to be far smaller: From 2001
through 2003, the EPA assessed an annual average of $619,089 in
fines against the military, down 64% from its average of $1.7
million a year over the prior three years.
"The Pentagon is spending less on cleanups.
The Bush administration has proposed cuts in the Pentagon's
budget for environmental cleanups in each of the past three
years. Congress has refused to approve some of the reductions.
Even so, overall spending to clean up polluted military sites,
including closed bases, has dropped 20% since 2001, from $2.1
billion a year to $1.68 billion.
The administration also has refused to include more contaminated
military lands in the Superfund program, which would speed
cleanups and make funding for them a federal priority. When Bush
took office, six military properties were on the list of new
sites proposed for Superfund cleanup by the EPA and state
environmental agencies, but none has been approved. By
comparison, the Clinton administration added eight military
installations to the Superfund program in its last three years.
And among the 130 military sites that were included in the
Superfund program before Bush took office, the services are
reaching cleanup milestones at slower rates than private
companies. The services have finished 26% of cleanup remedies
such as water-treatment plants and soil-decontamination
facilities. At Superfund sites owned by private industry, the
completion rate is 54%.
The Pentagon view
Administration officials say there is no concerted effort to
weaken environmental oversight of the military or to lessen its
commitment to cleanups. After 15 years of pressure on the armed
services to emphasize conservation and pollution control, they
say, that commitment is here to stay.
But Pentagon officials acknowledge that they're more aggressive
in resisting environmental rules and cleanup demands that they
see as misguided. With the services strained by wars in
Afghanistan and Iraq, they add, it's more important than ever to
make sure their missions aren't hampered.
"There are two very important national issues here. There's the
issue of protecting the environment and the issue of protecting
our nation," says Donald Schregardus, deputy assistant secretary
of the Navy for environment. "We want to make sure that the
environmental laws allow us to do both."
Defense officials say cleanup orders from environmental agencies
can limit their ability to "train as we fight," a motto of
military readiness. They argue that some of the demands could
dictate everything from where planes may practice their bombing
runs to what sort of ammunition troops may use on artillery
ranges.
For instance, soldiers at Camp Edwards, an Army National Guard
base on Cape Cod, Mass., do their howitzer training on
simulators because a 1997 EPA order barred the use of live
ammunition that was polluting drinking water supplies. Edwards
is the only military installation in the nation where operations
have been curtailed as a direct result of orders from an
environmental agency.
More often, the services' disputes with state and federal
environmental regulators are based on concerns about the scope
and cost of cleanups. The services have learned a lot about
"what makes sense" in cleaning up pollution, says Maureen Koetz,
a deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force who oversees
environmental matters. So military officials "come to the table
with (proposals) that we think are a better menu of options for
both us and the regulators."
Health and environmental officials say the military's cleanup
proposals at many polluted sites don't do enough to reduce
health risks. When that sort of impasse occurs on privately
owned land, regulators often use their authority to simply order
a cleanup on their terms. But the military is fighting for
special treatment and getting it.
Regulators challenged
On Aug. 22, 2001, EPA Administrator Christie Whitman was
preparing for a dinner with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
The Pentagon was battling the EPA over fines for pollution,
arguing that the services should not be penalized as severely as
private companies. So Whitman's top enforcement adviser, John
Spinello, asked the EPA enforcement office for a briefing paper
on the agency's position. (Related: Read Whitman's letter
He got back a "guidance" memo that said the EPA recognized "no
policy reason to treat federal agencies differently from any
other entity." But Spinello, a Bush appointee, had a different
view.
In an e-mail back to enforcement managers, Spinello criticized
the EPA's stance as "high-handed and wrong." The message,
obtained by USA TODAY, said "there is no consensus of opinion on
this (approach). To state that 'there is no policy reason' is
inflammatory, myopic and arrogant."
The decline in EPA inspections, enforcement actions and fines at
military sites began in those early months of the Bush
administration. And the services began challenging the agency
more aggressively.
Last year, the Army fought off an unprecedented $16 million EPA
fine for air pollution from coal-fired power plants at Fort
Wainwright in Alaska. The Army seemed poised to lose after a
federal judge rejected its argument that the military should not
be penalized at the same rate as a private polluter. But the
Army threatened more appeals, and the EPA settled for a $600,000
fine. The Army also agreed to put new emission controls on the
Wainwright power plants and spend $1.7 million on other
anti-pollution projects at the base.
David Kling, the EPA's head of federal facilities enforcement,
says the agency remains committed to policing the military. "You
need to look at more than just the enforcement numbers," he
says. The EPA is putting more emphasis on cooperation to help
the services heed environmental laws, Kling says, and their
recent record of making current operations meet
pollution-control rules "speaks to the success we're having."
Others familiar with the EPA's enforcement disagree.
"All the numbers are consistent with an overall trend," says
Sylvia Lowrance, a 20-year EPA veteran who retired last year as
its top enforcement official and Kling's boss. "In the last
two decades, you've had a general buildup of EPA's authority to
... take enforcement action against the Defense Department. That
direction has changed in this administration."
State and local officials also are battling the Pentagon. Cities
and states from Florida to California have taken the services to
court in recent years for refusing to pay fines for
environmental problems or failing to meet local demands for
cleaning up pollution.
Among regulators "there's a frustration that the Defense
Department has gotten tougher to deal with," says Christopher
Jones, head of Ohio's Environmental Protection Agency and
president of the Environmental Council of the States, a national
body of state environmental chiefs. If the Pentagon "would allow
base commanders and the local people who are dealing with
(pollution) problems to get them resolved, I think we'd be able
to work through these issues."
Daniel Miller, Colorado's assistant attorney general for
environment, says the services "have become the most
recalcitrant entities we deal with on cleanups. They think
they're beyond accountability."
Money matters at Lowry
The fight over the asbestos cleanup in Amy Ford's Lowry
neighborhood revolves around a question driving many of the
military's clashes with regulators: How much public health risk
is acceptable at a polluted site?
At the state's direction, workers have removed nearly all the
tainted soil at Lowry, where the asbestos was left from building
debris and an old steam pipeline bulldozed decades ago by the
Air Force. But the Air Force says there wasn't enough danger to
warrant the work.
The science on asbestos is evolving, and there are no federal or
state limits on how much can safely remain in soil. New research
suggests that inhaling even a few asbestos fibers may cause lung
disease. Other studies say low levels of asbestos are a
negligible risk.
An Air Force risk assessment for Lowry concluded in April that
residents could have up to a 4-in-100,000 risk of cancer or lung
disease linked to asbestos exposure. And it put the risk to
construction workers at 2-in-10,000. Those figures are well
above the one-in-a-million threshold that health agencies
typically deem a significant risk. But absent any legal limits
on asbestos contamination, the Air Force report concluded that
the threats weren't great enough to warrant a cleanup.
Jeff Edson of the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment says the study bolsters the state's cleanup demands.
"Kids might play in that soil; people might garden in it," he
says. Though there have been no signs of asbestos-related
illness at Lowry, Edson says the prudent course is to remove the
soil. "But the Air Force has basically said, 'How are you going
to make us?' "
Pentagon officials say the big concern isn't the cost of
cleaning up Lowry; it's the costs the services could face if
they have to do similar cleanups elsewhere. Asbestos was a
common building material for decades, and it would cost the
Pentagon billions of dollars if the zero-tolerance cleanup
demanded at Lowry became a precedent.
"We want them to develop a cleanup goal based on risk," says
Doug Karas of the Air Force Real Property Agency. "The state
says there's a risk, but we haven't seen data to support that."
The Air Force's refusal to meet a state order to clean the 22
acres it still owns at Lowry and to reimburse the redevelopment
authority or builders for the $15 million cleanup of the rest of
the community has left ill will.
"The Air Force seems to be able to blow off the state, but we
certainly can't," redevelopment authority director Tom Markham
says. "Regardless of the (cleanup) standard, it was the Air
Force that left the contamination. They're responsible. We've
filed demands for them to pay. They seem to be ignoring us."
Data analysis by Paul Overberg. Contributing: William Risser.
Pentagon pitted vs. environment10/14/2004 12:43 AMBy Peter
Eisler, USA TODAYDENVER -->
© Copyright 2004 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.
*****************************************************************
13 UPI: Report: Cargo nuke inspections flawed -
(United Press International)
October 14, 2004
Washington, DC, Oct. 14 (UPI) -- There are grave flaws with the
process used to screen cargo entering the United States for
nuclear material, a report said Thursday.
"The report raises a number of troubling issues" about the
Department of Homeland Security's "ability to detect and prevent
nuclear material from entering the United States," said Rep. Jim
Turner, D-Texas, the senior democrat on the House Select
Committee on Homeland Security.
The report, by the Department of Homeland Security's Inspector
General Clark Kent Ervin, is secret, but an unclassified version
is being published Thursday.
Turner said the report showed that even for the five percent of
containers screened at U.S. ports "the report casts doubt ... on
the effectiveness of the inspections."
He added that the inspector general was "not satisfied with the
department's implementation of the (his) key recommendation..."
Turner requested the report last year, after ABC News was able
to smuggle depleted uranium into a U.S. port from Jakarta,
Indonesia.
[UPI Perspectives]
*****************************************************************
14 Las Vegas Mercury: Enough is enough
Thursday, Oct 14, 2004, 07:23:56 PM
28 good reasons to boot Bush from office
Compiled by Newt Briggs and Andrew Kiraly
Illustrations by F. Andrew Taylor
Anyone who saw the first presidential debate Sept. 30 knows
President Bush's mantra well: It's hard work! It's hard work!
It's hard work! Yes, destroying America is hard work.
Sadly, it's not hard work uncovering what a terrible president
Bush has been. He's made the air dirtier. He's lost a million
jobs. In education, he's left millions of children behind. He
started an unjustifiable war that has plunged the nation into
debt and will breed future generations of terrorists. He gave
seniors the finger with Medicare "reform" and signed off on an
energy bill crafted by industry cronies. And he believes siting
a high-level nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain is based on
sound science.
The list goes on--and now it's all available below, in handy,
bulleted form. As a service and a plea to undecided voters, the
Mercury compiled a list of the Bush adminstration's worst
offenses, from social services to the economy to the environment
to the war in Iraq. If you're an undecided voter, we hope this
helps you make up your mind. If you're a hard-headed cynic who
still believes there's no difference between the parties, we
hope this convinces you otherwise. And if you weren't planning
to vote in the first place, we hope this lights a fire under
your feet. Four more years of Bush is four too many.
We're not the only ones who think so. Heck, Bush himself summed
up his adminstration best at an Aug. 4 bill signing in
Washington, in one of his more telling Bushisms: "Our enemies
are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop
thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and
neither do we."
Environment
Remember clean air? Yeah, that clear, odorless stuff that
feels really good to breathe. Bush and his cronies put it one
step closer to being a thing of the past when they relaxed a
host of clean air enforcement rules, according to the Washington
Post. The "New Source Review" rule changes, announced in June
2002, essentially make older, polluting power plants immune from
lawsuits and spare them from installing pricey anti-pollution
equipment originally mandated by the 1970 Clean Air Act. Sen.
James Jeffords, I-Vt., called the rollback "a victory for
outdated polluting power plants and a devastating defeat for
public health and our environment." It's enough to make you
consider a boycott of breathing.
Let's get it straight: The greenhouse effect is just a liberal
conspiracy intended to sell sunscreen and discourage people from
burning tires in their back yard. That's why the Bush
administration deleted several major passages from a 2003 EPA
report on the state of the environment--including the phrase,
"Climate change has global consequences for human health and the
environment." The administration also added qualifying words
like "potentially" and "may" where no qualifications were
needed. The changes, says a 2003 story in the Guardian, prompted
the EPA to remove "the entire global warming section to avoid
including information that was not scientifically credible."
Who needs biodiversity when we've got cheap gas and hardwood
floors? At least that seems to be the attitude of President
Bush, who has protected only 26 animal species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 during his four-year term.
Compare that with his father, who protected 228 species, and
President Clinton, who protected 527 species over two terms, and
it's clear that the current administration will take the
lobbyist over the spotted owl and the marbled murrelet any day.
"Wish that I was on old rocky top/ Down in the Tennessee
hills/ Ain't no smoggy smoke on rocky top/ Ain't no telephone
bills." Oh, wait, did I say "rocky top"? I meant "atomized
plateau" created by miners blasting for coal hidden beneath the
lush peaks of Appalachia. The process--dubbed "mountaintop
removal"--was effectively banned in 1999 after more than 700
miles of mountain streams were buried by debris, but thanks to
the Bush administration, it's once again booming.
Trees are cool. They're a great background for nature pics,
help make oxygen and stop floods. They're also fun to climb and
serve as, like, little condominium complexes for wildlife and
shit. So why does the Bush administration hate trees? According
to a March 2003 article in the Washington Post, the Bush
administration denied wilderness protection to millions of acres
of the Tongass National Forest in Alaska. Critics and
environmentalists said the closely watched decision dramatically
increases logging in the old-growth Tongass, which contains
nearly 30 percent of the world's unlogged coastal temperate rain
forest. The ruling affects 4 percent of the forest's 16.8
million acres, or about 676,000 acres. At least we'll always
have the Rainforest Cafe!
Bush just loves them photo ops of him fishin', ranchin' and
roughin' it, but the Skull and Bones alum is a city boy at
heart: The Bush administration has made vulnerable to
development millions of acres of wilderness--thanks to an
Interior Department decision to limit Bureau of Land Management
lands eligible for protection to 23 million acres nationwide.
According to an April 2003 Associated Press story, the Interior
Department also told Congress it intended to stop reviewing
Western land holdings for new wilderness protection and would
withdraw 3 million acres in Utah from protected status. Alas,
yet another reason for the don't-litter Indian to cry.
Foreign policy
Bush believes in the sanctity of life, all right--so much
that he's withheld $34 million for the U.N. Population Fund to
show his distaste for what it said were "coercive abortions"
taking place in China. Long pressured by anti-abortion groups
and conservative lawmakers, the Bush administration denied the
U.N. $34 million, about 12.5 percent of the U.N.'s Population
Fund budget. U.N. officials said holding back the money could
hurt their prospects of preventing 800,000 abortions and the
deaths of 4,700 mothers and 77,000 children. A small price to
pay for affirming the sanctity of life, don't you think?
Bush targeting the Taliban in Afghanistan after 9/11 was
probably the one right thing he did--too bad he doesn't want to
clean up the mess he's left behind. According to a February 2003
BBC News article, the Bush administration did not request any
money in its budget for humanitarian and reconstruction aid for
Afghanistan. Congress finally scraped up about $300 billion for
the war-wracked country--$300 million? With a military budget
zipping into the stratospheric billions, that should be enough
to buy each Afghani a pack of Chiclets and a Gameboy.
Reagan had "Star Wars." Will George Bush be the star of the
Empire Strikes Back? CNN reported in December 2001 that
President Bush pulled out of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty, the Cold War agreement that specifically banned testing
and deployment of a ballistic missile defense system. Proponents
of the treaty decried the message this sent to the rest of the
world, while others pointed out that, ahem, just three months
earlier terrorists took down the Twin Towers using airliners,
not missiles. Hope that thing is good against hijacked domestic
flights!
In a world that's fat-free, low-calorie and Atkins-friendly,
it's only logical that we should have a Low-Yield Cold War.
According to a February 2003 article in the Washington Post,
Bush is seeking to revive a program focused on building
low-yield nuclear weapons. What exactly are low-yield nukes?
Call them Death and Destruction Lite, designed to penetrate
bunkers and detonate underground, thereby reducing nasty
fallout. It's still lame, though. Even George Bush Sr. had
eliminated low-yield nukes as part of an international accord to
reduce nuke proliferation overseas. Hm. Low-yield nukes plus a
doctrine of pre-emptive war. Hello, international community. You
want some of this, bitchez?!
Civil liberties
The Bush boys have led an assault on open government unlike
anything since the darkest days of the Nixon era. On Day One in
office, Mr. Bush reversed efforts by the Clinton administration
to provide more access to government records. Since then, the
number of documents and files deemed "classified" or "sensitive"
has blossomed, even ancient records for which there is no
plausible reason for secrecy. An embarrassing memo leaked from
the Justice Department confirms that the enlightened John
Ashcroft advised federal agencies to place whatever
administrative obstacles they can to prevent Freedom of
Information Act requests from being honored.
At the same time, citizen access to government information has
withered, government's access to information about us has
exploded. An extension to the PATRIOT Act was signed into law on
a Saturday, and on the same day that Saddam Hussein was
captured. Needless to say, it didn't get much coverage. It
allowed federal lawmen to seize business records from entities
such as banks or casinos without a warrant. (Las Vegas was
targeted, of course.)
Remember those bygone days when every patch of dirt from sea
to shining sea was considered a free speech zone, a place where
the First Amendment was still considered the law of the land?
Bush and Ashcroft have now given us a new definition of the
term, and if we don't like it, we can all just shut the hell up.
Whenever Bush travels to a U.S. city, teams of Secret Service
agents precede him and inform local police that they must
establish "free speech" or "protest" zones where people opposed
to Bush's policies must be penned up. Invariably, these zones
are far removed from anywhere the president himself will visit,
so he doesn't have to be exposed to opinions different from his
own. In St. Petersburg, Fla., for instance, two elderly
grandmothers who dared to hold up tiny signs expressing
oppositon to Bush were arrested. Hundreds of other arrests have
occurrred all over the nation. Anyone who carries a pro-Bush
sign is allowed upfront seating at presidential events. Free
speech still applies to them.
Education
Americans are so dumb. All this time we could have been
profiting on our children's educations, but we've just been
sitting by letting the government run our schools. Now, thanks
to the president's No Child Left Behind Act, corporations are
taking over schools in record numbers, and with a lot of
cost-cutting and accountability, they'll probably eventually be
almost as good as the schools they replaced. A recent national
study revealed that the test scores of children in charter
schools were significantly lower than those of children at
regular public schools. Then again, maybe President Bush is
right and those childrens really am as smart as the kids in
publick school.
Special interests
So your eyes are bleeding and your feet have swollen into
pus-filled flesh balloons, what do you want the drug companies
to do about it? According to a July article in the New York
Times, the Bush administration has been going to court to block
lawsuits by consumers who say they've been injured by
prescription drugs. Apparently, the administration believes that
drug companies should not be liable for consumer injuries if
their products have been approved by the Food and Drug
Administration. Did we mention that the drug industry has
dispensed more than $50 million in campaign contributions during
the last four years--the vast majority of it to Republicans?
Former oilman Dick Cheney was placed in charge of energy
policy early in the Bush term. He presided over a hush-hush
gathering of energy experts, all of whom were executives at the
largest energy companies in the world--Big Oil, Big Coal, Big
Nukes. Not a single environmentalist was allowed to participate
in the study, and when Cheney emerged from under his
self-imposed Cone of Silence, it surprised no one when he
announced the results of the gabfest would be tax breaks for
energy companies. Despite lawsuits and public pressure, Cheney
would not reveal anything about what went on inside the energy
meetings. One interesting document has surfaced, however. It is
a two-page chart titlted "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfields."
It identified 63 oil companies from 30 countries and specified
which companies were interested in which Iraqi oil fields. This,
of course, was well before the invasion of Iraq, which, as we
all know, had nothing to do with oil.
No, the cows aren't literally mad, but maybe they should be.
When a case of mad cow disease surfaced in Washington state last
year, federal regulators proposed sharp restrictions on what
could be included in animal feed, but after intense lobbying by
the cattle and feed industries, the Bush administration put the
kibosh on any potential legislative changes. Shortly afterward,
the National Cattleman's Beef Association broke with its
nonpartisan tradition and endorsed Bush for re-election.
The economy
Millions of Americans depend on overtime to make extra money.
But thanks to the Bush administration, more than 8 million
Americans are now ineligible for overtime. According to a June
2003 CNNMoney.com story, liberal think tank the Economic Policy
Institute scrutinized the Labor Department proposal to change OT
criteria and found it would affect 2.5 million salaried
employees and 5.5 million hourly employees. The proposal, which
went into effect without congressional approval, will screw
those employees in another way, too, the study notes. "Once
employers are not required to pay for overtime work, they will
schedule more of it," the study said. Now, please place bloody
stump of nose back on grindstone. The management thanks you.
One way of getting a general sense of the nation's economic
health is to look at how many people have been laid off. Thanks
to the Bush White House, the Labor Department program that
tracked such information has been quietly squelched, according
to San Francisco Chronicle columnist David Lazarus. In a January
2003 column, he reported that the program tracking mass layoffs
by U.S. companies was killed by the administration in order to
more easily hype a rosy economic picture. According to the
bureau's final monthly report covering November 2002, U.S.
companies laid off more than 240,000 workers. Lazarus write that
the Labor Department made no mention of ending the program, save
for one short blurb buried in a November 2002 press release.
Liberals, liberals, liberals. Tax and spend. Tax and spend. $2
trillion! Or so goes Bush's standard campaign grouse, which
conveniently fails to mention that his own economic plan will
cost "well in excess of $3 trillion over a decade," according to
a Sept. 14 story in the Washington Post. The bloated expenses
come from the war in Iraq, his proposed changes to Social
Security system and tax cuts, which are expected to "reduce
government revenue by about $1 trillion over 10 years." Now
that's fiscal conservatism!
I mean, seriously, what's up with math? It thinks it's, like,
so smart with its objectivity and indisputable numerical
evidence. Why can't it just be a team player and go along when
President Bush insists that the tax cut was really aimed at
working-class Americans? According to The State of Working
America 2004-2005, a lengthy report issued in September by the
Economic Policy Institute: "For households in the top 1 percent
of the income scale, the full tax savings from the cuts that
were made from 2001 to 2003 was about $67,000; for middle-income
families, the cuts amounted to just under $600; and for the
lowest 20 percent, the savings was $61." The net result was to
redistribute income up the income scale, transferring 0.8
percent of all after-tax household income from the bottom 99
percent to the top 1 percent.
Judging by the last two debates, President Bush can't help but
slobber over the job figures from the last 13 months: "1.9
million jobs, yeah, definitely 1.9 million jobs." What he fails
to mention is that the economy is still down a total of 821,000
jobs, according to an Oct. 9 article on Dick Cheney's favorite
website, factcheck.org. If, as most experts predict, the economy
does not pick up those jobs by January 2005, Bush will be the
first president since Herbert Hoover to preside over a net loss
in jobs during his term. That's bad, definitely, definitely bad.
Nevada
Thank--gasp!--goodness for President Bush's
Clear--wheeze!--Skies Act. As the U.S. Public Interest Research
Group reports, smog levels in the Las Vegas metropolitan area
exceeded the EPA's eight-hour health standard 27 times in 2003,
earning the city 18th place on the agency's list of major U.S.
cities with the worst smog pollution. That's bad news for anyone
still dependent on lungs to breathe--particularly the 33,500
children in Las Vegas who suffer from asthma. For those with
healthy respiratory systems, it just means an increased risk of
lung cancer and a few extra phlegm-filled hacks in the morning.
Hrrrackkk! Thwip! That's one small goober for man, one giant
goober for mankind.
Damn, neighbor, do I smell mesquite? Thanks to President
Bush's generous 2003 tax cut, the average Nevadan had an extra
$244 last year to spend on a grill, two shares of Google stock
or any of the fine products offered in the Sharper Image
catalog. By comparison, the wealthiest 1 percent of Nevadans had
$43,079 to spend on, say, a Hummer H2 or a college education.
No, that's not mesquite you smell; that's the smoky delicious
scent of unprecedented income inequality.
Ah, those two little words that make our heart gurgle with
bile: Yucca Mountain. Don't get us started: Bush's record on the
proposed nuclear waste dump is filled with lies, distortions and
broken promises, capped by his official recommendation in 2002
of the site as the nation's nuclear trash bin--despite a General
Accounting Office report finding 300 problems with the
repository design, despite the objections of the Nuclear Waste
Technical Review Board, despite a U.S. Appeals Court ruling that
the administration's Yucca plans failed to meet National Academy
of Science safety standards--despite, well, science. This from
man who wrote to Gov. Kenny Guinn in 2002 that the "best science
must prevail in the designation of any high-level nuclear waste
repository."
Random acts of cruelty
If the government ends up awarding a multibillion-dollar
defense contract to Totally Evil Enterprises Inc., you can thank
Bush. In December 2001, the Bush administration junked a rule
that would deny federal contracts to companies violating labor,
environmental and consumer-protection laws, according the
Washington Post. The rule, put in effect by the Clinton
adminstration, pressured federal contracting officers to take
into account credible evidence of industry wrongdoing when
considering doling out government contracts. Rolling back the
rule was decried by labor groups such as the AFL-CIO, while
those in favor of trashing it said it would put procurement
officials in charge of judging whether a company a violate the
law. Yeah, why bother with ethics and shit?
The Bush administration appreciates the sanctity of life--and
if that life is one of unmitigated pain, torment and debasement,
um, sorry, dude, all I can do is kick the morphine drip up a
notch. The long arm of Attorney General John Ashcroft reached
across the country to block Oregon's landmark assisted-suicide
law, according to a November 2001 article in the Washington
Post. Oregon's law, the Death With Dignity Act, mind you, was
approved by that state's voters in 1994 and 1997 referenda. At
least 70 terminally ill people have committed assisted suicide
since passage of the act. Gee, if only Ashcroft had intervened
sooner, those 70 people could have been still with us, suffering
untold pains and degradation--all while affirming the miracle of
life.
"My administration worked with the Congress to create the
Department of Homeland Security." Yeah, and Al Gore invented the
Internet. Although President Bush has used the department to
curtail personal liberties and manipulate public sentiment, he
opposed its creation for nine months after Sept. 11,
2001--largely because it was proposed by Democrats. As Jonathan
Chait wrote in The New Republic, "Bush's record on homeland
security ought to be considered a scandal. Yet, not only is it
not a scandal, it's not even a story."
When the president needed someone to head up the FDA's
Advisory Committee on Reproductive Health Drugs, he chose Dr. W.
David Hager. This committee makes important decisions about what
drugs should be used in obstetrics, gynecology, hormone therapy
and contraception programs. Why was Dr. Hager selected? Perhaps
because of his groundbreaking medical text, As Jesus Cared for
Women, which blends biblical accounts of how Jesus healed sick
women with case files from the good doc's own patient list. Dr.
Hager isn't exactly in the mainstream of reproductive science
since in his own practice he refuses to prescribe contraceptives
to unmarried women. He's pro-life, you see.
Copyright © Las Vegas Mercury, 2001 - 2004
*****************************************************************
15 AxisofLogic: Media Critiques
[http://www.axisoflogic.com/
The New York Times and the road to war
By Joseph Kay
Oct 14, 2004, 06:46
On October 3, the New York Times published an extensive article
detailing the history of one of the fabrications employed by the
American government to justify the war against Iraq: the charge
that aluminum tubes imported by Saddam Hussein were intended for
use in the development of a nuclear weapons program.
The article (How the White House Embraced Disputed Arms
Intelligence, by David Barstow, William Broad and Jeff Gerth:
http://www.uruknet.info/?colonna=m&p=6059&l=x&size
...
[http://www.uruknet.info/?colonna=m&p=6059&l=x&size=1
&hd=0] ) is an indictment of the Bush administration. But the
information it presents is also a political indictment of the
role played by the Times itself in facilitating the drive to war.
This, of course, was not the intention of the newspapers
publisher and editors. On the contrary, the publication of the
article was, in large measure, motivated by a desire to present
the Times as a conscientious critic of the war. Hence the
follow-up editorial that appeared on October 5, in which the
editors struck a pose of shock and dismay over the findings
outlined in their October 3 article.
The more we learn about the way Mr. Bush paved the road to war,
the editorial declared, the more it becomes disturbingly clear
that if he was not aware that he was feeding misinformation to
the world, he was the only one in his circle who was not clued
in.
The editorial went on to say that administration officials had
plenty of evidence that the [aluminum tubes] claim was baseless;
it was a long-discounted theory that had to be resurrected from
the intelligence communitys wastebasket when the administration
needed justification for invading Iraq.
The editorial failed to note the salient factwhich emerges
clearly from the Times own account published two days
beforethat the newspaper played an indispensable role in
feeding misinformation to the world. As the October 3 article
revealed, the Times served as a conduit for administration
officials, uncritically reporting their claims and lending them
badly needed credibility.
According to the October 3 exposé, the allegation that Iraq was
importing aluminum tubes for use in nuclear centrifuges was
originally raised in 2000 by a mid-level CIA analyst, referred to
by the Times only as Joe. As early as May 2001, experts in the
Energy Department published a detailed finding refuting the claim
that the tubes were suitable either to be used or adapted for use
in the making of nuclear centrifuges.
They found that the tubes were in all likelihood intended for use
in conventional rockets, precisely as claimed by the Iraqi
regime. (This analysis has since been confirmed both by United
Nations weapons inspectors and the CIAs own Iraq Survey Group,
whose report, issued October 6, flatly rejected the aluminum
tubes-nuclear weapons canard.)
While analysts at the Energy Department thought the question had
been resolved, it continued to be pushed within the CIA and
received the support of CIA Director George Tenet.
Without any new findings, the aluminum tubes suddenly became a
major public issue in September 2002. As Barstow, Broad and Gerth
note in their article, the first detailed public account of the
aluminum tubes came in a lead article on Page 1 of the New York
Times, published on September 8, 2002.
They write that this article cited unidentified senior
administration officials who insisted that the dimensions,
specifications and numbers of tubes sought showed that they were
intended for a nuclear weapons program. The closer [Saddam
Hussein] gets to a nuclear capability, the more credible is his
threat to use chemical and biological weapons, a senior
administration official was quoted as saying. Nuclear weapons
are his hole card.
The authors of the October 3 exposé write, without comment, The
[September 8, 2002] article gave no hint of a debate over the
tubes. Significantly, they do not assert that the Times was
unaware of the debate.
The September 8, 2002 story was based entirely on unnamed
administration officials, with no attempt to verify the content
of what was being reported. No mention was made of the analysis
made by the Energy Department and its conflict with the CIA, in
spite of the fact that, according to the authors of the October 3
exposé, the bureaucratic infighting was by [July 2002] so widely
known that even the Australian government was aware of it.
Nor do Barstow, Broad and Gerth give the names of the authors of
the September 8, 2002 piece: Judith Miller and Michael Gordon.
Both the authorship and timing of the September 8, 2002 article
are highly significant. Millers role as a conduit for the
pro-war cabal within the Bush administration is by now notorious.
In addition to her role before the war in promoting the lies of
the administration, she published numerous articles after the war
that purported to uncover evidence of chemical and biological
weapons.
In particular, an article published on the front page of the New
York Times on April 22, 2003 cited an unnamed Iraqi scientist
whom Miller did not even interview as making claims that Iraq had
destroyed stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the
weeks preceding the American invasion. In her April, 2003 piece,
Miller openly acknowledged that her article had been submitted
prior to publication for vetting by the military unit with which
she was traveling as an embedded reporter. (See Manufacturing
the news: New York Times report on Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction.)
Miller functioned as more than a reporter. She was a proxy for
elements within the Pentagonincluding Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld and his undersecretary, Douglas Feith-as well as
Ahmed Chalabi, the former Pentagon favorite among Iraqi exiles.
It later emerged that she exerted extraordinary control over the
military unit in which she was embeddeda unit tasked with
finding evidence of unconventional weapons. At one point she
threatened to appeal directly to Rumsfeld and Feith if the units
officers did not go along with her attempts to discover weapons
of mass destruction.
Even within the corrupt milieu of the US press, Millers actions
and reporting were seen as an embarrassment and created something
of a scandal. On May 26, 2004, the editors of the Times published
an extraordinary statement criticizing the papers own pre-war
coverage of the administrations claims. While the statement did
not mention Miller by name, it singled out several of the
articles she had writtenincluding the September 8, 2002 aluminum
tubes pieceas particularly egregious examples of poor
journalistic standards.
Given Millers close ties to the administration and Chalabiwho
supplied the administration with much of the phony intelligence
on Iraqi WMD that Bush, Cheney and company used to justify the
invasionthere can be no doubt she, and the Times as a whole,
were well aware of the dispute within the intelligence community
over the aluminum tubes. They chose to say nothing about it in
the sensational September 8, 2002 article that launched the
administrations Big Lie campaign for war.
The timing of the September 8, 2002 article was anything but
accidental. This was a critical turning point in the
administrations propaganda offensive. The problem facing the
administration was that, having actively begun its war
preparations, it had yet to manufacture a convincing rationale.
Why was Saddam Hussein such a grave threat to American security
that he had to be removed by military force? There was no
evidence that the Iraqi leader had anything to do with the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Try as they might, the
war plotters in the White House, the Pentagon and the CIA had
been unable to come up with any evidence of collaboration between
Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. Even bogus allegations of chemical
and biological weapons were not sufficient to make the case for
an unprovoked war. They had to play the nuclear card!
In August of 2002, Vice President Dick Cheney began pushing the
idea that Iraq was close to acquiring nuclear weapons. We know
that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons,
he said at the time. Many of us are convinced that Saddam will
acquire nuclear weapons fairly soon.
By September 1, the administration had decided to ask Congress
for authorization to invade Iraq and a vote was scheduled for
early October. The Democratic congressional leadership supported
an invasion, but they needed political cover. As far as they were
concerned, the administration had not done enough to manufacture
a pretext.
The Democrats demanded that the CIA produce a National
Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that would make the case for war. The
Bush administration agreed to slap together an NIE by early
October, in advance of a congressional vote, with the
understanding that the Democrats would, in return, supply it with
the votes it needed to push through a war resolution.
In his book Plan of Attack, published in April of this year, Bob
Woodward quotes House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt as saying
to the president after a meeting on September 4: I appreciate
your outline, agree with your concern about Saddam Hussein...
Its about weapons of mass destruction getting in the wrong
hands. They dont see it.... We need to make it graphic.
At the urging of Secretary of State Colin Powell and British
Prime Minister Tony Blair, the administration had also made the
tactical decision to ask the United Nations for a new resolution
authorizing the forceful removal of Saddam Hussein. Accordingly,
Bush was preparing to speak before the UN to present the case for
invasion, a speech that he was to give on September 12.
A new UN resolution would provide an invasion with a fig leaf of
legality and multi-lateralism. However, in order to argue that
Iraq was so grave a threat to American and international security
that war, rather than an extended resumption of weapons
inspections, was necessary, and to claim that the US would be
acting in self-defense, the administration felt it had to raise
the ante beyond chemical and biological weapons and invent a
nuclear threat.
Thus, early September 2002 was the pivotal period in the public
campaign for war.
Enter the New York Times. The front-page article of Sunday,
September 8fed to Miller and the Times by the Bush
administrationwas seized upon that morning by Bush
administration spokesmen. Cheney went on NBCs Meet the Press,
citing the article to back up his claim that with absolute
certainty Hussein was buying equipment to build a nuclear
weapon.
National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice declared on CNN that
the United States could not wait to invade: We dont want the
smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud. Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld urged the American people to imagine a September 11
with weapons of mass destruction, resulting in the deaths of
tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children.
The calculated and dishonest character of the Times reportage of
the tubes issue is underscored by its coverage after September 8,
2002. This history is set out in the October 3 exposé by Barstow,
Broad and Gerth. Having plastered a sensational and alarming
article on its front page, the newspaper subsequently buried on
its inside pages articles hinting at the truththat the claims
were not credible and were hotly disputed by the most expert
analysts within the government itself.
On September 13, the Times published an article on page A13 that
noted in passing the internal differences within the intelligence
community, but came out clearly on the side of the administration
and the CIA. According to Barstow, Broad and Gerth, the September
13, 2002 article reported that an unidentified senior
administration official dismissed the debate as a footnote, not
a split.
They quote further from the September 13, 2002 piece: Citing
another unidentified official, the story reported that the best
technical experts and nuclear scientists at laboratories like Oak
Ridge supported the CIA assessments.
This claim is flatly refuted by the October 3 account given by
Barstow, Broad and Gerth, who report that Jon Kreykes, the head
of Oak Ridges national security advanced technology group, was
among those at the Energy Department who early on raised doubts
about the aluminum tube-nuclear connection.
In their account, the three authors note that opposition among
Energy Department nuclear analysts to the administration-CIA
aluminum tube story was so intense, the administration felt the
need to issue a directive that they not discuss the question with
the press. Nevertheless, some of these analysts provided
information to the prestigious Institute for Science and
International Security, which issued a report on the subject
September 23, 2002 that constituted the first public airing of
facts that undermined the most alarming suggestions about Iraqs
nuclear threat.
The authors of the October 3 exposé note, The Washington Post
ran a brief article about the findings on Page A18. Many major
newspapers, including the Times, ran nothing at all.
On October 11, 2002, the Senate voted 77-23 to grant
authorization for an invasion on the grounds of the continuing
threat posed by Iraq and its weapons programs. Explaining his
vote in favor of the resolution, Senator John Kerry declared,
There is little question that Saddam Hussein wants to develop
nuclear weapons.
Toward the end of 2002, the International Atomic Energy Agency
resumed inspections of Iraqi weapons programs. The investigations
conclusively refuted the theory that the aluminum tubes were
destined for use in a nuclear program. Again the Times buried the
story.
On Jan. 10, 2003, write Barstow, Broad and Gerth, the Times
reported that the international agency was challenging the key
piece of evidence behind the primary rationale for going to
war. The article, on page A10, also reported that officials at
the Energy Department and State Department had suggested the
tubes might be for rockets.
On January 28, 2003, Bush made his infamous State of the Union
address, and on February 5 Secretary of State Colin Powell went
before the United Nations Security Council to present the
administrations arguments for war. On the question of the
aluminum tubes, Powell felt obliged to hedge, stating, People
will continue to debate this issue, but there is no doubt in my
mind these illicit procurement efforts show that Saddam Hussein
is very much focused on putting in place the key missing piece
from his nuclear weapons program: the ability to produce fissile
material.
What was the response of the Times? The lead editorial on
February 6, 2003 declared: Mr. Powells presentation was all the
more convincing because he dispensed with apocalyptic invocations
of a struggle of good and evil and focused on shaping a sober,
factual case against Mr. Husseins regime. It may not have
produced a smoking gun, but it left little question that Mr.
Hussein had tried hard to conceal one.
The Times reporting and editorial comments in the run-up to war
were not mistakes, lapses in judgment, or the result of naïveté.
The so-called newspaper of record was pursuing a conscious
policy: it wanted war in Iraq.
Whatever differences the Times might have had with the
administration over tactics, the newspaper was aiding and
abetting the efforts of the government to dupe the public and
create a climate of fear and hysteria conducive to launching an
unprovoked war. It tailored its reporting to that end and served
as a mouthpiece for the administration.
The attitude of the newspaper toward the US imperialist
enterprise in Iraq has not fundamentally changed, and it
continues to play a critical role in covering up the brutality of
the occupation. The Times repeatedly parrots the official line
about Americas democratic mission in Iraq, and has censored
reports that highlight the criminality of the stooge regime of
Iyad Allawi. It has refused to publish a single article
concerning allegations that Allawi personally murdered Iraqi
detainees last Juneallegations that have a great deal more
credibility than any of the pre-war assertions of Iraqi nuclear
weapons activity.
One obvious question arises from the Times October 3 report on
the aluminum tubes hoax: why did the newspaper fail to undertake
such an investigation of the governments claims in late 2002 and
early 2003? The answer clearly emerges from the October 3 exposé
itself: the Times was itself complicit in the governments war
conspiracy.
This history stands as a damning indictment of the role of the
New York Times in facilitating the preparation and launching of a
war of aggression. But its role is anything but an aberration. It
is a concentrated expression of the role of the American media as
a whole.
*****************************************************************
16 NRC: NRC to Hold Public Meeting on Proposed Rule on Requirements for Export or Import of
Radioactive Materials
News Release - 2004-13 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office
of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC
20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 04-132 October 14,
2004
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a public meeting
Oct. 19 concerning its proposed rule tightening licensing
requirements for the exportation and importation of high-risk
radioactive materials.
The meeting will be held from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. in room 1-F16
of NRCs One White Flint North building, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Md. Members of the public wishing to attend are
requested to arrive at least 30 minutes early for processing
through building security.
The NRC published its proposed rule in September. The rule aims
to implement recent changes to the policies of the Commission
and the U.S. government regarding the security of radioactive
materials and reflects guidelines adopted last year by the
International Atomic Energy Agency. The proposed rule would
require a specific license for the export or import of high-risk
radioactive materials. Under current NRC regulations, these
materials may be exported or imported under a general license,
which does not require filing an application to the NRC or the
issuance of licensing documents.
The proposed rule, the regulatory analysis and any public
comments received are available on the NRCs Web site at
http://ruleforum.llnl.gov [http://ruleforum.llnl.gov] . The
documents are also available through the NRCs Public Document
Room, at (301) 415-4737, or 1 (800) 397-4209.
For more information about the meeting, contact Suzanne
Schuyler-Hayes, Office of International Programs, at (301)
415-2333.
Last revised Thursday, October 14, 2004
*****************************************************************
17 Nuke Weapons Appeal Signed by 18 Nobels, 205 Organisations
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:32:07 -0700
----- Original Message -----
From: BC Macdonald
To: John Lewallen ; Carol
Wolman
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 8:17 AM
Subject: Fw: Nuke Weapons Appeal Signed by 18 Nobels, 205 Organisations
(incl 42 Parliamentarians)
I'm sure you got this one, but just in case...... Could be nice to have
the Green Party endorse this by beginning at the Emerald Region meeting
this Sunday. ~~Bernie
----- Original Message -----
From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign
To: Recipient List Suppressed:
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 8:37 PM
Subject: Nuke Weapons Appeal Signed by 18 Nobels, 205 Organisations (incl
42 Parliamentarians)
This appeal is a call to take action aimed at lowering the operating
status of nuclear weapons. Parliamentarians reading this are strongly urged
to take such action in their legislatures, as well as adding their names to
this appeal.
The appeal on operating status of nuclear weapons, (full text and
signatures below) has now been signed by:
--205 organisations including 42 parliamentarians (incl speaker of NZ
Parliament)
--18 Nobel prizewinners.
These include the following peace - prize recipients:
--HH the Dalai Lama
--Archbishop Desmond Tutu
--Dr Joseph Rotblat
--Oscar Arrias Sanchez
--Mairhead Corrigan Maguire.
Other distinguished signatories include:
--Maestro Mstislav Rostropovitch
--Dr Robert Muller (fmr assistant UN secy- General)
--Astronaut Edgar Mitchell.
Major supporting organisations include:
--Mayors For Peace (Tadatoshi Akiba, Mayor of Hiroshima, representing 547
cities in 107 countries)
--John Loretz/Rob Mc Coy, International Physicians for the Prevention of
Nuclear War (IPPNW)
--Abolition 2000
--Greenpeace International
--Womens International League for Peace and Freedom
--Alyn Ware, International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms
--Dave krieger, Rev. Vernon. C. Nichols, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
--PSR (IPPNW-USA)
--Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Policy Research Institiute
--Admiral Ramdas/Achin Vanaik, Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace
(CNDP) India,
--CND.(UK)
Dear Parliamentarian/NGO:
You are invited to endorse the statement below calling for the
lowering of the operational status of nuclear weapons systems, and for
the adoption of resolutions on this issue in parliaments and
international forums.
Attached is an example of a parliamentary resolution adopted by the
Australian Senate and a model resolution for the UN General Assembly.
(This text is being sponsored by the Association of World Citizens and
Friends of the Earth)
When signing please include your title, name of organisation, and location.
STATEMENT OF ENDORSEMENT
The Distinguished individuals and organisations below, make the following
appeal concerning nuclear weapons, and the danger posed by the
maintainance of thousands of nuclear warheads and delivery systems on
launch-on-warning status.
We call on the governments of the United States, Russia, China, France,
and the UK, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea, to support and
implement steps to lower the operational status of nuclear weapon systems
in order to reduce the risk of nuclear catastrophe and as part of thier
obligations, affirmed by the International Court of Justice, to achieve
the elimination of nuclear weapons under strict and effective international
control.
We note that:
1)To this day, thousands of nuclear weapons in the US and Russia are on
Launch-on-warning status, and that the megatonnage involved remains more
than enough to destroy civilisation and perhaps the human race.
2)That the Indian subcontinent is increasingly on a 'hairtrigger' status.
3)That there have been numerous incidents in which a nuclear exchange
involving thousands of warheads could have taken place, and in which the
fate of the earth has depended on the correct judgement of a single individual.
4)That the US, Russia, China, France, and the UK have failed so far to
make further progress to achieve the total and unequivocal elimination of
their nuclear arsenals, as called for under international law.
5) That, in addition to the failure of the 'officlal' nuclear weapons
powers to fulfil their treaty obligations, India, Pakistan, Israel, and
North Korea also posess nuclear weapons, and that the risk of their use is
very real.
6)That a number of calls have been made by the UN General Assembly and by
the European Parliament to lower the operational status of nuclear weapons.
Accordingly we call on the governments of the United States, Russia, China,
France and the UK, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea, to:
a)Take immediate steps to lower the operational status of nuclear weapons,
and to revise nuclear doctrines, policies and postures to reflect such
lowered operational status.
b)To implement in good faith their obligations under international law , to
accomplish the total and unequivocal elimination of their nuclear arsenals.
c)To implement the steps toward nuclear disarmament outlined in the '13
steps' of the final declaration of the Year 2000 NPT Review Conference.
d) We call on non- nuclear nations to press for nuclear disarmament in
every available international forum especially including the United Nations
General Assembly First Committee and the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva.
e)We call on legislators worldwide to pass resolutions in national and
other parliaments pressing for the lowering of the operational status of
nuclear weapons and for nuclear disarmament as mandated by international law.
We draw the attention of legislators and diplomats to the two texts below:
i) A model for a resolution in the UN General Assembly calling for the
lowering of the operational status of nuclear weapons (Note that in the
process of getting it through the GA First Committee it may experience some
alterations in text)
ii) Motion passed by the Australian Senate congratulating Colonel
Stanislav Petrov on preventing nuclear war during the Serpukhov 15
incident of Sept 26 1983, and calling for the lowering of the
operational status of nuclear weapons.
You are invited to endorse the statement above calling for the lowering of
the operational status of nuclear weapons systems, and to give your support
to measures such as the texts below.
i) Model for a resolution in the UN General Assembly Calling for the
lowering of the operational status of nuclear weapons
Operational status of nuclear weapons
The General Assembly
Convinced that the possible use of nuclear weapons poses the most serious
threat to humanity and to the survival of civilization,
Convinced also that the maintenance of nuclear weapons systems at a high
level of readiness-to-use increases the risks of unintentional or
accidental use of such weapons which would have catastrophic consequences,
Noting that a high level of nuclear weapons readiness-to-use has
contributed to a number of circumstances when nuclear weapons have become
very close to being used,
Welcoming steps taken by States possessing nuclear weapons to reduce
nuclear risks and prevent nuclear war,
Welcoming particularly the agreement by Russia and the United States of
America on the Establishment of the Joint Center for the Exchange of Data
from Early Warning Systems and Notification of Missile Launches, but noting
that the agreement has not yet been implemented,
Considering that, until nuclear weapons are eliminated, it is imperative
that further steps be taken to prevent the accidental, unauthorized or
unintentional use of nuclear weapons,
Expressing its deep concern that thousands of strategic warheads remain on
Launch-On-Warning status,
Expressing its concern also about emerging approaches to the broader role
of nuclear weapons as part of security strategies, including
rationalizations for the use, and the possible development, of new types of
nuclear weapons,
Recalling the program of action agreed at the 2000 Non-Proliferation Treaty
Review Conference which called for concrete agreed measures to further
reduce the operational status of nuclear weapons systems
Recalling resolutions [specify resolution numbers] on the floor of this
assembly have called for reductions in the operational status of nuclear
weapons,
Mindful that concrete steps to reduce the operational status of nuclear
weapons systems will help reduce tensions, build confidence and support
negotiations leading to the elimination of nuclear weapons,
1. Calls for a review of nuclear doctrines emphasizing concrete steps to
reduce the operational status of nuclear weapons,
2. Encourages States to immediately implement unilateral steps including,
inter alia, the rescinding of launch-on-warning policies, and to urgently
conclude negotiated steps, pending agreements for the complete elimination
of nuclear weapons,
3. Calls on all States possessing nuclear weapons to undertake not to
increase the number or types of weapons deployed and not to develop new
types of weapons or rationalizations for their use,
4. Calls for further confidence-building and transparency measures to
reduce the threats posed by nuclear weapons,
5. Requests States possessing nuclear weapons to report to the 60th session
on steps they have taken to implement this resolution
6. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of its 60th session the
item entitled "Operational status of nuclear weapons."
ii)Motion passed by Australian Senate 23 June 2004 congratulating Colonel
Stanislav Petrov
21
FOREIGN AFFAIRS-NUCLEAR WEAPON SYSTEMS-COLONEL STANISLAV PETROV
Senator Allison amended general business notice of motion no. 895 by leave
and, pursuant to notice of motion not objected to as a formal motion,
moved-That the Senate-
(a) recalls the incident that took place in the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics (USSR) at Serpukhov-15 on 26 September 1983 at 12.30 pm
Moscow time, and the role of Colonel Stanislav Petrov in this incident;
(b) notes:
(i) that the Serpukhov-15 incident, in which a newly installed Soviet
surveillance system reported that the United States of America (US) had
launched nuclear missiles at the USSR, is considered by many analysts to
have been the closest the world has ever come to nuclear war,
(ii) that the megatonnage that was likely to have been used at that
time was between 30 and 60 times the amount required to produce a nuclear
winter, and that the number of nuclear weapons that would have been
launched would have been enough to end civilisation and kill most living
things,
(iii) the role played by Colonel Petrov in refraining from launching
a number of thousands of warheads at the US in retaliation and in pressing
his superiors to consider the report a false alarm,
(iv) that the Canberra Commission of 1996 recommended that strategic
nuclear weapons be taken off `Launch on Warning' status, and
(v) the resolution of the European Parliament of 18 November 1999,
and the Senate's own resolutions as well as repeated calls to lower the
alert status of strategic nuclear weapons made by the Non-Aligned Movement
and the New Agenda Coalition that have been passed year after year by the
United Nations (UN) General Assembly;
(b) offers its congratulations to Colonel Petrov for being presented
with the World Citizen Award on Friday, 21 May 2004, in recognition of his
actions; and
(c) urges the Government to give support to measures aimed at lowering
the readiness to launch nuclear weapon systems and to support such measures
on the floor of the UN General Assembly.
Question put and passed.
url for this motion:
(Sometimes gives a 'runtime error')
http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/view_document.aspx?id=95635&table=journals
From:
John Hallam
Nuclear Weapons Campaigner Friends of the Earth Australia,
nonukes@foesyd.org.au
61-2-9567-7533, fax 61-2-9567-7166
1 Henry Street Turella NSW Aust 2205
-------------------------------------------
Doug Mattern,
Association of World Citizens,
55 New Montgomery Street, Suite 224, San Francisco, CA 94105.
1- 415 541 9610.
Supported by the Organisations and distinguished individuals below:
Nobel Prizewinners:
Dr. Baruj Benacerraf Medicine 1980
Dr. Guenter Blobel Medicine 1999
Mairead Corrigan Maguire Peace 1976
Dr. Peter C. Doherty Medicine 1996
Dr. R.R. Ernst Chemistry 1991
Dr. John B. Fenn Chemistry 2002.
Dr. Val L. Fitch Physics 1980
Dr. Herbert A. Hauptman Chemistry 1985
Dr. Edmond H. Fischer Medicine 1992
Dr. Jean-Marue Lehn Chemistry 1987
Dr. Ferid Murad Medicine 1998
Dr. Joseph Rotblat Peace 1995
Oscar Arias Sanchez Peace 1987
Dr. Frederick Sanger Chemistry 1958; 1980
Dr. Jack Steinberger Physics 1998
Dr. E. Donnall Thomas Medicine 1990
Archbishop Desmond Tutu Peace 1984
The Dalai Lama Peace
Other distinguished Persons:
Maestro Mstislav Rostropovich
Dr. Robert Muller (Fmr UN assistant Secy General)
Edgar Mitchell (Astronaut)
Benjamin Ferencz, (Prosecutor at the Nuremburg War Crimes Trials)
Prof Saul Mendlovitz, Dag Hammarskjold Professor, Rutgers Law School,
International Organisations:
Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba, Mayors for Peace, Hiroshima, Japan, (547 member
cities from 107 countries)
Ronald Mc Coy President, John Loretz, Program Director, International
Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW)
Emma Mc Gregor-Mento, Abolition-2000
Cora Weiss, Hague Appeal for Peace (HAP),
Alyn Ware, International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms,
Nicky Davies, Greenpeace International, Amsterdam,
Susi Snyder, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom
(WILPF), Director, United Nations Office- NY
Bruce Gagnon, Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space,
Brunswick, ME, USA,
Vijay Mehta, Chair, World Disarmament Campaign, Lond,
Charles Mercieca, International Association of Educators for World Peace
(IAEWP) Huntsville Ala, USA,
Pol D'Huyvetter, For Mother Earth International, Ghent, Belgium,
Kate Cell, Director, Lucy Webster, UN Observer, Economists Allied for Arms
Reduction (ECAAR)
Rev. Vernon C. Nickols, UN Observer/NGO Rep, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation,
Yumi Kikuchi, founder, Global Peace Campaign,
Peer de Rijk, World Information Service on Energy (WISE) Amsterdam,
David Mumford, International Fellowship of Reconciliation (IFOR), Alkmaar,
Neth,
Penny McManigal, The Millionth Circle, USA,
Mary T. Legge SSJ, DPI/NGO at UN for Congregations of St Joseph,
US Organisations:
Helen Caldicott,(founder PSR, WAND) President, Nuclear Policy Research
Institute, Wash DC,
Alice Slater, Global Resource and Action Centre for the Environment, NY,
Martin Butcher, PSR, Washington DC,
Bruce Blair, President, Centre for Defence Information, Washington,
(identification only)
Jonathan Granoff, President, Global Security Institute, (pers capy)
David Krieger, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, Santa Barbara, Calif,
Rev. Vernon C. Nichols, UN-NGO Rep, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation,
Pamela S. Meidell, Atomic Mirror, Port Hueneme, Calif, USA.,
David Robinson, Pax Christi USA, Erie, PA,
Peggy L. Shriver, Fmr Asst. General Secy, National Council of Churches, NY.,
Donald W. Shriver, Union Theological Seminary, NY.,
Rev. William J. Morton, SSC, Columban Mission Office, US/Mexico Border, El
Paso Texas, USA,
Bernice Fisher, Penninsula WILPF, Palo Alto Calif,
Bill Smirnow, Nuclear- Free New York,
Donald Keesing, Voices Opposed to Environmental Racism, Wash DC,
Lorraine Krofchok, Grandmothers for Peace International, Elk Grove, Calif,
Vina Colley, PRESS, Ohio,
Bruce A. Drew, Prairie Island Coalition, Mn, USA,
George Crocker, N. American Water office, Lake Elmo, Mn, USA,
Daniel Ellsberg, Truth-Telling Project, (Fmr RAND consultant to White House
on Nuclear C3I)
Kathy Kelly, Coordinator, Voices in the Wilderness, Chicago Ill,
Patricia J. Ameno, Chair, Citizens Action for a Safe Environment, Penn,
Francis Chiappa, President, Cleveland Peace Action,
John Laforge, Nukewatch, WI, USA,
Andrew Hund, Alaska/Arctic Environmental Defense Fund,
Coleen Marshall Secy, Sheldon Nidle, Founder, Planetary Activation
Organisation, Hawaii,
Marsha Joyner, President, Hawiian National Communications Corporation,
Honululu, Hawaii,
Paul Ehrlich, President, Centre of Conservation Biology, Stanford
University, Stanford, Calif,
Irving Stolberg, President, Caucus of Connecticut Democrats,
Irving Stolberg, President, Connecticut Division, United Nations Association,
Barbara Murphy-Warrington, CARE-USA, Atlanta, Georgia,
Alanna Hartzog, Co-Director, Earth Rights Institute, PA,
Beth A. Pirolli, Director, Families United for a Safe Environment (FUSE),
Carolyn Vigneri, Nebraskans for Peace, Omaha, Nebraska, USA,
Glen Carroll, Georgians Against Nuclear Energy, Atlanta, GA, USA,
Robert Gould MD, Physicians for Sociel Responsibility (PSR) San Francisco
Bay Area, Berkley, Calif,
Samuel S. Epstien MD, Chair, Cancer Prevention Coalition, Chcago, Ill,
Dr Kathleen Sullivan, Nuclear Weapons Education and Action Prject, NY.,
Terri Swearingen (1997 Golman Prize) Tri-State Environmental Council, WV.,
Bill Towe, North Carolina Peace Action, NC, USA,
Medea Benjamin, Co-Founder, Global Exchange,
Jennifer O. Viereck, Director HOME: Healing Ourselves & Mother Earth,
Tecopa, CA,
Bob Kinsey, Colorado Coalition for the Prevention of Nuclear War,
Kevin Martin Executive Director Peace Action and Peace Action Education
Fund, MD,
Canadian Organisations
Debbie Grisdale President/Steven Starr, Physicians for Global
Responsibility, (PGS),
Rosalie Bertell, President Emeritus, International Institute for Concern
for Public Health, Toronto, Ont,
Roy and Anne Morris, Salmon Arm Kairos Group, BC, Canada,
Gordon Edwards PhD, President, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear
Responsibility (CCNR),
Desmond Berghofer, Co-Founder, Institute for Ethical
Leadership, Vancouver Canada,
Metta Spencer, Editor, Peace Magazine, Toronto, Ont,
Libby Davies MP, Vancouver East, Canada,
UK Organisations
George Farebrother, World Court Project, Lond, UK,
Vijay Mehta, CND London,
Jenny Maxwell, West Midlands Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Birmingham, UK,
Reuben Ralph Say, Woking Action for Peace/CND, Woking, Surrey, UK,
Caroline Gilbert, Patricia Pulham, Michael Pulham, Christian Campaign for
Nuclear Disarmament (CCND),
Jill Stallard National Secy, CND Cymru, Nantagredig, Cynghordy,
Llanymddyfri, Wales, UK,
Di Mc Donald, Nuclear Information Service, (NIS) Southampton, UK,
Ken Coates, Chair, Bertrand Russel Peace Foundation,
Angie Zelter, Trident Ploughshares UK,
Richard Bramhall, Low-Level Radiation Campaign, Llandridod, Powys, UK,
Lindis Percy/Anni Rainbow, CAAB, Yorks, UK,
David Bowe, MEP,
Dr Caroline Lucas MEP, Green Member of the European Parliament for S.E. England
Alan Simpson MP,
David Chaytor MP, Member for Bury North,
Frank Cook MP, Westminster,
Russian Organisations
Vladimir Sliviak, Co-Chair, Ecodefense, Moscow,
Andrei Laletin, Chairman, Friends of the Siberian Forests, Krasnoyarsk, Russia,
Jennie Sutton, Baikal Environmental Wave,
Victor Khazan, Friends of the Earth Ukraine, Dipropetrovsk, Ukr,
Sergei Kolesnikov, Duma Member, Deputy Chair, Cttee on Education and
Science, Moscow,
Sergei Kolesnikov, IPPNW-Russia,
Indian Organisations
Achin Vanaik, Admiral L. Ramdas, Lalita Ramdas, Coalition for Nuclear
Disarmament and Peace (CNDP), India New Delhi,
Admiral L. Ramdas, India-Pakistan Soldiers Initiative for Peace, Raigad
Dist, Maharashtra,
Hari Sharma, President, International South Asia Forum,
Sukla Sen, EKTA, Mumbai, India,
Mahipal Singh, Peoples Union for Civil Liberties, New Delhi,
Imrana Quadeer, Centre for Community Health and Social Medicine, JNU, New
Delhi,
Harsh Kapoor, (India/France) South Asians Against Nukes,
Jayanti Patel, Indian Radical Humanist Association, Ahmedabad, Gujarat,
Kirity Roy, Secy, MASUM, Howrah, W. Bengal,
Swami Manavatavadi, International School of Humanitarian Thoughts and
Practice, Rajghat, Kurukshetra, Haryana,
Aruna Roy, Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), Rajasthan,
The National Campaign for the Peoples Right to Information (NCPRI)
Rajasthan, India,
Mahi Pal Singh, Treasurer, People's Union for Civil Liberties-Delhi
Ammu Abraham, Womens Centre, Mumbai,
Pakistani Organisations
Pirzada Imtiaz Syed, Secy, All-Pakistan Federation of United Trade Unions
(APFUTU), Gujrat, Pakistan,
AH Nayyar, President, Pakistan Peace Coalition,
Dr Mubashir Hasan, (Fmr finance minister) Campaigner for Human Rights and
India-Pakistan Friendship, Pakistan-India Forum for Peace and Democracy.
Prof. M. Ismail, Director, RISE, Peshawar, Pakistan,
NZ Organisations
Commander Robert Green, Disarmament and Security Centre, Christchurch, NZ,
Alyn Ware, Peace Foundation, Wellington, NZ,
Marion Hancock, Wendy John, Aotearoa/NZ Peace Foundation, Auckland NZ,
Christine Lesley, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Wellington, NZ,
R.E. White, Director, Centre for Peace Studies, University of Auckland, NZ,
Peter Low, Quaker Peace and Service, NZ,
Jonathan Hunt MP, Speaker, NZ Parliament,
Keith Locke MP, Greens, NZ,
Gordon Copeland MP, United Future Party,
Tim Barnett MP, Labor, Christchurch Central Electorate, Christchurch NZ,
Australian Organisations
Sue Wareham, President, Medical Association for the Prevention of War (MAPW),
Margaret Reynolds, President, United Nations Association of Australia (UNAA),
Jo Vallentine, People for Nuclear Disarmament W.A.,
David Sweeney, Nuclear Campaigner, Australian Conservation Foundation,
Carlton, Vic,
Peter Robertson Environment Centre of the Northern Territory (ECNT) Darwin, NT,
Gar Smith, Environmentalists Against War,
Dr Stella Cornelius, Director, Conflict Resolution Network, Chatswood NSW,
Ned Iceton, Co-Convenor, Social Development Network, Armidale NSW,
Peter Burton, Peace Partners, Toowoomba, Qld,
Dr Mark Zirnsak, Director, Justice and International Mission, Synod of
Victoria and Tasmania, Uniting Church in Australia,
Rev Sue Gorman, Moderator, Synod of Victoria and Tasmania, Uniting Church
in Australia,
Keith Russel, Religious Society of Friends, ACT,
Senator Kerry Nettle, Greens, NSW,
Senator Lyn Alison, Australian Democrats Vic,
Senator Andrew Bartlett, Australian Democrats Qld,
Senator Aden Ridgeway, Australian Democrats NSW,
Senator Natasha Stott-Despoja, Australian Democrats SA,
Senator Brian Grieg, Australian Democrats WA,
Terry Roberts MP, SA,
Carmen Lawrence MHR, President, Labor Party,
Jill Hall MP,
Warren Snowden MP, ALP Member for Lingiari NT,
Alan Griffin MP, Member for Bruce, Melb,
Jann Mc Farlane MHR, Member for Stirling, W.A.,
Dee Margetts MLC (Greens), W.A.,
Giz Watson, Greens, W.A.,
Ian Cohen MLC (Greens) NSW,
Kerrie Tucker MLA, Greens ACT,
Swedish Organisations
Agneta Norberg/Bo Wirmark, Chair, Swedish Peace Council,
Gunnar Westberg, President, SLMK (IPPNW Sweden), Goteborg, Sweden,
Anders Ygeman MP, Stockholm,
Finnish Organisations
Teemu Matinpuro, Director, Finnish Peace Committee, Helsinki, Finland,
Lea Launokari, Women for Peace Finland,
Ulla Kotzer, Women Against Nuclear Power Finland,
Heidi Hautala MP Greens,
German Organisations
Eva Quistorp, Women for Peace, Germany,
Henning Droege, Arzt fur Allgemeinmedizin, Homoopathie, Naturheilverfahren,
Allgau, Germany,
Wolfgang Schlupp-Hauck, Friedens-und Begegnungsstaette Mutlangen eV, Germany,
Dr Anne Brie MEP PDS,
Bernd Frieboese, Barsebackoffensiv (Pers capy)
Rienhard Voss, Pax Christi Germany, Franfurt Am Main,
Belgian Organisations
Hans Lammerant, Forum Voor Vredesaktie, Belgium,
Zoe Genot MP, Greens, Belgium,
Eloi Glorieux MP, Greens, Flemish Regional Parliament, Belgium,
Muriel Gerkens MP, Greens, Brussels,
Senator Patrick Vankrunkelsven, Brussels, Belg,
Marie Isler-Beguin, MEP,
Edith Klein, European Commission, Brussels, Belg,
Netherlands Organisations
Harry Van Bommel MP, Neth,
Joost Lagendijk, Member of European Parliament, GroenLinks, Netherlands,
Fiona Dove, Director, Transnational Institute, Neth,
French Organisations
Dominique Lalanne, Co-Chair, Stop Essais, France,
Bruno Barrilot, Director, Observatoire des Armes Nucleaires Francaises,
Lyons, France,
Jean-Marie Matagne, Action des Citoyens pour le Desarmement Nucleaire
(ACDN) Saintes, France,
Luisa Morgantini MEP, Italy/Brussells
Folena Pietro, MP Italy, Foreign Affairs Commission, Democrats of the Left
(DS) - Olive Tree Coalition
Hallgeir H. Langeland MP, Norway,
Bent Natvig, Chair, Norwegian Pugwash Committee, Oslo, Norway,
Czech Peace Society, Prague, Czech Rep,
Romanian Organisations
Constantin Cretu, Romanian Social Forum, Bucharest, Romania,
Constantin Cretu, 'Carpathians Genius' Bucharest, Romania,
Aurel Duta, For Mother Earth, Bucharest, Romania,
Manana Kochladze, 'Green Alternative', Tblisi, Georgia,
Atsushi Fujioka, Kyoto Museum for World Peace, Kyoto, Japan,
Hideyuki-Ban, Secy-General, Citizens Nuclear Information Centre (CNIC)
Tokyo, Japan,
Wen Bo, Pacific Environment, Beijing, China,
Kim Choony, Korean Federation for Environmental Movement, (KFEM)
Mexican Organisations
Efraim Cruz Marin, President, Academicos de Ciencias y Humanidades, Mexico,
Noni Fernandez, Mexican Initiative Against War, Chiapas, Colonia Roma,
Luis Guttierez Esparza, President, Latin-American Circle for International
Studies (LACIS), Mexico City,
Grace de Haro, APDH, Rio Negro, Argentina,
Dina Lida Kinoshita, Unesca Catedra for Education for Peace, Human Rights,
Democracy and Tolerance, Sao Paulo, Brasil,
Senator Roberto Saturnino, Brasilian Federal Senate, (for Rio de Janiero)
Roy Cabonegro, YSDA-Pilipinas, Quezon City, Phillipines,
Clemente G. Bautista, Kalikasan, (Peoples Network for the Environment)
Phillipines,
Soodhakur Ramlallah Secy Mauritius Union of Journalists Port Louis Mauritius
Bishan Singh, SUSDEN, Malaysia,
Dato Haji Mustapha Ma, Secy, IFNGO, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
Lonngena Ginting, WALHI/Friends of the Earth Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia,
Saranjan Kodithuwakku, Green Movement of Sri Lanka, Nugegoa, Sri Lanka,
Maria D. Watondoha MP, Tanzanian National Assembly, Dodoma, Tanzania,
Edward Appiah-Brafoh, Green Earth Organisation, Accra, Ghana,
Dr. Araf Marei, Vice President, Egyptian Association for Community
Participation, Cairo, Egypt,
Dr Akram Alhamdani, President, Green Party of Iraq, Baghdad
Ayman Jallad, Humanitarian Group for Social Development, Beirut, Lebanon,
Mabrouk Boudaga, Arab Young Lawyers Association, Tunis, Tunisia,
*****************************************************************
18 The Heral: Scottish firms urged to make sparks in Chinas
powerhouse
Web Issue 2115 October 14 2004
DOUGLAS FRASER, Scottish Political Editor, Beijing
October 14 2004
China's dash for new electricity generating capacity is paying
off for Scottish companies selling specialist products, with
Howden yesterday announcing an expansion of its Shanghai plant,
and Jack McConnell, the first minister, promising more
assistance to companies trying to break into the Chinese market.
Staffing in the two Chinese offices of Scottish Development
International an offshoot of Scottish Enterprise is to be
doubled from four to eight, while the first minister has
announced that he is to station a full-time executive
representative in Beijing, which it has only done until now in
Brussels and Washington.
On the third day of his five-day visit to China, McConnell
focussed on the 25 Scottish businesses operating in China, with
visits to the Beijing offices of the Howden Group, based at
Renfrew, and Clyde Blowers, based at East Kilbride, both of
which have built up substantial joint venture operations in
China, providing specialist equipment for power stations.
Howden manufactures industrial fans and heat exchangers, having
been in a partnership with three Chinese companies since 1994.
It has 500 employees in Shanghai and yesterday announced
expansion plans of around 100 extra staff over the next two
years.
According to Bill Thompson, executive director of Clyde
Blowers, which manufactures soot and ash handling devices to
maximise coal-burning effic-iency, the Chinese will next year
increase their electricity-generating capacity by more than the
total capacity available in the UK. They will then keep up that
pace, to provide for the shortfall which has been one of the key
blockages in the country's rapid economic growth.
Much of the growth will be coal-powered, raising concerns about
the severe environmental harm that is being caused by Chinese
economic growth. There will also be renewable energy, plans for
20 natural gas stations and new nuclear plants being opened at a
rate of one each year for the next 16 years.
Thomson cites the government's growth plans, recently raising
the target for the current five-year programme from 380,000
megawatts to 430,000 megawatts. In the next 20 years, they aim
to increase to 900,000 megawatts. For comparison, Britain's
generating capacity is put at 65,000 megawatts.
"This growth is bigger than the rest of the world put
together," said Thomson. "If you want to be in the power
business, you've got to be here."
Thomson has visited China 89 times in the past 11 years since
he began to establish the company in its second-biggest market
after the United States. It built up two joint ventures and last
year set up a wholly-owned subsidiary to market its machinery
for removing ash from the bottom of furnaces. Together they
employ 230 staff in Beijing and Shanghai.
Chinese orders account for Ł28m of turnover, or 36%,
representing 24% of turnover and 21% of profit.
McConnell commented on the increased SDI staff and his company
visits which also included Standard Life's new joint venture:
"Scottish companies need to seize the opportunities opened up by
China's growing economy and we need to support them. Scotland
has much to offer China. We are strong in many of the key
sectors of the modern economy such as financial services, life
sciences and energy.
"We have world-class universities to support research, and we
have the enterprising spirit needed to succeed in the world's
fastest growing economy."
Jack Perry, the Scottish Enterprise chief executive who is
travelling with the first minister, said there was potential for
many more companies to target the Chinese market, but they face
substantial challenges in doing so.
"We can help them plan properly and ensure their investment
pays off. The scale of the opportunities for Scottish companies,
large and small, is enormous. We want to ensure they get off to
the best start possible in this booming market."
Copyright © Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights
[http://www.pressnow.co.uk/] :: About Us :: Terms of Use
*****************************************************************
19 DAWN: 'Khan network supplied N-parts made in Europe, Southeast Asia'
-DAWN - Top Stories; 14 October, 2004
http://www.dawn.com/
By Anwar Iqbal
WASHINGTON, Oct 13: A large number of sensitive nuclear
components sold to Iran and Libya for building uranium enrichment
plants were made at workshops in Europe and Southeast Asia, says
a Washington-based nuclear monitoring agency.
In a recent report on the nuclear black market, the Institute for
Science and International Security confirms Pakistan's claim that
the network might have been headed by a Pakistani, Dr A.Q. Khan,
but it was a gang of international proliferators and smugglers
that had bases and workshops at many places across the globe.
The ISIS report says that the centrifuges the network sold to
Iran and Libya are formally called Pakistan 1 and Pakistan 2 but
are better known by their acronyms, P1 and P2.
They are used for uranium enrichment and were deployed in large
numbers by Pakistan's gas centrifuge programme. The P1 centrifuge
uses an aluminium rotor, and the P2 centrifuge uses a steel
rotor.
The components for roughly 500 P1 centrifuges that went to Iran
in the mid-90s were from centrifuges that Pakistan had retired
from its main centrifuge programme. Members of the network were
able to remove them in secret and sell them to Iran.
Libya received 20 of its P1s in that manner. Libya also bought
about 200 P1 centrifuges from the wider network. At least some,
if not all, of the components of the additional 200 P1s were made
outside Pakistan at workshops under contract with companies in
the network. Aluminium rotors, for example, were made in
Malaysia.
The P2 centrifuges, which are more advanced machines, reportedly
left Pakistan in much smaller numbers. The two that were sent to
Libya, for example, were samples or demonstration models. One of
the P2s that went to Libya was not suitable for enrichment with
uranium hexafluoride gas. It did not have the final surface
coating necessary to prevent corrosion by uranium hexafluoride
gas.
In the case of Libya, the network focused on making P2 components
outside Pakistan. The Libyans have told US investigators that
they placed an order for 10,000 P2 machines. Since each
centrifuge has roughly 100 different components, this order
translates into a total of about one million components, a
staggering number of parts given the sophistication of gas
centrifuge components. The network was assembling an impressive
cast of experts, companies, suppliers and workshops to make all
these components.
The workshops that contracted to make components for the network
typically imported the necessary items, such as metals, equipment
or subcomponents. After they made the item, they would then send
it - either assembled or as a finished centrifuge component - to
Dubai under a false end-user certificate. Then it would be
repackaged and sent off to Libya.
The ISIS report quotes Mohamed EIBaradei, Director General of the
IAEA, as saying that "nuclear components designed in one country
could be manufactured in another, shipped through a third,
assembled in a fourth, and designated for eventual turn-key use
in a fifth."
We and British investigators allowed inspecting Libya's nuclear
plant identified roughly half a dozen key workshops that were
making or doing final assembly of the centrifuge components. The
network selected a workshop based on the type of centrifuge
component needed and the materials and equipment involved in
making those particular components.
The most well-known workshop was located in Malaysia at a company
called SCOPE. The parts seized on a German ship, BBC China, in
Italy last year, were from SCOPE. US State Department spokesman
Adam Ariel told reporters earlier this year that the ship had
been en route to Libya but was diverted to an Italian port so
that US investigators could seize the content.
SCOPE was also near the company that made the aluminium rotors
for the 200 P1 centrifuges that Libya imported from the network.
The network contracted with SCOPE to make thousands of 14
different high precision aluminium centrifuge components for
Libya's order. The contract with SCOPE involved up to about 15
per cent of the total number of components sought by the network
for Libya.
Workshops in Turkey made the centrifuge motor and frequency
converters used to drive the motor and spin the rotor to high
speeds. These workshops imported sub components from Europe and
elsewhere, and they assembled these centrifuge items in Turkey.
Under false end-user certificates, the components were then
shipped to Dubai for repackaging and shipment to Libya.
SCOPE did not make the P2 centrifuges' maraging steel parts,
which comprise the bulk of the rotating components in a
centrifuge and are more difficult to make than the aluminium
parts. It has not yet been determined which workshop, if any, was
contracted to make the sensitive steel rotor and bellows. The
network appears to have experienced trouble in finding a workshop
to make these components.
Libya also ordered from the network a sophisticated manufacturing
centre, code-named Workshop 1001, to make centrifuge components.
The original plan called for this centre to make additional
centrifuges after the network delivered the first 10,000
centrifuges, either to replace broken ones or add to the total
number of centrifuges. However, if the network had difficulty in
making a component for the original 10,000 machines, this centre
may have had to make that particular component.
© The DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2004
*****************************************************************
20 Interfax: Russia-Iran nuclear energy cooperation doesn't involve military
technology - Ivanov
Interfax.com [http://www.interfax.com] Text version
Oct 14 2004 11:51AM
POIANA BRASOV (Romania). Oct 14 (Interfax) - Nuclear energy
cooperation between Moscow and Tehran excludes Iran's use of
Russian technologies for military purposes, Defense Minister
Sergei Ivanov said at an informal meeting between NATO and
Russian defense ministers in the Romanian town of Poiana Brasov
on Thursday.
"Russia is helping Iran build a nuclear power plant in Bushehr.
I can assure you that the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) has strict control over the project, which rules out the
possible use of Russian technologies and materials for military
purposes," he said.
© 1991-2004 Interfax
All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
21 Tennessean: Environmentalists irked over firm making reactor fuel for TVA -
Thursday, 10/14/04
[http://tennessean.com
By DUNCAN MANSFIELD Associated Press
KNOXVILLE Nuclear Fuel Services has started turning
weapons-grade uranium from the Savannah River Site into
commercial reactor fuel for the Tennessee Valley Authority to
make electricity.
''The first shipments have already left the facility,'' Tony
Treadway, spokesman for the NFS plant in Erwin, about 120 miles
north of Knoxville, said yesterday.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced Tuesday through a
notice in the Federal Register that NFS received a third and
final license amendment to begin ''downblending'' 33 metric tons
of highly enriched uranium from the Department of Energy plant in
South Carolina.
The material will be converted into low-enriched uranium for
reactor fuel for TVA, the nation's largest public utility.
The decision, the result of a regulatory process that began in
2002, came without public hearing.
Environmental opponents, including the Sierra Club, the Tennessee
Environmental Council and the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace
Alliance, will file an appeal tomorrow demanding a full
environmental impact statement.
Diane Curran, a Washington, D.C., attorney representing the
environmental groups, said her clients support the project's
objective of turning Cold War swords into plowshares.
''But what this whole process looks like is a railroad because
the NRC has done the barest minimum of environmental study of
this, and it deserves better. My clients deserve better,'' she
said. ''They deserve to have the federal agency that is
supposedly regulating this process to really take a hard look at
ways that the environmental risk could be minimized.''
The NRC issued a 92-page report supporting the latest licensing
amendment as meeting federal safety standards.
The NFS plant, which continues to supply fuel for U.S. nuclear
submarines, sits in the middle of Erwin in northeastern Tennessee
near the Nolichucky River. About 2,800 people live within 15
miles of the plant, along with businesses, a health-care center
and a school.
The value of the four-year project has been measured in many ways
saving taxpayers $500 million that would been spent storing the
material or providing TVA with a clean-energy fuel equal to
800,000 rail cars of coal.
''This has been a project that has been fully studied beginning
in 1996,'' Treadway said. ''There have been numerous reviews by
government agencies, including an environmental assessment
reviewed by people all the way from the Tennessee Historic
Commission to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Agency. All of those
studies found that it would have no significant impact on the
environment.''
| [http://www.tennessean.com/] |
© Copyright 2004 The Tennessean A Gannett Co.
*****************************************************************
22 Platts: Domenici: Senate funding for nuclear exceeds House levels
Washington (Platts)--13Oct2004
+ The Senate's funding levels for nuclear projects are "well
above" the levels in the House bill or the administration's
request, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) said today.
In a speech delivered by Pete Lyons, a senior Domenici aide, to a
Nuclear Energy Institute conference in Ponte Verda, Fla.,
Domenici cited programs such as Nuclear Power 2010, the Nuclear
Energy Research Initiative, Generation IV reactors, and the
Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative as items that received the higher
funding in the draft bill, which has not been made public.
Domenici has the lead responsibility in the Senate for
appropriations for DOE's nuclear programs. In the speech,
Domenici also said he has "forcefully" told DOE it should fund
all three consortia that have applied for construction and
operating licenses for new plants; only one of the three has
received funding to date.
Copyright © 2004 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
[The McGraw-Hill Companies]
*****************************************************************
23 Times Argus: Federal regulators to hold hearing on Yankee power boost
timesargus.com
October 14, 2004
BRATTLEBORO (AP) Federal regulators will come to Vermont next
week to hear arguments on whether there should be a hearing on
Entergy Nuclear's request for a power boost at the Vermont Yankee
nuclear plant.
The quasi-judicial Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, an arm of
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, will meet in Brattleboro on
Oct. 21 and possibly Oct. 22.
The board will hear from NRC staff, the state Department of
Public Service and the nuclear watchdog group New England
Coalition, as well as Entergy Nuclear, owners of the Vernon
reactor.
The state believes the 20 percent power increase, as proposed,
would compromise safety margins at the 32-year-old nuclear plant.
© 2004 Times Argus [http://www.timesargus.com/]
*****************************************************************
24 Boston.com: NRC investigating report of operator napping
By Associated Press, 10/14/2004 07:19
PLYMOUTH, Mass. (AP) The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is
investigating a report that a senior reactor operator fell asleep
in the control room at Pilgrim Nuclear Station.
The NRC, which said the incident was brought to the federal
agency's attention in late August, notified plant officials about
the incident on Aug. 26. Plant officials subsequently suspended
the entire crew that worked the shift on the night in question,
June 29, and the napping operator and a co-worker who took his
picture sleeping with a cell phone camera were let go.
''The inattentiveness can't be tolerated, but secondly, the
employee that filmed the senior reactor operator did not
immediately report the potential safety condition,'' said David
Tarantino, a spokesman for Pilgrim, a 670-megawatt power plant
owned by the conglomerate Entergy.
The operator's nap was brief, and never posed a threat the
public, said the NRC, which was notified of the incident by a
third party.
The NRC requires that several people staff the control room on
each shift, and the plant met that requirement on the night of
June 29, the agency said.
NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said that the operator's nap appears
to have been an isolated event.
The NRC is developing rules that would limit the number of hours
plant operators can work. Currently, there are only guidelines,
published in 1982 after the Three mile Island disaster in
Pennsylvania, recommending a 40-hour week and shifts no longer
than 16 hours.
Mary Lampert, director of the anti-nuclear group Pilgrim Watch,
said the case was ''something that you'd see in the Simpsons (TV
show), and you'd laugh.
''But you don't laugh when you recognize the consequences of a
disaster at a nuclear power plant,'' she said.
archives [http://www.boston.com/tools/archives/] © 2004
*****************************************************************
25 Iraqi govt: nuke sites now fully protected
October 14, 2004
[http://www.brunei-online.com/mp]
BAGHDAD (AFP) - The Iraqi government said Wednesday all nuclear
sites are now fully protected after lapses in security during the
early days of the US-led occupation.
"Since the transfer of power and the passage of certain sites to
the responsibility of our ministry, all sites are protected,"
said Mohammad Jawad al-Shareh, director-general of the ministry
of science and technology.
Shareh said that in the aftermath of the US-led invasion in
March 2003 "people snuck in and took some equipment and
material," but that the situation had improved since the country
regained its sovereignty at the end of June.
In an October 1 letter to the UN Security Council, International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei said he was
concerned that material and equipment, in some cases entire
buildings housing sophisticated technology, are disappearing from
Iraq.
Copyright © 2004 Brunei Press Sdn Bhd
[http://www.bruneipress.com.bn] . All right reserved.
*****************************************************************
26 NRC: NRC Begins Special Inspection at Hope Creek Nuclear Power Plant
News Release - Region I - 2004-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-04-047
October 12, 2004 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil
A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail:
opa1@nrc.gov [opa1@nrc.gov]
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has begun a special inspection
into the rupture of an 8-inch drain line that led to a manual
shutdown of the Hope Creek nuclear power plant on October 10. The
inspection got under way today at the plant, which is located in
Hancock Bridge (Salem County), N.J., and operated by Public
Service Electric & Gas (PSEG).
There are five full-time and three part-time members on the NRC
inspection team, which will be tasked with evaluating the
circumstances surrounding the Oct. 10 event. The review will
include an assessment of whether the steam pipe failure could
have been prevented and an independent evaluation of equipment
and human-performance issues that complicated the shutdown. In
addition, the inspection will assess the adequacy of PSEGs
root-cause evaluation of the event and its plans for corrective
actions.
Between about 6 p.m. and 6:14 p.m. on Oct. 10, the plants
operators reduced power and then manually shut down the reactor
in response to indications of a steam leak in the turbine
building. The leak was isolated shortly thereafter when the
operators shut the main steam valves. While subsequently cooling
down the plant, the operators experienced difficulties in
efforts to maintain appropriate reactor vessel water levels.
However, the plant maintained adequate safety margins throughout
the event, backup safety equipment was available if needed, and
the shutdown was successfully carried out. A small release of
radioactivity occurred, but it was well below allowable federal
limits.
The team will document its findings and conclusions in a report
to be issued within 45 days after an exit meeting with the
utility at the inspections conclusion.
Last revised Thursday, October 14, 2004
*****************************************************************
27 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
FR Doc 04-23006
[Federal Register: October 14, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 198)]
[Notices] [Page 61048-61049] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14oc04-109]
Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
ACTION: Notice of pending NRC action to submit an information
collection request to OMB and solicitation of public comment.
SUMMARY: The NRC is preparing a submittal to OMB for review of
continued approval of information collections under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35). Information pertaining to the requirement to be
submitted: 1. The title of the information collection:
NUREG/BR-0238, Materials Annual Fee Billing Handbook, NRC Form
628, Financial EDI Authorization, NUREG/BR-0254, Payment Methods,
NRC Form 629, Authorization for Payment by Credit Card.
2. Current OMB approval number: 3150-0190. 3. How often the
collection is required: Annually. 4. Who is required or asked to
report: Anyone doing business with the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission including licensees, applicants and individuals who
are required to pay a fee for inspections and licenses.
5. The number of annual respondents: 7,330 (10 for NRC Form 628,
and 7,320 for NRC Form 629, and NUREG/BR-0254).
6. The number of hours needed annually to complete the
requirement or request: 611 (.80 hour for NRC Form 628 and 610
hours for NRC Form 629 and NUREG/BR-0254).
7. Abstract: The U.S. Department of the Treasury encourages the
public to pay monies owed the government through use of the
Automated Clearinghouse Network and credit cards. These two
methods of payment are used by licensees, applicants, and
individuals to pay civil penalties, full cost licensing fees, and
inspection fees to the NRC.
Submit, by December 13, 2004, comments that address the following
questions: 1. Is the proposed collection of information necessary
for the NRC to properly perform its functions? Does the
information have practical utility? 2. Is the burden estimate
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 or other forms of information
technology? A copy of the draft supporting statement 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. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide
Web site:
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html
[http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leaving
FR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comm
ent/omb/index.html] . The
[[Page 61049]] document will be available on the NRC home page
site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions about the information collection
requirements may be directed to the NRC Clearance Officer, Brenda
Jo. Shelton (T-5 F52), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, by telephone at 301-415-7233, or by
Internet electronic mail to INFOCOLLECTS@NRC.GOV
[INFOCOLLECTS@NRC.GOV] . Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th
day of October, 2004.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-23006 Filed 10-13-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
28 Challis Messenger: Snake River Alliance meets with locals
by Anna Means
If you think youve had a problem with inexplicable cancers, go
to Boise November 6. Or write a letter to the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS). That was the message delivered by three members
of the Snake River Alliance who met with locals Tuesday night.
The Snake River Alliance is encouraging people to offer testimony
in Boise when the NAS visits in November. The NAS was
commissioned to study the effects of above ground nuclear testing
on citizens of the U.S. They were recently persuaded to hold a
meeting in Idaho after 450 or more people sent their cancer
stories to the academy.
The study is seeking anyone who has suffered from thyroid and/or
lung cancer, plus nonmalignant respiratory ailments and assorted
other cancers. These people have been dubbed Downwinders and
might be eligible for federal compensation.
Margaret Stewart, with the Alliance, told the 25 locals in
attendance at this weeks meeting that money really isnt the
issue for most Downwinders. She said people want the government
to admit they did something wrong, and hopefully, promise not to
do it again.
Stewart said the testing done in Nevada from the 1950s through
the 1960s was deliberately timed to avoid prevailing winds headed
toward Las Vegas and Los Angeles. Yet, when the winds were
blowing north and east, it was OK to detonate. Lemhi, Blaine,
Custer and Gem counties were four of the five hardest hit with
Iodine 131 fallout, which is a major factor in thyroid cancer.
There was some discussion that Senator Larry Craig now supports
more nuclear weapons development and related testing.
A major portion of the meeting was devoted to informing people on
how to testify or send comments to NAS. Yet, some in attendance
felt a study should be conducted in Custer County to determine
the true impact of the fallout.
Alliance members suggested that kind of research project would be
perfect for a doctoral thesis. They promised to speak to their
contacts in universities and encouraged the locals to make their
own inquiries.
Meanwhile, anyone wishing to testify in Boise must get on a list
to speak for five minutes. They have to either e-mail
ialnabul@nas.edu [ialnabul@nas.edu] or call Dr. Isaf Al-Nabulsi
at 202-334-2671. Ester Ceja, Snake River Alliance, said those who
cant call or e-mail can contact Alliance staff, who will get
them on the list.
Cancers of concern are small intestine, pharynx, pancreas, liver,
lung, brain, breast, bladder, colon, gall bladder, thyroid,
certain types of leukemia, lymphoma, myeloma, esophogial,
stomach, urinary, ovary and salivary.
Custer Publishing, Inc. P.O. Box 405 Challis, Idaho 83226
Telephone 208.879.4445 Fax 208.879.5276 E-mail:
info@challismessenger.com [info@challismessenger.com]
Copyright © 2001-2004 Custer Publishing, Inc. All rights
reserved. Web site developed and designed by Meg Donahue.
*****************************************************************
29 Interfax: Russian soldiers to observe nuclear safety training in England
Interfax.com [http://www.interfax.com] Text version
Oct 14 2004 2:06PM
BUCHAREST. Oct 14 (Interfax) - Russian military experts will
observe nuclear safety training scheduled to take place in Great
Britain in 2005, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said at
a press conference in the Romanian town of Poiana Brasov on
Thursday.
"Great Britain came up with the initiative to hold training on
protecting nuclear military objects from a terrorist threat,"
Ivanov said.
He said that issues of providing security and defense for
nuclear military facilities, and also the transportation of
nuclear weapons will be worked out during the training.
© 1991-2004 Interfax
All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
30 Times-Picayune: N.O. contractor unfazed by vote
[http://www.timespicayune.com/subscribe.html]
But program transfer likely means lost jobs Thursday, October
14, 2004By Bruce Alpert Washington bureau
WASHINGTON -- A New Orleans contractor says it expects to
continue working on a contract to process claims for sick workers
at government labs and nuclear facilities despite a recent vote
by Congress to transfer the program to another federal agency.
Moving the program from the Energy Department to the Labor
Department is expected to lead to the selection of a new
contractor.
[http://ads.nola.com/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.ads/www.nola.com/xml/
story/N/NSDC/@StoryAd?x]
But Apogen Technologies, formerly Science and Engineering
Associates, said it doesn't anticipate any immediate letup in its
work, and the company expects to play a lead role in processing
claims through next year.
"We are currently processing nearly 300 claims per week and we
are projected to complete all pending claims during the next
year," the company said in a statement. "Apogen Technologies is
fully staffed and prepared to continue processing claims during
the transition and thereafter as directed."
Neither Labor nor Energy Department officials could say Wednesday
how long a transition period would be needed to transfer the
program.
Congress voted to transfer the contract after months of
complaints from influential lawmakers that the Energy Department
and Apogen had been too slow in processing claims. Sen. Chuck
Grassley, R-Iowa, said he feared many workers would die before
they were compensated.
Grassley also used a Senate hearing to present financial records
that showed Apogen had charged the government a reimbursement
rate for one top manager that was higher than the $400,000 annual
salary of the president of the United States. Apogen and the
Energy Department both denied any overcharging.
Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., said the Department of Energy has
spent $95 million on administrative costs for the sick worker
program, but processed less than 10 percent of the 23,000 pending
claims.
Under the program, the Department of Energy was charged with
helping government workers and private contract employees get
state workers' compensation benefits for illnesses associated
with work at federal nuclear labs and other facilities. The
Energy Department hired Apogen to process the claims, using an
existing Navy contract rather than putting the work out for bid.
Sens. John Breaux and Mary Landrieu, both D-La., successfully
opposed efforts last year to move the program out of the Energy
Department, saying it would hurt a key New Orleans workforce.
But the latest transfer proposal, incorporated into a giant
defense authorization bill, met with little congressional
opposition. Neither Landrieu nor Breaux were available Wednesday
to discuss the issue.
The Bush administration has expressed a preference for keeping
the program at the Energy Department. But the president is
unlikely to veto the defense authorization bill, which gives
support to some of his major spending initiatives in Iraq,
because of changes in the sick worker program.
Apogen had employed more than 100 workers on the Energy
Department contract, about 30 in its New Orleans office and the
rest in Virginia, according to company officials. The company
recently said it hired about 200 more workers, almost all in
Virginia, to speed claims processing.
"Apogen is currently performing at a record pace in processing
claims for handoff to a physician review panel," the company said
in a statement. "On Oct. 1, we surpassed 10,000 claims
processed."
In August, Bobby Savoie, who founded Science & Engineering
Associates, left Apogen, which was created in January as a result
of a merger with ITS Services Inc. of McLean, Va. Savoie said he
was fired.
That left Apogen without its most politically influential
executive. Savoie is a regular donor to congressional campaigns,
and has been a major fund-raiser for Democratic presidential
candidate John Kerry.
Bruce Alpert can be reached at bruce.alpert@newhouse.com or (202)
383-7861.
Times-Picayune home delivery. Subscribe Now!
©2004 NOLA.com. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
31 NRC: NRC Proposes $3,000 Fine Against Integrated Production Services, Inc.
News Release - Region IV - 2004-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region IV No. IV-04-042
October 14, 2004 CONTACT: Victor Dricks Phone: 817-860-8128
E-mail: [opa4@nrc.gov]
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a $3,000
fine against Integrated Production Services, Inc., of Broussard,
La., for a willful violation of NRC radiation safety
requirements.
The company is licensed by the State of Louisiana to use
well-logging devices with sealed radioactive material to obtain
information about underground rock formations and the likely
amounts of gas and oil present. However, in May 2001, the NRC
notified the State of Louisianas licensees that they were be
subject to NRC regulatory requirements when operating in
offshore waters.
During an NRC inspection and investigation completed on August
9, 2004, the NRC staff determined that the company had conducted
well-logging activities in offshore waters in September 2003,
and transported radioactive byproduct material into offshore
waters on other occasions without first obtaining an NRC
license.
The NRC also determined that the violation was willful, as the
companys representative had attended a May 10, 2001,
NRC-sponsored meeting in Lafayette, La., where the requirements
were explained.
Although the company maintains that there was no intent to
violate federal law, the NRC continues to believe that
willfulness was associated with this violation, the NRCs
Region IV Administrator Bruce S. Mallett said in a letter to the
company. IPS sent a representative to the (May 10, 2001)
meeting and had the overall responsibility to assure that the
messages conveyed by NRC at this meeting were acted upon.
Mallett also noted that the violation occurred after applying
for, but before receiving, an NRC license to operate in offshore
waters.
The companys corrective actions include employment of a
full-time radiation safety officer, actions to assure that
company managers are aware of meetings with regulatory agencies
and any required actions, monthly review of employee training
plans, and meetings with employees to emphasize the importance
of compliance.
The company is required to provide a written response to the
proposed violation within 30 days.
Last revised Thursday, October 14, 2004
*****************************************************************
32 Boston.com: Report challenges US port security
Urges tighter watch over cargo
By Katherine Pfleger Shrader, Associated Press |
October 14, 2004
WASHINGTON -- The Homeland Security Department's independent
investigator has concluded that federal inspectors of oceangoing
shipping containers still need to improve their detection
equipment and search procedures to prevent terrorists from
sneaking weapons of mass destruction into US ports.
In a report to be released today, the department's inspector
general acknowledges that US Customs and Border Protection has
made security changes and has others planned.
Clark Kent Ervin said he still has recommendations to improve the
equipment that detects threatening cargo, such as nuclear
material, and make inspection procedures more effective.
Details were not made public in the unclassified report, obtained
in advance by the Associated Press.
''Improvements are needed in the inspection process to ensure
that weapons of mass destruction or other implements of terror do
not gain access to the US through oceangoing cargo containers,"
Ervin wrote.
Representative Jim Turner of Texas, the top Democrat on the House
Homeland Security Committee, said the government needs to put
specialized radiation monitors at all US ports and have enough
people to physically inspect cargo containers that set off
radiation alarms.
While improvements in cargo inspection have been made since Sept.
11, 2001, less than 5 percent of containers are inspected.
''We all know that the number one threat faced by the American
people is a nuclear weapon in the hands of a terrorist," Turner
said. ''It illustrates what a wide gap there is in the rhetoric
of protecting the homeland and the reality of what we are
actually doing. It is one security gap that has got to be
closed."
Turner and Representative John Dingell, Democrat of Michigan,
requested the report after an ABC News team smuggled 15 pounds of
depleted uranium into the United States in 2002 and 2003. ABC
cited experts who said that shielded depleted uranium had the
same signature as shielded weapons-grade uranium -- a finding the
agency has rejected.
Homeland Security Department spokesman Dennis Murphy cast doubt
on the ABC experiment's validity, saying depleted uranium is used
in everyday items, including elevators and jets. He said it only
carries a risk if heated to a point that microscopic pieces can
be inhaled.
The inspector general said senior scientists from the Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory concluded that the Homeland
Security agency now has tools that can detect both depleted
uranium and highly enriched uranium that could be used in a
weapon, but the ability to sense them is reduced in certain
conditions. Those conditions were not publicly disclosed.
Ervin's report makes recommendations to improve the equipment,
but they were not disclosed. The report also urges better
training and search procedures to be followed by cargo
inspectors.
Today, if a container creates an alert, Murphy said, experts at
the always open National Targeting Center work with inspectors at
the ports to determine if there is a problem. He said everyday
items, including dirt and bananas, are known to set off alarms.
Meanwhile, the government agency in charge of airport security
spent nearly $500,000 on an awards ceremony at a lavish hotel,
including almost $200,000 for travel and lodging for attendees,
$81,000 for plaques and $500 for cheese displays, according to an
internal report obtained by the Associated Press.
The investigation by the homeland agency's inspector general also
found the TSA gave its senior executives bonuses averaging
$16,000, higher than at any other federal government agency.
TSA spokeswoman Amy von Walter said the agency believes the
bonuses and party were justified ''given the hours and
productivity of the work force during this critical period." [ /]
© Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company. [ /] More News
*****************************************************************
33 News agency: Kyrgyzstan Blocks Nuclear Shipments
[http://www.akipress.com/]
14:24 14-10-2004
Government move to ban radioactive imports pleases
environmentalists but angers processing plant workers.
A battle between environmental groups and western nuclear energy
firms trying to send radioactive materials to Kyrgyzstan came to
a head in recent weeks, with the government siding with locals
worried about possible contamination.
On September 28, the Kyrgyz government announced it would block
efforts by energy producer British Nuclear Fuels, BNFL, to send
uranium-contaminated graphite for processing in Kyrgyzstan.
In a statement, which was re-released in English in London on
October 5, the government said it had reached its decision
because of safety concerns.
The declaration came after state-owned BNFL tried to send about
1,800 tonnes of uranium-bearing graphite, a byproduct of the
nuclear fuel production process, to the Karabalta mining and
processing plant, KGRK.
BNFL and other western firms are struggling to dispose of these
materials because of strict controls at home and growing
environmental opposition in developing nations.
In the civilian sector, uranium is used to fuel commercial power
plants and in certain fertilizers, among other things. Exposure
to the substance has been linked to several types of cancer.
BNFL maintains that it is not looking to dump radioactive waste
in Kyrgyzstan. Instead, it intends to extract uranium and send
it back to the UK, leaving the remaining material in Kyrgyzstan,
the company says.
Kyrgyz activists are strongly opposed to the British shipments,
We will not allow the delivery of such dangerous cargo from
abroad. If this goes ahead, we demand that the government
resign, Toktaiym Umetalieva, the leader of a coalition of
non-governmental groups, told IWPR.
A deal between the plant and BNFL would make economic sense for
the British firm, but would be bad news for Kyrgyzstan, which is
struggling to cope with existing radioactive waste on its soil,
said Peter Roche, a nuclear expert at global environmental
campaigner Greenpeace.
BNFL not only gets to dispose of its waste in Kyrgyzstan, but
will also get back 60 tonnes of useable uranium in return, he
said.
BNFL spokesman Alan Beauchamp rejected allegations that the
company was effectively dumping uranium waste in Kyrgyzstan.
We are not looking to dispose of the waste, he said, adding
that the material that would stay in Kyrgyzstan is not known of
as waste but processed residue.
German contractor, RWE Nukem GmbH, which provides services for
the nuclear industry, has been trying to arrange the delivery of
BNFL consignments of uranium-contaminated graphite to the Kyrgyz
plant, but has so far failed to get an import license for it.
The contractor started negotiating with the authorities earlier
this year, but in July a group of NGOs sent letters to the
government protesting against an official commission's decision
to support the deal.
The matter appeared to have been settled after the government
gave assurances that the shipments would not go ahead. But the
controversy resurfaced again in September when the British media
reported that BNFL, through Nukem, was negotiating the delivery
of uranium-contaminated graphite - prompting a renewed outcry
from Kyrgyz activists and apparently forcing the government to
issue its ban.
In an interview with IWPR, a Nukem spokesman denied claims that
they were organising the dumping of radioactive material,
insisting that it was merely being sent for processing. He added
that Kyrgyzstan has been processing uranium-containing raw
material for 45 years and had been receiving such consignments
from Kazakstan quite recently.
For the workers in the Karabalta plant, one of the few factories
in the world that separates uranium from graphite, the
governments decision imperils their livelihoods.
We havent been paid for half a year, and we dont have raw
materials to work with. Our plant was built to process uranium,
nothing else. What should we do, die of starvation?, said a
KGRK employee, who wished to remain anonymous.
Boris Karpachov, the head of the radiation safety service at the
Governmental State Agency for Geology and Mineral Resources,
lashed out at the groups trying to derail the contract with
BNFL.
KGRK is looking for partners, trying to survive, while NGOs are
busy with their intrigues and demagogy, preventing contracts
from being signed, which are the only chance for the workers and
for all residents of Karabalta, he said.
Karpachov argued that money made by the factory would allow the
country to address economic and social problems, and pay to
cleanup and maintain pits containing processed radioactive
material.
The BNFL is holding out for a decision in its favour despite the
governments categorical statement banning its proposed
shipments.
Company spokesman Beauchamp insisted that BNFL has not received
any official notification about the ban.
We will find an alternative to the Kyrgyz plant if necessary
but we do not have any lined up at the moment because we hope to
get the [Kyrgyz import] licence.
By Gulnura Toralieva in Bishkek , specially for IWPR
All rights reserved. Our address: Moskovskaya str. 189,
Bishkek, the Kyrgyz Republic Tel/Fax: +996(312)61-03-96
admin@akipress.org
*****************************************************************
34 Findlaw: The Yucca Mountain Radioactive Waste Site Controversy -
The Role A Recent Federal Appellate Decision In The Controversy
May Play in the Presidential Election
[http://jobs.findlaw.com] | CLE
By JAMISON COLBURN ---- Thursday, Oct. 14, 2004
In their series of debates, the candidates have explored a number
of legal issues of consequence in the upcoming election. But one
such issue still lies dormant under a ridge in the Nevada desert.
The issue is Yucca Mountain. For Nevadans, it's visceral: When
the dust finally settles, the repository
[http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/ymp/about/index.shtml] will likely
house over 70,000 metric tons of highly radioactive waste. Nevada
- with five electoral college votes - doesn't want that waste.
Indeed, Nevadans feel a strong antipathy toward anyone even
remotely responsible for Yucca. In 2000, for instance,
then-Governor Bush used the issue to beat then-Vice President
Gore in that states.
Unfortunately for President Bush, it is now possible that Senator
Kerry will best him in Nevada using the very same issue. Las
Vegas -- the fastest growing city in America -- gains 5,000 new
residents every month and, of course, contains the "gaming" lobby
- one of the most powerful in the country. And recent decisions
regarding Yucca Mountain from the U.S. Court Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit have, as I discuss below, added some
fuel to the fire of this controversy.
But should Yucca Mountain really be laid at the President's door?
This train started rolling 22 years ago and it has taken almost
$4 billion to keep it chugging through five presidential
elections since.
It may be just bad luck that President Bush - like would-be
President Gore - before him - has assumed this legacy. After all,
the entity originally responsible for Yucca Mountain was
Congress. And the reason twenty-two years have passed since
Congress acted, may have much more to do with the truth about
administrative agencies, than with any of the individual
Presidents who have served during that time.
Nevertheless, a recent federal court ruling
[http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/01-12
58a.pdf] finding that the Bush EPA underestimated Yucca
Mountain's risks may well influence the election - for this
ruling may tend to further enrage Nevadans, adding to their
ongoing anger over Yucca Mountain.
The NWPA: What This 1982 Law Required of Three Administrative
Agencies
The Yucca Mountain story begins in 1982. That year, in the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA), Congress "federalized" the
disposal of high-level radioactive waste - ensuring it would be
exclusively under federal power.
The NWPA charged three federal agencies -- the Department of
Energy (DOE), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) -- with designing, building,
and administering a single centralized repository for such waste.
The idea was that the repository would replace the current
system: on-site storage of waste at the more than 100 nuclear
power generating facilities nationwide.
The NWPA charged the three agencies with find the right "remote
location" for the waste repository. The hope was that putting the
waste in a single place would minimize the possibilities of
sabotage or terrorism--or indeed, releases of any kind--and make
the waste easier to manage.
Each of the three agencies was given different responsibilities
with respect to Yucca Mountain. EPA was to write "general"
standards for the containment structures in order to prevent
releases. NRC was to license the facility, as it was designed and
proposed by DOE. And DOE was to administer the facility
long-term.
How would the site be selected? Under the NWPA, DOE was to
nominate five candidate sites; study those sites in cooperation
with NRC; and then narrow the list to three. This short list was
then to be presented to the President - with detailed
characterizations of each site.
Then, with the President's approval, the final selection was to
be presented to Congress, with the opportunity given to the
unlucky State to "disapprove." But this so-called disapproval
could be overridden by a joint resolution of Congress.
The Agencies Bog Down in Analysis - and Congress Intervenes
It made sense for the NWPA to require all this analysis of
candidate sites by the three different bureaucracies. The
technical expertise of one administrative agency could check that
of the others.
And since the ultimate choice was going to be a sacrifice on the
part of one state, it was important that the decision be made
responsibly. In the event of containment breach, the site - and
part of the state - would surely be consigned to environmental
oblivion.
Unfortunately, as has been true of most carefully-done
environmental impact assessments, the analysis became bogged down
and pricey. It took three years just for EPA to write basic
containment standards for the eventual site. Meanwhile, DOE and
NRC foundered in their attempt to identify 5 uniquely suitable
sites.
By 1987, the waste was still piling up at the dispersed
facilities, many of them near major cities. And that is still
true today. That means that some 160 million people in 39 states
live within 75 miles of a facility.
In light of this reality, Congress grew weary of the selection
process it had created, and simply picked a site: Yucca Mountain,
an old weapons test site owned by the government. Favoring the
selection of the site were the fact that it was located almost
100 miles from the nearest city; the fact that Nevada was not a
highly populated state; and the fact that the federal government
owned 87% of the land in the state.
More Analysis - This Time, Focused Solely on Yucca Mountain
In the 1992 Energy Policy Act, Congress ordered the three
agencies to focus their full attention on this site and to devise
the safest storage structure feasible there.
To ensure their success, Congress charged an independent panel of
the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) with analyzing Yucca
Mountain. And, Congress required that the containment standards
eventually created be "consistent with and based upon" NAS's
findings.
Analyzing Yucca took much of the next decade. Working through its
contingencies produced a detailed knowledge of Yucca Mountain and
its probable futures. The design was tweaked accordingly.
Nevada Clashes with Congress and the Administration over Yucca
Mountain
In 2002, the Bush administration finally presented a formal
"approval" of the site to Congress: The approval opined that
looking out 10,000 years into the future, the risks were
acceptable.
Unsurprisingly, Nevada disagreed. But the Congress vetoed
Nevada's "disapproval." The veto was enacted into law in the way
ordinarily legislation is - its passage was bicameral; and it was
presented to and signed by the President, who chose not to veto
the veto. (Thus, none of the problems raised by other
"legislative vetoes," such as the one at issue in the Supreme
Court's decision in INS v. Chadha
[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=46
2&invol=919] , arose.) In addition, it was within Congress power,
for it pertained to federal realty governed by the Property
Clause.
D.C's Federal Appellate Court Rules on Yucca Mountain-Related
Challenges
In September, the D.C. Circuit, denying rehearing, rejected a
slew of challenges to the EPA's containment standards and DOE's
environmental impact statement. However--and significantly - it
also found that the EPA had violated the Energy Policy Act's
mandate to write rules "based upon and consistent with" the 1995
NAS findings for Yucca.
The court pointed out that the NAS had found
[http://books.nap.edu/books/0309052890/html/index.html] that
there was no scientific reason to limit the timeframe of risk
analyses to 10,000 years. Yet EPA had done just that.
EPA's choice to limit its rules to the next 10,000 years was
defensible for several reasons - for example, because predictions
so far into the future are extremely speculative. Nevertheless,
the court found that this limitation was unacceptable.
For one thing, the court noted, Yucca's "peak risk"--the point at
which the atomic decay will have progressed to a stage where
radioactive emissions are the highest--might not even occur in
the first 10,000 years! So the EPA's limiting its analysis to the
next 10,000 years might well ignore the "peak risk" of the site.
Accordingly, the court held that the Bush EPA's standards were
not "based upon and consistent with" the NAS study. It seems,
then, that the EPA will have to go back and re-perform the
analysis behind its rules - this time, taking into account a far
longer timeframe. Only then, will the EPA end up with rules the
court will deem consistent with the NAS study.
It is possible that the EPA will take this issue up to the U.S.
Supreme Court. Whether or not it does so, as I have noted above,
the issue may play a role in the election. At this point, a
ruling that his EPA did not take into account all of Yucca
Mountain's risks was the last thing President Bush needed when
attempting to persuade Nevadans to give him their votes. What Do
You Think? Message Boards
Jamison Colburn teaches environmental and administrative law at
Western New England College, School of Law. Prior to teaching, he
was Assistant Regional Counsel for the United States
Environmental Protection Agency in Philadelphia.
[http://findlaw.com/info/disclaimer.html] Copyright ©
1994-2004 FindLaw
*****************************************************************
35 deseret news: Nuclear waste transit safe?
[deseretnews.com]
Thursday, October 14, 2004
Federal officials say it will be, but activist doubtful
By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News
An activist worries about terrorist
attacks on high-level nuclear shipments to a federal repository
at Yucca Mountain, Nev., a program that may begin in 2010.
But federal officials say the shipments will be safe.
Meanwhile, uncertainty about budgetary matters has left
some shipment details unresolved, according to Gary Lanthrum,
director of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of National
Transportation.
The setting for the discussions was a meeting of the
Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board's Transportation Planning
Panel. The federal board convened the two-day meeting Wednesday
in the Sheraton City Center Hotel, 150 W. 500 South.
The session comes about three months after the U.S. Court
of Appeals struck down all challenges to the selection of Yucca
Mountain as the site of the first national long-term repository
for high-level nuclear waste. It's also about one month after
settlement of a suit by Union Pacific Railroad concerning use of
rail lines to move the material, according to Lanthrum.
That was the first suit to be settled, among a number that
are pending with railroads. Some suits have been going on for 20
years, he said.
"These shipments are not something the railroads can turn
down," Lanthrum told the panel. "If we're compliant (with safety
regulations), they have to accept them."
Spent fuel rods and other dangerously radioactive waste
are expected to be shipped from utilities and federal storage
areas throughout the country. According to the DOE, shipments
should begin in 2010.
Jason Groenewold, director of the Health Environment
Alliance of Utah (HEAL), Salt Lake City, said whether railroads
or highways are used to move the material, "about 90 percent of
the shipments are expected to come through Utah."
He cited federal figures that if the material traveled
mostly by rail, 95 percent would go through Utah; if by truck,
the figure drops to 87 percent. When the Deseret Morning News
attended the board's morning session on Wednesday, the board's
focus was strongly on rail transport.
HEAL is concerned about "the security issue of moving
nuclear waste across the country," Groenewold told the paper. He
called the shipments "mobile dirty bombs."
"And how do we ensure that terrorists won't sabotage a
shipment?" he asked.
If an accident were to occur, about 80 percent of Utah's
population lives within five miles of the transportation belt,
Groenewold said. He worried about health impacts to the public
and emergency responders, as well as the temporary shutdown of
ordinary transportation.
During a break, the paper asked Lanthrum about safety
concerns. He replied that the DOE believes shipments will be
safe because the country is already safely shipping such
material.
Allen Benson, DOE spokesman who is in Salt Lake City for
the meetings, said about 3,000 shipments of spent fuel have been
sent around the United States by utilities over the years. This
radioactive material was moved safely a cumulative distance of
about 1.7 million miles, he said.
The rate of shipments is expected to increase once the
repository opens.
The DOE budget request for planning, design and other
activities regarding transportation is $880 million per year for
the fiscal year that started Oct. 1.
But the budget for planning transportation of nuclear
fuel to Yucca Mountain has not been passed. Instead, Congress
has passed a "continuing resolution" budget item based on last
year's funding level, $577 million per year.
The resolution ends Nov. 20. By midnight that date,
Congress must pass another resolution or the final budget or
face a funding crisis.
Benson said the House of Representatives came up with a
much lower figure than the agency sought: only $131 million for
the fiscal year. The Senate has yet to act. Once the Senate
passes a budget, the two chambers must work out a final figure.
How much money is available will affect how planning
proceeds, according to Lanthrum.
Some materials destined for the repository are of
"off-normal size" and would not fit into the typical safety
cask. If funding is limited, special-size shipment containers
may not be available because it's more efficient to spend the
money on methods that guarantee more material will be moved.
E-mail: [bau@desnews.com]
© 2004 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
36 Salt Lake Tribune: West states in dark on moving N-waste
[http://www.sltrib.com]
Article Last Updated: 10/14/2004 01:48:11 AM
Governors say: During a time of terrorism, secrecy about
transporting hot material is unacceptable
By Patty Henetz The Salt Lake Tribune
Utah and Nevada are at the end of the funnel for the tens of
thousands of rail and truck shipments of nuclear waste heading
for the proposed Yucca Mountain and Private Fuel Storage (PFS)
disposal sites.
Along with other Western states, they would like to know how
the PFS and the U.S. Department of Energy plan to move and
monitor the deadly material.
But Congress has balked at funding the Yucca Mountain
project, leaving DOE's transportation plans in limbo. And PFS, a
consortium of seven utilities whose nuclear power plants are
running out of on-site storage for spent fuel rods, has yet to
divulge how it plans to ship the material.
In a time of heightened fear of terror attacks, such
uncertainty and secrecy is unacceptable, a Western governors'
organization told federal officials Wednesday.
"We are reluctant stewards of nuclear waste in the West,"
said Tim Holeman, representing the Western Interstate Energy
Board. "But we are united in our commitment to safe
transportation."
Pointing to likely maps of train and truck routes, Holeman
noted that the waste from nuclear power plants would traverse 45
states, 700 counties and 50 Indian reservations on its way to
Yucca Mountain, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. More than
11 million people live within a half-mile of a potential highway
route, he said.
Preliminary study shows the states most likely to see most
of the waste pass through their population centers are Nevada,
Utah and Arizona, followed by Nebraska, Wyoming and Colorado.
"This is a Western issue, not just a Nevada issue," Holeman
told members of the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board
during a meeting in Salt Lake City.
The DOE, by law, was to open a permanent nuclear waste
repository by 1998. Now the deadline is 2010.
Meanwhile, DOE has not yet decided on how rail lines might be
used to transport up to 3,000 metric tons of waste per year.
There would have to be 300 miles of track laid between existing
rails and the Yucca projects envisioned in the last 100 years,"
Holeman said.
Not all of the nuclear reactor sites have access to rail, so
the transportation plan will have to include barges and trucks.
Gary Lanthrum, director of DOE's transportation program, said
Congress' unwillingness to include Yucca funding in its omnibus
spending bill may ultimately force the restructuring of Yucca's
whole work plan. If Congress does not appropriate the money for
the Nevada rail component next year, he said, the 2010 deadline
would be missed.
Western governors are demanding that DOE develop with the
states and tribes a comprehensive transportation plan that
addresses the safety of the shipping casks and a review of
terrorism and sabotage risks.
The governors also say that no private storage facility for
nuclear waste shall be located in a state without the written
consent of the governor. "PFS is a big concern to us," Holeman
said.
Skull Valley Band of Goshutes chairman Leon Bear in 1997
signed a lease with PFS to allow the company to store up to
44,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel on Goshute land 45 miles west
of Salt Lake City. The containers would sit on concrete pads
spread across 100 acres before being sent to Yucca, proponents
said.
The proposal must be approved by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
A PFS representative was scheduled to testify before the
review board today.
© Copyright 2004, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
37 Charleston.Net: Opinion: Editorials Progress on nuclear waste site
10/14/04
October 14, 2004
South Carolina should welcome approval of a nuclear waste cleanup
plan by a House-Senate conference committee last week. The plan,
advanced by Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., provides adequate
safeguards and oversight for the project, and relies on the
practical experience already gained on two similar cleanup
projects at SRS.
Highly radioactive waste from two tanks at SRS already have been
removed and stabilized for eventual storage in the interior of
Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Concrete and grout were poured into the
tanks, thereby stabilizing the waste residue that couldn't be
safely removed and diluting it so that it no longer qualifies as
high-level waste.
The remaining 49 tanks, containing more than 35 million gallons
of waste, will undergo the same process under the scrutiny of
state environmental officials. Meanwhile, the National Academy of
Sciences will review the plan in preparation for the cleanup to
determine if it meets requisite safety standards. The process
already has been reviewed and found to be safe by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
Board.
Critics have opposed the plan because it does not take care of
100 percent of the radioactive waste in the storage tanks. It
does have the benefit, however, of actually getting virtually all
of the waste removed, treated for permanent storage and
eventually taken off site. As Sen. Graham observed, "Tank cleanup
efforts at the site have been at a virtual standstill."
He estimates that the cleanup plan will put the waste removal
more than two decades ahead of schedule.
"It's long past time we get the cleanup efforts moving forward
again to protect our environment," Sen. Graham said. "Every day
we delay just increases the risk to the local community and the
Savannah River that these tanks, some of them 50 years old, will
leak and create even greater problems down the road."
The plan has been endorsed by Gov. Mark Sanford, the state
Department of Health and Environmental Control, Attorney General
Henry McMaster, the Aiken County legislative delegation and other
local officials. Its approval by conference committee, as part of
the Defense Appropriations bill, virtually ensures congressional
passage.
The plan has been opposed by officials from Washington state and
Idaho and some environmental organizations, who object to what
they view as a weakening of cleanup standards and the federal
responsibility for managing radioactive waste. Hanford, in
Washington state, has an even larger volume of high-level waste
in storage than SRS.
South Carolina has opted for a practical and expedient solution
over the possibility of a perfect cleanup plan perhaps decades
hence. The safeguards and oversight required are sufficient to
the long-overdue task. Eventually, the project may point the way
for the management of other waste sites that currently are on
hold.
Copyright © 2004, The Post and Courier, All Rights Reserved.
[webmaster@postandcourier.com]
*****************************************************************
38 AU ABC: Uranium levels in NT water 'safe'.
14/10/2004. ABC News Online
[http://www.abc.net.au/]
Northern Territory Health Minister Peter Toyne says no water
supplies in the Territory come close to containing dangerous
levels of uranium.
The Opposition has accused the Government of not revealing
details of radioactivity levels in some towns.
The Government says some of the Territory's communities do have
naturally occurring levels of uranium in their underground water
supplies.
Dr Toyne says the highest reading is at Kings Canyon and that
is a fraction of the unsafe level prescribed by the Australian
drinking water guidelines.
"As regards radioactive content of water, there is no one even
close to coming to unsafe levels anywhere in the Territory,
where probably one-twentieth is the worst that we would find
anywhere of the safe limit," he said.
© 2004 Australian Broadcasting Corporation
This service may include material from Agence France-Presse
(AFP), AAP(International), APTN, Reuters, CNN and
*****************************************************************
39 KRNV: Attorney General says Yucca meeting was illegal
October 14, 2004
A group of elected officials from rural Nevada violated state
open-meeting law when they met behind closed doors to talk about
a rail corridor to the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site.
The state attorney general determined that the Central Nevada
Community Protection Working Group is a public body and has to
hold meetings in public.
The group of officials from Lincoln, Esmeralda and Nye counties
and the city of Caliente is agreeing to go back and reconsider
anything talked about in closed session -- and hold future
meetings in public.
That'll avoid a full-scale criminal investigation.
The panel was formed last year at the suggestion of the
Department of Energy.
(Copyright 2004 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
[http://www.worldnow.com] All content © Copyright 2001 -
2004 WorldNow and KRNV. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
40 UK: News & Star: PLUTONIUM IN SHELLFISH ROW
Published on 14/10/2004
['Kevin Christian: âExperts are talking rubbishâ
Kevin Christian: âExperts are talking rubbishâ says the
Whitehaven fisherman. By Andrea Thompson
WEST Cumbrian fishermen say the areaâs shellfishing industry
would be crippled by new rules to ban seafood that it is too
contaminated with plutonium from Sellafield.
Thousands of tonnes of British shellfish currently eaten in
Europe â including fish from Cumbria, the Solway and Morecambe
Bay â could be banned because it will breach limits due to be
introduced by the United Nations in 2005.
The UNâs âCodex Alimentariusâ â which brings together the
World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture
Organisation â is proposing a safety limit for plutonium in
food of one becquerel per kilogram (1Bq/kg).
Concentrations of plutonium and other radioactivity in all the
shellfish sampled by the Food Standards Agency between the Ribble
estuary at Preston and Kirkcudbright on the North Solway coast in
2002 exceeded 1Bq/kg. Winkles from St Bees, next to Sellafield,
contained 66 Bq/kg.
The UN says the aim of the new safety levels is to reduce the
long-term risk of getting cancer from eating these foods to below
one in a million.
But Kevin Christian, manager of Kilkeel Fishing in Whitehaven
says the experts are âtalking rubbish.â
âWhere are they producing their evidence from? The water is
tested near enough on a daily basis. BNFL does its own testing
and there is also independent testing by the National Rivers
Authority. The water is also tested further up at Silloth and has
been given a category B status which is a very good category.â
Prawns are the main shellfishing along the West Cumbrian coast
from Barrow to St Bees.
Mr Christian said the industry would be decimated if the fish was
banned.
âIf it was the case that it was too radioactive it would have
been stopped already.
âThe problem that the fishing industry faces is that these
white collar workers havenât got a clue about what they are
speaking about. It would cripple the fishing industry round
here.â
The UNâs proposal takes into account scientific uncertainties
about the health risks of small amounts of plutonium inside the
body. It is in line with radiation safety limits recommended by
other regulatory authorities internationally, in the US and in
the UK.
But the UKâs Food Standards Agency says the new limits are too
stricy and ânot proportionate to the actual risk.â
Anti-nuclear campaigner Janine Allis-Smith, of Cumbrians Opposed
to a Radioactive Environment said the group welcomes the move.
âWe wholeheartedly endorse the view that the health of the
public must come first. We have been concerned about plutonium in
our food and its possible effect on our health for a long time,
particularly as in studies by the Westlakes Research Institute,
the radiation dose to the Cumbrian âcritical seafood consumer
groupâ from Americium has been rising annually.â
[http://www.whitehaven-news.co.uk/]
*****************************************************************
41 NRC: NRC Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste to Meet Oct. 19-21 in Rockville, Maryland
News Release - 2004-13 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office
of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC
20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 04-131 October 14,
2004
The Nuclear Regulatory Commissions Advisory Committee on
Nuclear Waste will hold a public meeting Oct. 19-21, in
Rockville, Md., to discuss, among other items, the June 2004
recommendations of the International Council on Radiation
Protection, including how they compare to NRC regulations and
practices and what aspects may require further study.
The meeting will run from 8:30 a.m. to 5:45 p.m. on Tuesday,
from 10 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday and from 8:30 a.m. to
noon on Thursday. On Tuesday, the meeting will be held in Two
White Flint North Auditorium; on Wednesday and Thursday the
meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agencys Two White
Flint North Building, at 11545 Rockville Pike.
A complete agenda will be available on the NRCs Web site at
this address:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acnw/agenda/2004/.
For additional information, please contact Howard Larson at
301-415-6805.
Last revised Thursday, October 14, 2004
*****************************************************************
42 Daily Camera: Tests on Flats deer show little radiation
[newsroom@dailycamera.com] .
Plans for former weapons plant include hunting
By Todd Neff, Camera Staff Writer
October 14, 2004
Tests on deer culled at Rocky Flats show scant uptake of
radioactive materials into the animals' bodies, preliminary tests
show.
The finding supports the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's plans
to allow limited hunting on the property when it becomes a
wildlife refuge.
All but about 1,000 acres of the roughly 6,300-acre site of a
former nuclear-weapons plant will be turned over to the Wildlife
Service to create the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge. The
U.S. Department of Energy plans to complete the $7.2 billion
cleanup of radioactive material by December 2006.
"A highly controlled youth and/or disabled hunting program would
be held a few weekends a year," says a draft comprehensive
conservation plan and environmental impact study by the wildlife
service. The hunting program could be expanded to the general
public, depending on the need to manage deer and elk populations,
the plan says. The assumption is that the game would be eaten.
The Wildlife Service sent muscle, lung, liver, kidney and bone
tissue from 26 deer animals originally culled to test for
chronic wasting disease to General Engineering Laboratories in
South Carolina. The company tested for plutonium, americium and
uranium contamination, said Mark Sattelberg, a senior
contaminants biologist for the wildlife service at Rocky Flats.
Two of the 454 analyses exceeded the upper limits the wildlife
service established for the radionuclides, Sattelberg said. One,
a kidney sample, showed 0.0016 picocuries per gram of americium.
The limit for that element was 0.001 picocuries per gram.
z A picocurie is one one-trillionth of a curie, a measurement of
radioactivity. By comparison, the Rocky Flats surface soils will
be cleaned to 50 picocuries per gram.
The second sample, from a deer liver, had 0.021 picocuries per
gram of uranium, just above the Wildlife Service's limit of 0.02
picocuries per gram, Sattelberg said.
Sattelberg said the wildlife service had follow-up questions for
the lab, and that the results could change.
The federal agency expected some radioactive particles to pass
from soil to plants and into deer tissue, Sattelberg said. But he
said the preliminary results show these amounts to be "very low."
The wildlife service established sampling limits for
radioactivity in the deer tissue based on increased cancer rates
when humans consume plutonium, americium or uranium. They based
their limit on the amount of contamination needed to elevate
cancer risk by one one-millionth, based on Environmental
Protection Agency standards, Sattelberg said.
To make the test more conservative, the wildlife service assumed
that a single person would eat the meat of the entire deer. It
also made the testing threshold 10 times more sensitive than EPA
limits, Sattelberg said such that an increased risk of just one
in 10 million would exceed the wildlife service limit.
Steven Gunderson, who oversees the Rocky Flats cleanup for the
state health department, said the results didn't surprise him,
given the insolubility of the radioactive elements and that most
of the site wasn't contaminated.
The Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center's LeRoy Moore said
the presence of uranium and americium in the deer should be
enough to preclude hunting on the former nuclear-weapons site.
"The important thing is that they did find radionuclides in the
tissue of the deer," he said.
MORE INFORMATION
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will present its results at
the Rocky Flats Citizens Advisory Board meeting from 6 to 9 p.m.
today at the Broomfield Recreation Center's Lakeshore Room, 280
Lamar St.. The deer-tissue sampling talk is on the agenda for
7:30 p.m.
Contact Camera Staff Writer Todd Neff at (303) 473-1327 or
nefft@dailycamera.com.
[http://www.scripps.com] Copyright 2004, The Daily Camera
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************