*****************************************************************
03/21/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.64
*****************************************************************
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 [southnews] Blair was told US 'fixed' case for war
2 Sunday Times: MI6 chief told PM: Americans ‘fixed’ case for war -
3 BBC: Blair's case for war
4 AFP: US will have to give Iran security guarantees - ElBaradei -
5 AFP: US military not conducting spy flights over Iran - Rumsfeld
6 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Urges Nuclear Arms Talks With Iran
7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran's Leader Blasts U.S. 'Warmongers'
8 Hankyoreh: Editorial: US Intelligence on NK that Can't Be Believed
9 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Did Washington Lie to Seoul?
10 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: North's prime minister heads for Beijing talk
11 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Analysts see North facing a deadline
12 Guardian Unlimited: Rice Seeks China's Aid on N. Korea Talks
13 US: MARCH 21 Next International Call-In Day
14 Guardian Unlimited: Annan proposes radical UN shakeup
15 Times of India: 'Pakistan may hand over A.Q. Khan to US'-
NUCLEAR REACTORS
16 US: Nuclear Power Industry Must Market Strengths More Effectively -
17 US: [NukeNet] Va. Nuclear Plant's Plans Raise Fears
18 US: Ruling Bolsters Workers Who Warn Nukes
19 US: U.S. levies $1.1 billion pollution settlement against
20 US: United Press International: Congress wants nuke secrecy probe -
21 US: NY Daily News: We must take closer look at nuclear energy
22 Independent: Troubled British Energy replaces chief executive
23 Slovak Spectator: THE TOWERS that make the Austrians worry.
24 Scotsman.com: New Boss for Nuclear Power Firm
25 US: St. Cloud Times: Board wants input on nuclear plant addition
26 ThisisLondon: British Energy gets rid of chief exec
27 AFP: Indonesia moving ahead with plans for nuclear power
28 CBC - New Brunswick: Kyoto argument not flying for Lepreau
29 News & Star: N-plant on telly
30 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find
31 Guardian Unlimited: Experts Discuss Nuclear Power As Energy
NUCLEAR SAFETY
32 US: FDA approves nuclear medicine for kids
33 US: Hawk Eye: Harkin weighs in on delay
34 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Facing Fallout: At odds over nuclear history
35 US: lamonitor.com: Nuclear workers comp program gets new start
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
36 DenverPost.com: Extend probe on Yucca Mountain
37 Las Vegas SUN: Nevada official: More e-mails show data faulty at Yuc
38 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Premature confidence
39 RGJ: Yucca’s delayed, not ended
40 US: Great Falls Tribune: Anaconda: Contamination cancels BiMart's bi
41 Gazette.com: The nuclear options
42 WCAX.com: Yucca Mountain woes seen having little effect on Yankee
43 US: DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD: Safe Storage proposal
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
44 DOE Plans For 1000 To 1200 New US Reactors Sharing Research Internat
OTHER NUCLEAR
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [southnews] Blair was told US 'fixed' case for war
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:50:45 -0600 (CST)
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
DonorsChoose. A simple way to provide underprivileged children resources
often lacking in public schools. Fund a student project in NYC/NC today!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/5F6XtA/.WnJAA/E2hLAA/7gSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
The head of Britain's foreign intelligence agency told the Prime
Minister, Tony Blair, that the case for war in Iraq was being "fixed" by
Washington to suit US policy, a BBC documentary will claim today.
Blair was told US 'fixed' case for war
AFP March 20, 2005 - 1:54PM
The head of Britain's foreign intelligence agency told the Prime
Minister, Tony Blair, that the case for war in Iraq was being "fixed" by
Washington to suit US policy, a BBC documentary will claim today.
Richard Dearlove, head of MI6, briefed Blair and a group of ministers on
the United States' determination to launch the invasion nine months
before hostilities began in March 2003, the Sunday Times reported,
citing the BBC program, which is due to be aired later in the day.
After attending a briefing in Washington, he told the meeting that war
was "inevitable", according to the newspaper.
"The facts and intelligence" were being "fixed round the policy" by US
President George Bush's administration, Dearlove said.
The allegations against Blair just weeks before an expected general
election are likely to reopen a feud between the Government and the
British broadcaster.
The two fell out last year over allegations by a BBC reporter that
Britain "sexed up" the case for war.
The documentary argues that Blair had signed up to follow Bush's plans
for regime change in Iraq as early as April 2002, the Sunday Times said.
Robin Cook, Britain's former foreign secretary who resigned as leader of
the House of Commons over Iraq, claimed that the threat of weapons of
mass destruction was not the prime minister's true reason for going to war.
"What was propelling the prime minister was a determination that he
would be the closest ally to George Bush and they would prove to the
United States administration that Britain was their closest ally," Cook
tells the program.
"His problem is that George Bush's motivation was regime change. It was
not disarmament. Tony Blair knew perfectly well what he was doing.
"His problem was that he could not be honest about that with either the
British people or Labour MPs, hence the stress on disarmament."
The documentary, on BBC's Panorama, comes one day after tens of
thousands of protesters marched through the centre of London demanding
that Blair pull British troops out of Iraq and warning against any more
"Bush wars".
Meanwhile, Tony Blair faced another challenger in Britain's upcoming
elections after the father of a military policeman killed in Iraq
pledged to stand against him.
Reg Keys, 52, said he would battle Blair in the prime minister's
constituency of Sedgefield, northern England, as part of a campaign for
justice after the death of his son, Tom, in June 2003.
"This isn't a publicity stunt, it's a serious full blown political
campaign to take the fight to Tony Blair's doorstep," Keys, who took
part in a huge anti-war protest march in London today, told the domestic
Press Association.
"There will be crackpots standing as independents but I shouldn't be
confused with them. I want to make him accountable for his actions in
taking us to war," said Keys.
The former paramedic from Wales said he would travel to Sedgefield on
Monday.
"I have got to be confident about this. My full intention is to remove
Tony Blair from his seat in Sedgefield and I have to believe I can do
that," he said.
"It will be a David and Goliath fight, but Goliath was a Philistine and
I think that word sums up my opponent."
Keys' son Lance Corporal Tom, 20, was one of six military policemen
killed by an Iraqi mob as they manned a small police station on June 24,
2003.
The bereaved father told AFP at the London rally earlier today that he
was demonstrating against government lies.
"I stand here a betrayed man by my government who lied to me about the
need to send my son to war," he said.
Keys' challenge echoes a pledge by a former British spy to stand against
Blair in his constituency. David Shayler has lambasted the Prime
Minister for his "illegal invasion of Iraq".
Shayler, who first made headlines in 1997 as a whistleblower after he
disclosed secret MI5 documents to a British newspaper, said he would
campaign for Blair's seat.
Shayler told The Guardian newspaper yesterday that he would challenge
Blair's credibility and ability to lead "in the light of his lies over
the war".
"If Blair were an American or French president, the electorate would
have a chance to remove him from power," said Shayler.
"As things stand in Britain's increasingly undemocratic society, only
the people of Sedgefield have the opportunity to vote him out of power."
The ex-secret agent, who was served time in prison for breaking the
Official Secrets Act with his disclosure to the Mail on Sunday
newspaper, said he would neither be representing the left nor the right.
A general election is widely expected to be called for May 5.
7 A survey for the Sunday Times newspaper today revealed Labour had a
five-point lead over the main opposition Conservative Party. The YouGov
survey put Labour comfortably in the lead on 37 per cent of the vote,
followed by the Conservatives with 32 per cent and the smaller Liberal
Democrats on 23 per cent.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/03/20/1111253870275.html?oneclick=true
----------------------------------------------------------
BBC 'Panorama' program: Iraq, Tony (Blair) and the truth
Transcript of BBC 'Panorama' Program Included at this URL:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/4332485.stm
Here is the direct URL for the transcript:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/programmes/panorama/transcripts/iraqtonyandthetruth.txt
The archives of South News can be found at
http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/southnews/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
southnews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
*****************************************************************
2 Sunday Times: MI6 chief told PM: Americans ‘fixed’ case for war -
March 20, 2005
Nick Fielding
THE HEAD of MI6 told Tony Blair that the case for war against
Iraq was being “fixed” by the Americans to suit the policy,
according to a BBC documentary that will reignite its battle with
the government.
Blair followed the US lead by failing to reveal publicly doubts
about the quality of intelligence that he had requested to
support the case for war, the programme claims.
Sir Richard Dearlove, head of MI6, briefed Blair and a select
group of ministers on America’s determination to press ahead
with the war nine months before hostilities began.
After attending a briefing in Washington, he told the meeting
that war was “inevitable”. Dearlove said “the facts and
intelligence” were being “fixed round the policy” by George W
Bush’s administration.
The allegations against Blair just weeks before a general
election are likely to reopen the feud between the government
and the BBC that came to a head over the death of Dr David
Kelly, the former weapons inspector. It led to the resignations
of Gavyn Davies, its chairman, and Greg Dyke, its
director-general.
The documentary — to be shown on BBC1’s Panorama tonight —
reveals that Britain and America were anxious to present a
united front on Iraq despite a paucity of new data on Saddam
Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
It quotes from a leaked memo on the presentation of intelligence
sent by Peter Ricketts, political director of the Foreign
Office, to Jack Straw, foreign secretary, in March 2002.
The memo says: “There is more work to ensure that the figures
are accurate and consistent with the US. But even the best
survey of Iraq’s WMD programmes will not show much advance in
recent years.”
The programme argues that Blair had signed up to follow Bush’s
plans for regime change in Iraq as early as April 2002. It
quotes Robin Cook, the former foreign secretary who resigned as
leader of the Commons over Iraq, arguing that the threat of WMD
was not Blair’s true reason for going to war.
Cook says: “What was propelling the prime minister was a
determination that he would be the closest ally to George Bush
and they would prove to the United States administration that
Britain was their closest ally. His problem is that George
Bush’s motivation was regime change. It was not disarmament.
Tony Blair knew perfectly well what he was doing.
“His problem was that he could not be honest about that with
either the British people or Labour MPs, hence the stress on
disarmament.”
The intelligence services had little evidence to show that Iraq
was a serious threat. At the meeting with Dearlove in July,
Straw was still not entirely convinced. But, the programme
claims, Blair had to keep talking up the threat posed by Iraq to
justify his policy of supporting Bush. MI6 was then tasked to
seek new information from its limited Iraqi network to make the
case for war.
The little intelligence that could be gathered was seized upon
by Alastair Campbell, Blair’s press secretary, and John
Scarlett, the official leading a team drawing up the now
notorious intelligence dossier.
The new material came mostly from two sources. The first, who
was new and untried, reported that Iraq had restarted chemical
agent production. The second, who had never previously provided
details on WMD, was the source of the claim that Iraq was able
to deploy WMD within 45 minutes.
When Dearlove briefed Blair on the first source, only days
before he presented his dossier to parliament, the MI6 chief
told him “the case is developmental and the source remains
unproven”. Nonetheless, Blair told MPs two weeks later on
September 24, 2002: “The intelligence picture they paint is one
accumulated over the past four years. It is extensive, detailed
and authoritative.”
The evidence was vital in reducing parliamentary opposition to
the decision to go to war. Only much later, after the fall of
Saddam and the dawning realisation that Iraq possessed no WMD,
was it revealed that the intelligence from both agents had been
withdrawn.
However, Blair's immediate problem of justifying the war against
Iraq had been solved. He went on a diplomatic offensive to swing
the United Nations behind a vote for war.
Panorama interviewed Adolfo Zinser, former Mexican ambassador to
the UN, who recalls a briefing with MI6 as Britain was trying to
shore up support in the security council for the second
resolution on Iraq.
Zinser says: "I asked them, `Do you have full proof of the
existence of these weapons, at any one of these particular sites
that you are referring to?' The MI6 officers told me, `No, we
don't'."
The programme says Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, was not
convinced the invasion would be lawful without a second UN
resolution. It was not until two days before the war that
Goldsmith told the cabinet that this, after all, was not
absolutely necessary. This was after Britain had failed to secure
a second resolution.
"We stretched the legal argument to breaking point and the fact
that we didn't have that authority does set a dangerous
precedent," says Sir Stephen Wall, Blair's former European
affairs adviser.
The programme also reveals Blair deliberately misrepresented the
views of Jacques Chirac, the French president, to strengthen
support in parliament. When Chirac said on the eve of war in
March 2003 that France would veto a second UN resolution, Blair
seized on it. He claimed Chirac was planning a veto "no matter
what" and failed to make clear that France would in fact back an
invasion if Iraq impeded the efforts of UN weapons inspectors.
Senior civil servants became alarmed by Blair's rhetoric. Carne
Ross, the diplomat responsible for Iraq policy at the British
mission to the UN from 1998 to 2002, tells the programme he can
no longer trust Blair: "I'm afraid that the government did not
tell the whole truth about the alleged threat that Iraq posed,
that's why I think it's a tawdry story."
The programme will be seen as an attempt by the BBC to reassert
its editorial independence after it was criticised by the Hutton
report into Kelly's death. The BBC row with ministers was ignited
by a report by Andrew Gilligan claiming the government dossier on
Iraq's weapons had been "sexed up".
Kelly was revealed as the source for the story and committed
suicide two years ago. oThousands of protesters marched in London
yesterday on the second anniversary of the start of the war.
Police put the number on the Bring the Troops Home march at
45,000, organisers put it at nearer 100,000.
*****************************************************************
3 BBC: Blair's case for war
Last Updated: Monday, 21 March, 2005
Iraq, Tony and the Truth
[Tony Blair, UK Prim Minister]
BBC One's Panorama investigates the events leading up to the
Iraq war to see if there is any truth in claims that Tony Blair
misled the country.
On 23 July 2002 the prime minister chaired a highly sensitive
meeting.
It may prove to have been one of the most significant on his
road to war in Iraq.
The BBC's Panorama programme has been told by several reliable
sources that MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove was minuted as
saying that "the facts and the intelligence" were being "fixed
round the policy" by the Bush administration.
By fixed, it is understood that the head of MI6 meant the
Americans were trawling for evidence to support a policy of
regime change.
Just back from Washington, Sir Richard reported that military
action was inevitable. In the same meeting, and not for the
first time, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw questioned whether
Saddam Hussein posed a sufficient threat to justify invasion.
Intelligence trawl
Panorama has also learnt that the government tasked MI6 to
extract as much information as possible from their limited
sources in Iraq to build up an intelligence case.
Our shared reaction was th that would be a considerable challenge
because of the relatively sparse nature of the intelligence
available Dr Brian Jones Chief WMD analyst at the MoD [on the
dossier]
The results of this new intelligence trawl were intended to
support a new dossier which was subsequently published on the 24
September 2002.
Dr Brian Jones, the chief Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
analyst at the Ministry of Defence (MoD), recalls that there was
"an appeal... [for] people to look and think very closely about
the evidence that was available."
News of the government's dossier on Iraq's WMD threat, first
reached Dr Jones in the summer of 2002.
"It was mentioned to me by a colleague in the margins of a
meeting in Whitehall. Our shared reaction was that that would be
a considerable challenge because of the relatively sparse nature
of the intelligence available on Iraq's WMD."
'Lack of candour'
I think the real dishonesty the government's position is that
Tony Blair could not be frank with the British people Robin Cook
Former foreign secretary
Robin Cook, the former foreign secretary who resigned over the
Iraq war, says of the prime minister's actions that "... he knew
perfectly well what he was doing... I think there was a lack of
candour.
"I think the real dishonesty of the government's position is that
Tony Blair could not be frank with the British people about the
real reason why he believed Britain had to be part of an invasion
which was to prove to the US president that we were his most
reliable, most sound ally.
"His problem was he could not be honest about that with either
the British people or Labour MPs, hence the stress on
disarmament."
Private intelligence
His view comes alongside further evidence from senior figures
which once again bring into question the validity of pre-war
claims made about Iraq's WMD programmes.
Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, the former Mexican ambassador to the UN,
was invited to a private intelligence briefing about the WMD
evidence.
"I asked them, 'Do you have full proof of the existence of these
weapons, at any one of these particular sites that you are
referring to?' And the MI6 officer told me: 'No, we don't'."
He continues by saying: "... it was very clear they didn't have
the proof, that they had circumstantial evidence of a funny
behaviour, of a suspicious behaviour.
"But I knew that, we all knew that, because that was what we were
getting from the inspectors."
We stretched the legal argume to breaking point in my view... Sir
Stephen Wall The prime minister's former European affairs advisor
The former secretary of the Defence Notice Committee,
Rear Admiral Nick Wilkinson, told Panorama: "... the government
perhaps allowed the public to be misled as to the degree of
certainty about weapons of mass destruction."
Sir Stephen Wall, the prime minister's former European affairs
advisor says on the matter that "We stretched the legal argument
to breaking point in my view..."
Number 10 has told Panorama that the Prime Minister has nothing
to add to the facts and findings of the four inquiries that have
already been held.
Panorama: Iraq, Tony and the Truth on BBC One at 2215 GMT, Sunday
20 March 2005.
*****************************************************************
4 AFP: US will have to give Iran security guarantees - ElBaradei -
Monday March 21, 12:58 PM
PARIS (AFP) - The United States will eventually have to step in
if the EU is to give Iran security assurances in exchange for
guarantees not to develop nuclear weapons, UN atomic agency
chief Mohamed ElBaradei warned.
ElBaradei said "the United States will have to step in because
security assurances very much need the Americans."
The European Union has since December been trying in talks to get
Iran to abandon crucial nuclear fuel cycle activities in return
for a package of trade, technology and security rewards.
The United States is now backing the Europeans by offering to
help out with the incentives. ElBaradei said that "at the proper
time the United States will have to be fully engaged" because
"regional security (in the Middle East) is not a European
affair."
Copyright © 2005 AFP AFP. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
5 AFP: US military not conducting spy flights over Iran - Rumsfeld
Monday March 21, 07:27 PM
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he
had never authorized sending reconnaisance planes over Iran to
spy on the country's alleged nuclear program, contrary to
Tehran's assertions.
"I checked and I know we had no US aircraft doing what ... Iran
was saying," Rumsfeld told ABC television's "This Week" program.
"What investigations we've been able to undertake have suggested
that the charge was false -- either intentionally or through
ignorance, and that it may very well have been Iranian air
activity in that country by elements of the government that were
not coordinating with other elements of the Iranian government,"
the defense chief said.
Rumsfeld was less categorical in his denial when pressed about
whether he had ever authorized any US military overflights of
Iran during his tenure as defense secretary.
"I don't think I have, but I don't know. I'd have to check. And
I don't know that I'd answer it if I did find out that we had,
but I don't believe we have," he said.
When asked whether any US intelligence agencies might have
organized such flights, he responded: "I can't speak for
intelligence agencies, but not to my knowledge."
Rumsfeld also denied knowing about reports that Iran has
protested to the United States about US surveillance flights on
their territory and that that protest was forwarded to the
Pentagon.
"I don't know about the protest," he told ABC.
Recent US news reports said US drones have been overflying Iran
since April 2004, gathering intelligence on Iran's nuclear
program and probing for weaknesses in Iran's air defenses.
The reported spy flights have raised concerns about US military
preparations for possible strikes on suspected Iranian nuclear
weapons sites.
US officials have refused to rule out a military option, but
have indicated they are giving international diplomatic efforts
a try first.
Copyright © 2005 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
6 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Urges Nuclear Arms Talks With Iran
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday March 21, 2005 12:46 PM
AP Photo PAR103
By JAMEY KEATEN
Associated Press Writer
PARIS (AP) - The U.N. nuclear chief, opening an international
conference Monday on nuclear power, said the best way to ensure
Iran does not develop nuclear weapons is dialogue with European
nations.
Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy
Agency, also trumpeted the benefits of nuclear power as
consumers demand more energy and new environmental protection
rules threaten to raise the costs of fossil fuels. However, he
conceded that terrorism was a real concern for the nuclear
sector, along with proliferation.
Asked later if terrorists could get their hands on a nuclear
bomb, ElBaradei replied, ``After 9/11, we cannot exclude the
risk.''
ElBaradei expressed hope that talks would continue between Iran
and France, Germany and Britain, talks aimed at ensuring Tehran
does not develop nuclear weapons.
``I think this is the best approach - dialogue based on
verification,'' he said.
The United States has expressed concern that Iran is using its
planned nuclear power program to mask its desire to develop
nuclear weaponry. However, it recently agreed to back the
Europeans' diplomatic effort to resolve the disagreement.
The partners in dialogue are to meet again on Wednesday, and
Iran's agreement last year to suspend all uranium
enrichment-related activities - a confidence-building measure -
is likely to be on the agenda.
The suspension is a way for Tehran to avoid possible U.S.
sanctions. Tehran has said that maintaining the voluntary freeze
depends on progress in the talks with the Europeans.
``I very much hope that, of course, during that dialogue, they
will continue that suspension accepted voluntarily by Iran.''
The United States, the world's top nuclear energy producer, is
among 60 nations represented at the conference, sponsored by the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the
IAEA.
About half of the participating countries already use nuclear
energy; others are considering developing that capacity. Host
France generates nearly 80 percent of its electricity from
nuclear power, more than any other country.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran's Leader Blasts U.S. 'Warmongers'
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday March 22, 2005 12:01 AM
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's supreme leader said Monday he would
put on military fatigues and fight to the death if his country
were attacked - unlike U.S. ``warmongers'' who he said cower in
the rear far from the front lines.
President Bush has said The United States is not preparing to
attack Iran, but no option is ruled out if Tehran does not
abandon what Washington views as efforts to build a nuclear
bomb. Iran insists its nuclear program is only to generate
electricity.
In an apparent bid to boost morale in the face of U.S. pressure
over the nuclear program, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei mocked
Washington in a TV speech, saying its leaders keep to the rear
in any confrontation.
``We are not warmongers like U.S. leaders. They are warmongers.
They are after war, but we are men of sacrifice,'' Khamenei told
a crowd of several thousand in the northeast city of Mashhad.
``The U.S. leaders - the president, vice president and other key
leaders - were hiding up to three days after the Sept. 11
attacks,'' Khamenei said. ``We are not like that. If a bitter
experience occurs for this nation, God forbid, or if it is
tested, we will wear military uniforms at the front of the
nation and prepare for sacrifice.''
His speech was interrupted by crowd chants of ``Death to
America!'' and ``Oh, our leader, we are ready for sacrifice!''
Iran denies it seeks nuclear weapons and is currently
negotiating with three European powers who have demanded that
Iran give up its enrichment of uranium. Low levels of enriched
uranium can be used for nuclear reactors, but high levels can be
used for bombs.
The United States has said that unless Iran abandons enrichment,
it should be referred to the U.N. Security Council, which could
impose sanctions.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
8 Hankyoreh: Editorial: US Intelligence on NK that Can't Be Believed
English Editorials : Internet
Updated : Mar.22.2005 07:43 KST [ border=]
The March 20 Washington Post report that in order to intensify
pressure on North Korea the Bush Administration gave Korea and
other Asian nations false information suggesting the North had
exported nuclear material to Libya is shocking. That activity
inevitably hurts the cause of resolving the North Korean nuclear
issue. It of course makes other intelligence less reliable as
well.
On February 2, the New York Times reported that US intelligence
officials and government scientists had almost conclusively
determined that North Korea had exported two tons of uranium
hexafluoride (UF6) to Libya. The source of that intelligence was
supposed to be the National Security Council (NSC) and other
government officials. The US administration had already informed
the nations involved of that intelligence, and the when Michael
Green of the US's NSC visited Korea, China, and Japan
immediately after that report came out, he is said to have
talked along the same lines. The news meant for a very serious
situation, because the US has long considered the North Korean
sale of nuclear material to terrorist groups or other nations as
a line that the North must not cross.
This new Washington Post report exposes those US government
officials for deliberately distorting the facts. The
intelligence actually stated that the UF6 North Korea sold
Pakistan was then sold to Libya, but administration officials
changed things to say the North dealt with Libya directly.
Furthermore, the North's exportation of UF6 was a "commercial
deal" that had already been known about previously. Such
deceptive tricks have had two negative consequences. One is that
scared North Korea into declaring it will not participate in the
six-party talks. The other is that the confidence Asian nations
have in the US has been damaged.
The US already has a history here, for having significantly
distorted the intelligence when invading Iraq. These latest
developments make you worry that something similar may happen
with the North Korean nuclear issue. The US and the North are
making very different claims regarding a highly enriched uranium
(HEU) program. The US needs to explain this matter in detail.
Spreading false information to apply pressure on the North is
not the way to solve the problem.
The Hankyoreh, 22 March 2005.
Copyright 2005 Hankyoreh Plus inc.
*****************************************************************
9 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Did Washington Lie to Seoul?
Home> Editorials/Columns Updated Mar.21,2005 23:17 KST
Post Debunks N.Korea Nuke Sale Red Herring
When the United States told its Asian allies over a month ago
that North Korea exported nuclear material to Libya it was
omitting a vital part of the information, the Washington Post
reported Sunday. It was not North Korea but Pakistan that
exported uranium hexafluoride, a substance needed for uranium
enrichment, to Libya, and when Pakistan bought it from North
Korea Washington had no particular objections, the paper said.
Despite being fully aware of this, Washington fabricated the
story of a direct sale from Pyongyang to Tripoli to step up
pressure on North Korea, the report said.
The nature of the incident differs greatly depending which of
the two countries - Pakistan or Libya - North Korea sold uranium
hexafluoride to. Given that Pakistan is a de facto nuclear
power, Pyongyang's export of nuclear material to Pakistan can
hardly be seen as a grave development. But if Pyongyang exported
nuclear material to Libya, which was at the time under suspicion
of developing nuclear weapons, that would by far be the North's
most dangerous nuclear proliferation venture yet.
Even while reporting that North Korea exported uranium
hexafluoride to Libya, some U.S. media said the source of the
material was more likely Pakistan. The crux of the matter then
is whether Washington distorted the information on purpose.
If the U.S. administration really offered false information to
the Korean, Japanese and Chinese governments in an attempt to
put more pressure on North Korea to return to six-party talks,
Washington's credibility and morality would be in tatters. It is
a reality that America has a vast amount of intelligence about
North Korea. If it offers that intelligence to its allies only
after tweaking it to suit its own ends, it would deal a severe
blow to mutual trust, the foundation of cooperation.
The U.S. National Security Council's Asia director Michael
Green, during his visit here in February, told Seoul of
intelligence involving the North's exports of nuclear material.
The government must make the information it received from the
United States public, if only to dispel any doubts that we were
really misled and prevent distrust between the two allies from
growing.
*****************************************************************
10 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: North's prime minister heads for Beijing talks
March 22, 2005 KST 13:54 (GMT+9)
March 22, 2005 ¤Ñ North Korea's prime minister, Pak Pong-ju,
is expected to pay a five-day visit to Beijing, starting today.
Mr. Pak is to meet with senior Chinese officials, including
Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, to discuss ways to strengthen the
economic relationship between the two countries.
Receiving investment and technological help from Beijing for
North Korea's ailing agricultural sector is said to be one of
Mr. Pak's main objectives.
While the visit is officially for economic purposes, analysts
say that he is likely to discuss outstanding issues regarding
the North's nuclear program with Chinese officials.
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has just left Beijing
after urging China to exercise some of its leverage over
Pyeongyang to coax the North back to the six-party talks.
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
11 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Analysts see North facing a deadline
March 22, 2005 KST 13:54 (GMT+9)
March 22, 2005 ¤Ñ South Korean political analysts said
yesterday that North Korea may have no more than a month or two
in which to decide to return to the six-party nuclear
disarmament talks before Washington seeks tougher measures to
resolve the standoff.
Kim Tae-hyo, a professor of politics and international affairs
at Sungkyunkwan University, said Pyeongyang is now under
pressure to respond. "The next round of six-party talks should
take place some time around June or July," Mr. Kim said. "In
order to do that, working-level talks need to take place within
the next two months. If that does not happen by then the
situation gets really difficult."
The professor said the six-party framework will probably remain
in place, but economic sanctions are becoming a much more
realistic option for dealing with North Korea. "Other nations
have not favored hard-line tactics, but it's hard to see how
they can ask Washington for more flexibility at this moment,"
Mr. Kim said.
North Korea's prime minister, Pak Pong-ju, is scheduled to pay
a six-day visit to Beijing starting today, and analysts say that
Beijing will do what it can to get Pyeongyang back to the talks.
While South Korean officials, including Foreign Minister Ban
Ki-moon, have said that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice's remarks calling Pyeongyang a "sovereign state" is a
positive sign in creating an opening to revive the talks,
experts said the expression is a doubled-edged sword.
"You don't overthrow a sovereign state," said Yoon Deok-min, a
professor at the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National
Security. "That's how far one can go in interpreting Ms. Rice
remarks. From Washington's perspective it's a show of
flexibility. Whether that's enough to lure back Pyeongyang is
another matter, but the ball is certainly in the North's court
now."
Mr. Yoon said that a response by Pyeongyang should come within
a month or two. "Pyeongyang is at a crossroads actually," he
said. "The North has little room to maneuver now."
Goh Yoo-hwan, a professor of North Korean Studies at Dongguk
University, held a similar view.
Calling North Korea a sovereign state, he said, "is a sign by
the United States that it is acknowledging North Korea as a
conversational partner, but it is also a political move with
which the United States is trying to shed the blame in advance
if the talks collapse. The United States has given Pyeongyang a
face-saving excuse to come back."
During her Asian tour, Ms. Rice said repeatedly that
Washington's patience is not unlimited and that other measures
would be considered if there is no progress made through
negotiations. Meeting with Chinese officials in Beijing
yesterday, Ms. Rice warned Pyeongyang that "other options" were
a possibility if the six-party talks are considered a failure.
by Brian Lee africanu@joongang.co.kr>
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
12 Guardian Unlimited: Rice Seeks China's Aid on N. Korea Talks
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday March 21, 2005 8:01 AM
AP Photo BEJ204
By ANNE GEARAN
AP Diplomatic Writer
BEIJING (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hinted Monday
that North Korea faces possible international sanctions if it
flouts a diplomatic effort to halt its nuclear weapons program.
Rice also delivered subtle rebukes to China for raising the
stakes in the perennial standoff with Taiwan and for the
communist country's limitations on religious freedom.
``I made the point ... that I do hope there is an understanding
that religious liberties are not a threat to changing
societies,'' Rice said at a press conference.
Rice said she asked Chinese leaders for more help to bring the
North Koreans back to the six-way weapons talks. The Pyongyang
regime has said it already has at least one nuclear weapon and
has given no indication it is ready to bargain further.
``It goes without saying that to the degree that a nuclear free
Korean peninsula gets more difficult to achieve if the North
does not recognize that it needs to do that then of course we'll
have to look at other options,'' Rice said at a press
conference.
Rice did not spell out a fallback position, but it could include
seeking tough economic sanctions on North Korea through the
United Nations Security Council. Theoretically, the United
States might also launch a military attack, although Rice and
other U.S. officials have repeatedly said they do not intend to
do that.
``Obviously everyone is aware that there are other options in
the international system,'' Rice said.
At the news conference, Rice said she told Chinese leaders the
United States is unhappy with the recent passage of a law
codifying China's intent to use military force if Taiwan
formally breaks away.
The law, she said, ``was not a welcome development because
anything that increases tensions ... is not good.''
``China and Taiwan cannot do this alone. They are eventually
going to need one another to resolve this ... We are not pleased
when either side does anything unilaterally.''
Rice reiterated U.S. opposition to the potential lifting of an
international arms embargo on China, a move the European Union
seemed sure to take before the recent escalation of tensions
with Taiwan.
Rice said she didn't discuss the embargo specifically with the
Chinese, but she sounded encouraged by recent remarks from
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw that may signal that the EU
is rethinking its plan.
Beijing was the final stop on a weeklong tour of Asian capitals
for Rice, and it was the most delicate for America's new chief
diplomat. President Bush's second-term pledge to carry
democratic ideals around the globe has met with suspicion in
China, where government control remains a strong and constant
fact of daily life.
The United States is cooperating with China on several fronts,
including the talks over North Korea's nuclear program. But
Washington has complaints about China's record on human rights,
its treatment of dissidents and the rampant piracy of movies,
books and other goods.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
13 MARCH 21 Next International Call-In Day
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:50:35 -0800
Free Mordechai Vanunu - Info & Action Alert #52 - March 20, 2005
From the U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu
http://www.vanunu.com and http://www.nonviolence.org/vanunu/
** PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY TO SYMPATHETIC LISTS **
1) March 21 - Next International Call-In Day to Call for Full Freedom for
Mordechai Vanunu
2) Vanunu defiant as Israel brings new charges, by Peter Hounam, London
Sunday Times
3) Write to Mordechai Vanunu - PLEASE NOTE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS
==============
INTERNATIONAL CALL-IN DAYS
TO CALL FOR FULL FREEDOM FOR MORDECHAI VANUNU
REMINDER: MONDAY, MARCH 21 - CALL, FAX OR EMAIL THE ISRAELI AMBASSADOR IN
YOUR COUNTRY
Join in sending a flurry of email, faxes and phone calls to the Israeli
Ambassador in your country on the following Mondays, leading up to the one
year review of post-prison restrictions that have prevented nuclear
whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu from leaving Israel:
March 7, March 21, April 4 and April 18 -
to tell Israel not to renew the restrictions and to let Mordechai Vanunu go.
ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE NEW CHARGES BROUGHT AGAINST MORDECHAI VANUNU ON
MARCH 17,
PLEASE JOIN IN PROTESTING THIS CONTINUED PERSECUTION OF HIM
The severe restrictions placed on Mordechai Vanunu upon his release from
prison April 21, 2004 are a grave injustice which keep Vanunu from truly
being free after serving his full 18 year sentence in Ashkelon Prison. The
restrictions violate Vanunu's freedom of speech and association, and forbid
him from leaving Israel. These March 17 indictments, just a month before
Vanunu's restrictions are to be reviewed, are a continued outrage. We need
to tell Israel to stop punishing him, dismiss these indictments, lift the
restrictions and let him go.
Visit http://mfa.gov.il/mfm or
http://www.embassyworld.com/embassy/israel1.html to find the contact
information for Israeli Embassies in your country.
For those in the U.S., information for Israeli Embassy in D.C.:
Daniel Ayalon, Ambassador of Israel
3514 International Drive NW
Washington, DC 20008 US
Phone: 202-364-5500
Fax: 202-364-5607
Email: ambassador_sec@israelemb.org
For more information about the Vanunu case, see http://www.vanunu.com
==================
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1533566,00.html
March 20, 2005
Vanunu defiant as Israel brings new charges
Peter Hounam
THE nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu reacted defiantly yesterday to
criminal charges levelled by the Israeli authorities that could put him
back in prison. He vowed to continue flouting orders that prohibit him from
speaking to the foreign press because he believes that he has the right to
freedom of speech.
Speaking through an intermediary from the cathedral in Jerusalem where he
has sought sanctuary, Vanunu said he had always believed that the orders
were unconstitutional and had therefore decided to ignore them. "This is a
human rights issue," Vanunu said.
"I want to work for world peace and the abolition of nuclear weapons. I
want the human race to survive."
Vanunu worked as a technician at Israel's nuclear weapons plant near the
town of Dimona, but in 1986 he decided to expose its inner secrets to The
Sunday Times. He was kidnapped by Israeli agents in Rome and smuggled home,
where he stood trial for treason and espionage.
His gruelling 18-year sentence ended last April but restrictions were
immediately imposed on him, including bans on leaving the country and
speaking to foreigners. He soon began to infuriate the authorities by
openly meeting visitors from abroad, including the foreign media.
Among 22 indictments filed last Thursday in the Jerusalem district court,
Vanunu is accused of violating the restrictions by giving a joint interview
to The Sunday Times and the BBC last May, although the interviewer was an
Israeli.
Another charge says that last July he told a British journalist that he had
"photographed a model of a neutron bomb and said he believed Israel had
developed a hydrogen bomb". This is presented in the charge as a
revelation, but the Sunday Times articles in 1986 included Vanunu's
photographs of models of these types of weapon with explanatory details.
Another indictment said Vanunu had told the Sky television journalist Adam
Boulton last December that he was "deliberately violating the restrictions
imposed on him in order to make his case".
In another charge Vanunu has been accused of attempting to leave Israel.
The incident dates from Christmas Eve when he took a taxi to the West Bank
town of Bethlehem with the aim of attending a carol service at the Church
of the Nativity.
Michael Sfard, one of Vanunu's lawyers, said: "Vanunu has fully served his
sentence for what he did. Now the authorities seem to be trying to punish
him all over again."
Yael Lotan, a leading Israeli civil rights campaigner, said that the
authorities were seeking to keep Vanunu permanently under their control:
"The restrictions on him last year were due to expire in four weeks' time.
Now they can keep him in this country indefinitely. It makes me ashamed to
be an Israeli."
John Witherow, editor of The Sunday Times, said: "When we interviewed
Vanunu last year we made sure the interview was conducted by an Israeli in
compliance with the restrictions. He said nothing new about the Israeli
nuclear programme because he knows nothing more. This newspaper published
everything in 1986."
==============
3) Write to Mordechai
Mordechai would love to hear from his friends and supporters. You can
write to him at:
Mordechai Vanunu
c/o Cathedral Church of St. George
20 Nablus Road
PO Box 19018
Jerusalem 91190
Israel
and email him at
PLEASE NOTE NEW EMAIL ADDRESS
=================
Felice Cohen-Joppa
Coordinator
U.S. Campaign to Free Mordechai Vanunu
POB 43384
Tucson, AZ 85733
Phone/Fax 520-323-8697
freevanunu@mindspring.com
www.nonviolence.org/vanunu
*****************************************************************
14 Guardian Unlimited: Annan proposes radical UN shakeup
Jonathan Steele
Monday March 21, 2005
The Guardian
Kofi Annan proposed a radical change to the workings of the
United Nations yesterday, after a period of scandals and
controversy that has plagued the organisation and its secretary
general.
The blueprint for reform is contained in a 63-page draft report
to be presented to the general assembly, and includes changing
the controversial human rights commission, tightening oversight
of the UN's contracts and sanctions programmes, and creating a
new peace-building body to strengthen civil society in countries
ravaged by conflict.
In the introduction, Mr Annan calls on the world's leaders to
"act boldly" and adopt "the most far-reaching reforms in the
history of the UN". "We will not enjoy development without
security, we will not enjoy security without development, and we
will not enjoy either without respect for human rights," Mr Annan
says. "Unless all these causes are advanced, none will succeed."
An investigation into the UN's role in the pre-war oil-for-food
scandal in Iraq, and an inquiry into allegations of sexual abuse
by UN officials in the Congo have put Mr Annan under increasing
pressure.
The scandals have provided a focal point for conservative
critics who believe that the UN is a hindrance to US interests.
In the report, Mr Annan has sought to keep an increasingly
critical US on board by tackling issues that concern it.
The blueprint, entitled In Larger Freedom: Towards Development,
Security and Human Rights For All, calls for the commission on
human rights to be replaced by a smaller human rights council.
Mr Annan says the existing commission, which is riven by charges
and counter-charges, has "been increasingly undermined by its
declining credibility and professionalism".
Echoing Washington's criticism of states such as Cuba and Libya,
he says some states have sought membership on the commission
"not to strengthen human rights, but to protect themselves
against criticism, or to criticise others".
Today's report is an effort to find common ground between north
and south. It tries to meet the priorities of rich countries,
which put most store by security against terrorism and nuclear
proliferation, and poor states more concerned with poverty and
disease.
He warns that a catastrophic terrorist act in a big western city
could undermine poorer countries' economies, while an outbreak
of disease in a poor region could spread to the developed world.
Mr Annan's recommendations build on those of a panel he set up
last year to study threats and security challenges. It called
for international agreement on a new definition of terrorism to
outlaw all attacks on civilians, and proposed a change in the
balance between state sovereignty and the right of states to
intervene.
But although Mr Annan endorses the need for change, he does not
offer concrete proposals. He calls on the security council to
reach agreement on principles to govern "when and how force is
used".
Similarly, on reform of the security council, he does not come
off the fence in favour of any of the various schemes on offer.
The council needs to be expanded so as "to make it more broadly
representative of the international community as a whole", he
says. But he leaves it to member states to decide, preferably by
consensus rather than majority vote.
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
15 Times of India: 'Pakistan may hand over A.Q. Khan to US'-
TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ MONDAY, MARCH 21, 2005 07:30:16 PM ]
ISLAMABAD: A powerful opposition grouping here claims that the
Pakistan government may hand over father of Pakistan's nuclear
bomb and disgraced scientist A.Q. Khan to the US.
The claim was made by Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) chief Qazi
Hussain Ahmed at a "million man march" organised by the group in
Karachi Sunday, according to a report in Daily Times.
The MMA, an alliance of six Islamist parties, also called
President Pervez Musharraf a security threat to Pakistan.
Ahmed said Musharraf had compromised Pakistan's nuclear
programme, which acted as a deterrent against foreign
aggression, and had made the country's defence insecure. He also
accused the president of "misguiding the nation under the
pretext of enlightened moderation".
He criticised Musharraf for supporting the US-led attack on and
"occupation" of Afghanistan and accused him of failure to
promote Islamic values and include the religion column in
passports and allowing the Aga Khan Board, an NGO, to take over
the country's education system.
He also criticised the government's flawed economic policies,
saying they had forced the underprivileged segment of society to
the brink of economic disaster.
MMA secretary general Fazlur Rehman said the large turnout at
the march was a testimony to the fact that people had rejected
the government's anti-people policies.
He charged that the present government was blindly pursuing "US
diktats" and this had damaged Pakistan's image.
He asked the government to refrain from using force in
Balochistan and South Waziristan Agency and warned that this
would only complicate issues.
He accused Musharraf of trampling on the constitution, making
parliament subservient to his "whimsical" policies and playing
havoc with the country's democratic system.
"We will continue our democratic struggle till parliament's
supremacy is ensured and an Islamic system in the country is
implemented," he asserted.
Copyright © 2005 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
16 Nuclear Power Industry Must Market Strengths More Effectively - UN Watchdog
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:00:33 -0500
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on pascal.ctyme.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_ORG,
SPF_HELO_PASS,SP_HAM_SUPER,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham
version=3.0.1
X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
NUCLEAR POWER INDUSTRY MUST MARKET STRENGTHS MORE EFFECTIVELY – UN
WATCHDOG
New York, Mar 21 2005 1:00PM
With energy demand expected to double by mid-century and nuclear
power adding, by lowest estimates, the equivalent of 127 more1,000-megawatt
plants than earlier thought by 2020, the United Nations
atomic watchdog today <"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2005/ebsp2005n004.html">called
on the nuclear industry to provide
the public with a clear balance of the risks and benefits involved.
“The failure of the nuclear community – both scientists and technical
experts, operators and regulators – to effectively ‘market’
the strength of nuclear power in comparison with other sources, has
contributed to a lack of public understanding regarding risks
and benefits of nuclear energy,” International Atomic Energy Agency
(<"http://www.iaea.org/">IAEA) Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei
told a ministerial meeting in Paris.
He noted that nuclear power was dealt a heavy blow by the explosion
and fire at the Chernobyl reactor in Ukraine, a blow from which
the reputation of the industry has never fully recovered but an
array of measures have been put in place since then to offset the
possibility of another severe accident.
“How a given nation balances the risk of a nuclear accident against
other factors (from fossil fuels) – such as air pollution, dammed
rivers, mining accidents or dependency on foreign fuel supplies
– is already a matter of complexity and legitimate debate,” Mr.
ElBaradei told ministers and senior officials from over 60 countries
attending the <"http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Meetings/Announcements.asp?ConfID=122">conference
on Nuclear Power for the 21st
Century.
“It is important for the nuclear community to make every effort to
provide comprehensible, accurate information to support that debate,
to ensure that the risks and benefits of nuclear technology
are clearly and fairly understood,” he added.
He said he felt confident that nuclear safety has significantly improved.
“But we should not rest on our laurels,” he added. “As nuclear
power technology continues to spread to new countries, as
new reactor designs are developed and put to use, and as the licences
of existing plants are extended, it is essential that existing
safety standards, operational practices and regulatory oversight
are adapted – and in some cases strengthened – to ensure acceptable
levels of safety into the future.”
On the threat of nuclear terrorism, he said security activities had
greatly expanded in scope and volume. “Here, too, the international
community is making good progress,” he declared. “While much
remains to be done, nuclear installations around the world have
strengthened security forces, added protective barriers and taken
other measures commensurate with current security risks and vulnerabilities.”
Among the advantages of nuclear power, he noted that while the degree
to which fossil fuels are tapped to meet the growing demand
for energy could have a major negative environmental impact, nuclear
power emits virtually no greenhouse gases.
2005-03-21 00:00:00.000
________________
For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml
*****************************************************************
17 [NukeNet] Va. Nuclear Plant's Plans Raise Fears
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:51:18 -0800
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Va. Nuclear Plant's Plans Raise Fears
Terror Concerns Complicate Rare Request to Expand
By Michelle Boorstein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, March 20, 2005; Page C08
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50420-2005Mar19.html
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission says the North Anna nuclear
power plant, 80 miles south of Washington, meets post-Sept. 11 safety
standards. That's not enough for Tommy Barlow.
"It seems as though it doesn't take anybody too smart to get a hold of
a shoulder-mounted missile, with the means terrorists seem to be able to
come up with," said Barlow, chairman of the planning commission in
Louisa County, home to North Anna. "I definitely think it's an issue."
Dominion's nuclear plant has attracted more public attention recently
than it has in decades as the power company applies to add two reactors
to the two already there.
The application is one of only three in the country making its way
through the federal system, the first requests for new nuclear reactors
in the 25 years after the industry was rocked by an accident at Three
Mile Island in Pennsylvania.
In the past, routine North Anna events such as Dominion's annual "State
of the Station" presentation or the company's request for a license
renewal have drawn crowds that could be counted on one hand.
But last month, an NRC hearing in the town of Mineral on the proposed
expansion drew 200 to 300 people, most of them -- by a show of hands --
in opposition.
Comments ranged from concern about the consequences for the environment
and property values to support for the Bush administration's plan to
significantly boost nuclear power, adding the equivalent of 50 reactors
to the country's 103 by 2020. But activists say most common these days
are concerns about terrorism and security.
"Al Qaeda has said they want to attack a nuclear power plant, and this
is a sitting radioactive bomb," said Jerry Rosenthal, 56, a farmer and
financial consultant who has been in the anti-nuclear movement in Louisa
for nearly 30 years.
Security concerns have been heightened at plants across the country as
underwater pools designed to hold nuclear waste have been filling up and
utilities have been putting additional waste in aboveground casks that
look like small silos.
Although the NRC and Dominion say the concrete and stainless steel
casks are secure, even such middle-of-the-road Dominion supporters as
Barlow have concerns.
In a 7 to 0 vote last month, the planning commission recommended that
if Dominion wants an extension of its permit to keep 22 casks outside
and permission to build dozens more, it should be required to build a
berm "so that somebody can't get a direct line of sight and fire a
missile directly at it," Barlow said.
Tomorrow, the commission's recommendations will go before the Louisa
supervisors, and Dominion plans to oppose them, according to the
company's nuclear affairs spokesman, Richard Zuercher.
"I'm not going to go into what we'll discuss, but we are in compliance
with the NRC," he said, adding that the company has invested three times
since the 2001 terrorist attacks in additional security measures
required by the regulatory agency.
Tomorrow's vote in Louisa, a community largely reliant on recreation
revenue from Lake Anna, the 13,000-acre lake created for the plant, is
part of the local look at a very current national question: Where is
U.S. nuclear waste going to go?
First-generation nuclear power plants were built without aboveground,
outdoor storage because the federal government had promised to be
responsible for the radioactive waste. But the government broke its
promise long ago and spent more than $6 billion looking for a place to
bury the waste.
The deadline to begin burying at Yucca Mountain in Nevada passed in
1998, and early estimates say that the facility is at least a decade
away from opening. Environmental groups, including the Washington-based
Envi
ronmental Working Group, say that even if Yucca opens, it will fill
quickly because of waste already generated.
This month, Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) began floating a proposal to
have the federal government take ownership of all storage facilities
across the country, eliminating liability for states and utilities and
also keeping the massive storage debate out of his state.
The belief that Yucca will never be built is the reason Barlow said the
berm is needed.
"I don't think anyone is fooling themselves into thinking the waste is
ever going anywhere," he said.
As the storage question and U.S. energy policy have become topics of
greater interest, Washington area groups for and against nuclear power
have poured more effort into North Anna.
The North American Young Generation in Nuclear, made up of
professionals in the nuclear industry, has recently opened a Washington
area chapter. The People's Alliance for Clean Energy, a
Charlottesville-based group opposed to the North Anna expansion, sprang
up last year.
Most of the opposition has come from outside Louisa, where Dominion is
the largest employer, with 900 jobs at the plant, which provides $10
million annually in tax revenue.
Some residents, however, are questioning the impact of expansion on the
lake -- water tables, water levels, water temperature and fish -- and on
the recreation economy.
Supervisors in nearby Spotsylvania County issued a group statement last
month saying they were displeased with the NRC review of the proposed
expansion, which they said didn't consider the burgeoning region's
future water needs.
In addition, Supervisor Emmitt Marshall (I-Berkeley), whose district
includes part of Lake Anna, asked: "What happens if a suicide bomber
decides to drop a bomb on it or crash a plane into it? The larger the
plant, the more likely it is you have an accident."
But those concerned about terrorism say storage and expansion issues
aren't entirely local. Along with the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant
in Calvert County, Md., North Anna is the closest nuclear facility to
Washington. Federal emergency guidelines talk about dangers extending as
far as 50 miles.
"They should hold hearings in Washington and Alexandria and
Fredericksburg," said Elena Day, a member of the People's Alliance.
"Radiation doesn't stop at the county line."
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
18 Ruling Bolsters Workers Who Warn Nukes
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:51:25 -0800
More From The Post-Standard | Subscribe To The Post-Standard
Ruling Bolsters Workers Who Warn
Mexico whistle-blower was first employee in 10 years to succeed against
Entergy.
Friday, March 18, 2005
By Delen Goldberg
Staff writer
Mexico's Carl Patrickson is making legal waves that could be felt far beyond
the shores of Lake Ontario.
His victory in court earlier this month over Entergy Nuclear, owner of the
James A. FitzPatrick power plant in Scriba, marks the first time a
"whistle-blower" employee has beaten the company in at least 10 years.
Advertisement
"This is the first time Entergy has lost at this level," Patrickson's
lawyer, Lawrence M. Ordway Jr., said. "We hope this is a good indication
that other whistle-blowers will be successful."
Over the last 10 years, 13 Entergy employees have filed lawsuits against the
company, saying it punished them for reporting safety problems at nuclear
power plants, according to documents on the U.S. Department of Labor's Web
site. A federal statute protects employees against retaliation for reporting
health, safety or environmental concerns.
Two of the cases against Entergy are pending. Judges dismissed four others
after employees withdrew their complaints. Two employees lost their
lawsuits; Entergy agreed to settle four others. The details of those
settlements were sealed.
Patrickson, 54, who worked at the FitzPatrick plant 19 years before Entergy
fired him, is the only whistle-blower to have won a lawsuit against the
company.
"Considering the many months that he has endured as an outcast from his
industry, this is a great day for Carl and for whistle-blowers in general,"
Ordway said.
In his March 3 decision, U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge
Daniel F. Solomon ordered Entergy to reinstate Patrickson to his job -
Patrickson is a nuclear engineer - and to reimburse him for more than
$54,000 in legal fees.
Because Entergy is appealing the judge's decision, it's not yet clear when -
or if - Patrickson will return to work at the FitzPatrick plant.
Patrickson himself is appealing part of the judge's ruling. He wants Solomon
to award him thousands of dollars in back pay for the 68 weeks he was out of
work.
Entergy officials had tried twice to settle with Patrickson, his wife said.
Both times, he refused.
"If we took the settlement, we would never have known if we could actually
win this thing," said Carolyn Patrickson. "And we wanted the company to lift
the label of 'terminated' off him. Plus, if we had taken the money, they
would have won."
Patrickson's case could spark a ripple effect through the energy industry,
experts say.
"Now, future whistle-blowers will be able to cite this case as precedent,"
said David Lochbaum, a nuclear safety engineer with the Union of Concerned
Scientists in Washington, D.C. "Hopefully, it could be an eye-opener for the
industry. That could be the silver lining in all of this, if it prevents
future Carl Patricksons."
Whistle-blowers win cases all the time against large companies and
corporations, according to Robert Vaughn, a law professor at American
University Washington College of Law. Still, every victory matters, he said.
"Each victory illustrates the importance that whistle-blowers play in
ensuring people's health and safety," said Vaughn, who has studied
whistle-blower cases for more than 30 years. "Each victory also is an
indication that there are legal mechanisms available to protect people who
have the courage to speak out about risks they see."
© 2005 The Post-Standard. Used with permission.
Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\0316_WhistleblowerRelease.pdf"
*****************************************************************
19 U.S. levies $1.1 billion pollution settlement against
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:51:29 -0800
toledoblade.com: U.S. levies $1.1 billion pollution settlement against
FirstEnergy
Article published Saturday, March 19, 2005
Dirty coal plant violated EPA rules
By BLADE STAFF WRITER
FirstEnergy Corp. has agreed to pay the second-largest sum a
utility has ever paid to settle federal Clean Air Act
violations, making it the second-largest civil fine ever imposed
on the utility sector.
The corporation's $1.1 billion settlement, announced yesterday
by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Justice
Department, is second only to a $1.2 billion settlement the
federal government reached in 2003 with Virginia Electric and
Power Co.
FirstEnergy's settlement also includes an $8.5 million civil
penalty, second only to a $9 million civil penalty that Dynegy
Midwest Generation agreed to pay as part of a deal announced
March 7 in a case that also involved Dynegy's predecessor,
Illinois Power Co.
FirstEnergy owns coal and nuclear power stations in northern
Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. Its power plants include the
coal-fired Bay Shore plant in Lucas County and the Davis-Besse
nuclear plant in Ottawa County.
The utility's $1.1 billion expenditure will not directly affect
customers in the short term because the Public Utilities
Commission of Ohio has capped prices FirstEnergy can charge. The
cap is part of a rate stabilization plan in effect from 2006
through the end of 2008, said Ellen Raines, a utility spokesman.
FirstEnergy is the only utility in Ohio forbidden by the PUCO
from raising rates to pay for environmental investments, she
said.
The Clean Air Act violations stem from a lawsuit the federal
government filed in 1999 over excessive air pollution from the
W.H. Sammis coal-fired power plant. The plant, north of
Steubenville, Ohio, is operated by FirstEnergy subsidiary Ohio
Edison Co.
Located along the Ohio River near the Ohio-West Virginia border,
the plant is one of the nation's largest producers of
electricity and notorious for spewing contaminants.
In 2003, it was listed as the nation's second-largest emitter of
sulfur dioxide, a lung irritant that can permanently damage the
respiratory system.
Sulfur dioxide also is the driving pollutant behind acid rain, a
form of precipitation that travels for miles and contaminates
rivers, lakes, and forests.
The government said in its lawsuit that FirstEnergy was required
to install the most effective pollution-control equipment on the
market when substantial modifications were made. It said such
changes were mandated under provisions of the Clean Air Act,
called new source review, which treated older coal plants as new
sources of pollution when those plants were significantly
modified or expanded.
The utility contended its continued work at the plant was
maintenance and thus exempt from the law.
The U.S. EPA and the Justice Department described the case as a
landmark for utilities.
The target of the complaint was Ohio Edison, whose service area
includes portions of Erie and Huron counties, including the city
of Sandusky.
New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut were co-plaintiffs and are
among several in the Northeast that have claimed they are unable
to meet Clean Air Act requirements because of migrating
pollutants generated by Ohio coal plants.
The settlement requires a modernization of Sammis and three
other FirstEnergy coal plants - its Burger plant in Ohio's
Belmont County, its Eastlake plant in Eastlake, Ohio, and its
Mansfield plant in Beaver County, Pa.
The U.S. EPA projects the improvements will result in an annual
reduction of 212,000 tons of emissions a year, mostly in sulfur
dioxide and nitrogen oxides. The latter causes smog.
Contact Tom Henry at:
thenry@theblade.com
or 419-724-6079.
© 2005 The Blade. The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior
St., Toledo, OH 43660 , (419) 724-6000
*****************************************************************
20 United Press International: Congress wants nuke secrecy probe -
March 21, 2005
Washington, DC, Mar. 21 (UPI) -- U.S. lawmakers demanded an
inquiry Monday into an increasing tendency of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission to restrict and deny public access to
information.
"While I am certainly supportive of efforts to ensure that
information (which) could assist a terrorist in attacking a
nuclear facility is properly secured," wrote rep. Ed Markey,
D-Mass., in a letter to the commission's Inspector General, "I am
concerned that the Commission may be improperly restricting
public access to specific documents that should be releasable
without compromising security.
"This behavior must stop," concludes Markey's letter.
At issue are a series of recent decisions by the commission that
lawmakers say represent the use of security as a pretext to deny
the public and experts from outside the nuclear industry access
to information they need to independently assess the safety of
the nation's atomic power plants.
There was no immediate comment either from the commission or
from its inspector general, but as a matter of practice, such
requests from Congress are generally addressed by inspectors
general.
Copyright 2005 United Press International
*****************************************************************
21 NY Daily News: We must take closer look at nuclear energy
Stanley Crouch is a columnist, novelist, essayist, critic and
television commentator. He has served since 1987 as an artistic
consultant at Lincoln Center and is a co-founder of the
department known as Jazz at Lincoln Center. In 1993, he received
both the Jean Stein Award from the American Academy of Arts and
Letters and a MacArthur Foundation grant. He is now working on a
biography of Charlie Parker.
Email: scrouch@ edit.nydailynews.com
When any discussion of nuclear energy begins, the first image in
most minds is a mushroom cloud, mass terror and mass
destruction. Yet the facts seem to be quite different. After the
partial meltdown of a reactor at Three Mile Island in 1979,
psychiatrist Robert DuPont began investigating nuclear energy
and was astonished to find how well-run these plants are and how
poor a job has been done in getting the public to know the
difference between energy used to generate electricity and
nuclear weapons, which dominate the public fear in almost
pathological terms.
The recent congressional vote for arctic drilling would not
have been necessary if we had maintained a commitment to
developing nuclear power as an energy source. Of course, in the
wake of Three Mile Island, we had a number of setbacks that were
unavoidable. One had to expect high levels of hysteria,
finger-pointing and inevitable mistrust of industrial
information - and with good reason. But we still have to get all
of the hysteria and misinformation behind us so that we can
seriously reconsider nuclear energy as one way of getting free
of Middle Eastern dependence.
It is time to recognize what even France understands, which is
that nuclear energy is the cleanest, safest and least expensive
way to get beyond oil dependency. In our case, we also have
hazardous things that happen to economically disadvantaged
people through the emissions of coal burning.
We are due for a major reconstruction of our thinking about
nuclear power. I do not mean that everyone is supposed to lie
down and go to sleep, forgetting about everything on the basis
of what some energy company says. But I expect our nation to
grow up and move free of an irrational fear of technology. While
we gobble up every new gadget, those fears take a rest, but we
are quick to pick up those fears again whenever nuclear energy
is brought up.
The facts are on the side of Indian Point, and we will better
understand where we are when we look closely at those facts. We
should not allow ourselves to be manipulated by those ideologues
who pretend to hate big oil and the destruction of the
environment but are not willing to consider an alternative that
has proven itself the world over.
Originally published on March 21, 2005
All contents © 2005 Daily News, L.P.
*****************************************************************
22 Independent: Troubled British Energy replaces chief executive
independent.co.uk
By Michael Harrison Business Editor 22 March 2005
British Energy, the loss-making nuclear power producer, shocked
the markets yesterday by ousting its chief executive just weeks
after the completion of a £5bn government-backed rescue of the
company.
Mike Alexander, who was hired from the gas supplier Centrica two
years ago to lead British Energy through the massive financial
restructuring, will receive a pay-off worth about £425,000. But
his abrupt departure, orchestrated by the British Energy
chairman Adrian Montague, means he will miss out on a bonus
potentially worth £6m if the company hits financial and
operational targets over the next few years.
Thanking Mr Alexander for seeing the company through the
"complex and difficult restructuring", Mr Montague added: "Now
that he has ... laid the groundwork for the operational and
cultural rebuilding of British Energy, he has decided to seek a
new challenge elsewhere." Mr Alexander, 54, was informed of his
fate over the weekend after an emergency board meeting to
discuss his future. He has no new job to go to.
He is being replaced by one of British Energy's non-executive
directors, Bill Coley, a 61-year-old American who until two
years ago ran the US power company Duke Energy. Mr Coley will
move from North Carolina to the UK to take up the job. He has
signed a one-year contract but details of his pay package and
relocation deal have yet to be finalised. His appointment means
that the two top executives at British Energy will be Americans
with a background in the nuclear industry. The company's chief
operating officer, Roy Anderson, was previously the president of
the Public Service Enterprise Nuclear Group in the US.
Mr Alexander's removal follows a difficult period for the
company, culminating in the announcement in February of a £349m
loss in the first nine months of the year after reactor failures
hit nuclear output. The group has been plagued by shutdowns of
its Heysham 1 and Hartlepool reactors, resulting in an 11 per
cent fall in output for the March to December period last year.
Company sources denied that Mr Alexander had been ousted as a
result of shareholder pressure. Rather, the board agreed that
the company needed a chief executive with direct experience of
operating nuclear power stations.
He is the third chief executive to be forced out of the troubled
nuclear generator in the past four years. Peter Hollins was
ousted from the job in 2001 by the then chairman Robin Jeffrey.
A year later Mr Jeffrey was sacked after the company went to the
Government asking for emergency support to avoid insolvency.
Shares in British Energy fell 3p to 287p yesterday, valuing the
company at £1.6bn.
©2005 Independent News &Media (UK) Ltd.
*****************************************************************
23 Slovak Spectator: THE TOWERS that make the Austrians worry.
photo: TASR
Slovakia's English Language Newspaper
Volume 11, Number 11 March 21 - March 27, 2005
Slovakia wants its way with Jaslovské Bohunice but pledges not
to breach EU accession treaty Delicate dance conveys nuclear
agenda
By Beata Balogová Spectator staff
SLOVAKIA will not seek to change its accession treaty with the
European Union in order to modify plans to close one of its
nuclear power plants.
The treaty commits the Slovak government to closing blocks 1 and
2 of the V1 nuclear power plant at Jaslovské Bohunice by 2006
and 2008, respectively.
In mid-October 2004, Slovakia's Economy Minister Pavol Rusko
proposed that the blocks should be shut down simultaneously in
2008, instead of closing one reactor in 2006 and the other in
2008. The minister argued that shutting down the blocks at the
same time was a safer option than closing them in subsequent
years.
Rusko's desire to change the course of the country's nuclear
programme made Slovakia's environment-conscious neighbour
Austria nervous. However, on March 15, Rusko assured his
Austrian counterpart Martin Bartenstein that Slovakia would not
breach the EU accession treaty with new nuclear policies.
"I unambiguously confirmed Slovakia's position, that it will not
do anything that would be at odds with the accession agreement,"
Rusko said.
However, Rusko still wants to pursue the parallel shutdown of
the blocks and he hopes to manufacture an agreement with
Austria.
"We will propose a closure schedule with minimal security risks.
We plan to present this proposal to the old EU-member states in
Brussels," Rusko told the news wire SITA.
Rusko added that if its EU neighbours come out against the model
that Slovakia intends to propose for the V1 closure, then
Slovakia would strictly observe the accession treaty.
"So far there were talks held with countries of the former EU15
in which Slovakia explained its position on Jaslovské Bohunice.
The analysis that we used was partly confirmed by the
International Atomic Energy Agency," Economy Ministry spokesman
Maroš Havran told The Slovak Spectator.
On several occasions Austria has said that the dates for closing
the blocks at Jaslovské Bohunice are set and unchangeable.
"The accession treaty is crystal clear on this issue: Slovakia
commits to the closure of unit 1 of the Bohunice V1 nuclear
power plant by 31 December 2006 and unit 2 of this plant by 31
December 2008 at the latest, and to subsequent decommissioning
of these units," Deputy Ambassador of the Austrian Embassy
Marian Wrba told The Slovak Spectator.
According to Wrba, the Accession Treaty has the status of EU
Primary Law, which means that no party of the accession treaty
is in the position of accepting changes unilaterally,
bilaterally or even multilaterally without opening the accession
treaty as a whole in a new intergovernmental conference.
"The provisions of the accession treaty, however, stipulate
deliberately that December 31, 2006 and December 31, 2008 are
final deadlines 'at the latest', which explicitly allows
Slovakia to close the reactors together before December 31,
2006, if it prefers. For the subsequent decommissioning process,
no deadline is set," Wrba told The Slovak Spectator.
Wrba explained that the stipulations were carefully phrased when
Slovakia's accession to the EU was negotiated for more than
three years.
"The technical aspects of the closure were, of course, already
on the table and fully known to all negotiation parties when
negotiating Slovakia's accession to the EU - hence this specific
formulation of flexible closing dates until the deadline was
chosen by all parties involved," he added.
The Austrian deputy ambassador confirmed that the Slovak economy
minister, during his talks with his Austrian counterpart,
reiterated that Slovakia would pay the utmost attention to
secure the highest security levels possible when dealing with
the closure and subsequent decommissioning of the two V1
reactors.
"The undertaking of adequate safety precautions stemming from
the responsibility to guarantee the highest levels of security
for the population naturally finds the highest understanding and
acceptance," Wrba said.
However, in Austria, nuclear energy-related questions are not
within the competence of the Austrian Federal Ministry of
Economy and Labour.
According to ministry spokesman Havran, Slovakia is working on
the final version of the proposal to negotiate with Austria and
the EU.
"Slovakia's intention is to present the option of the parallel
shutdown of the blocks as the safest option. At the same time we
have to meet our obligation embedded in the accession treaty
with the smallest possible risk of violating this treaty,"
Havran told The Slovak Spectator.
Amador Sanchez Rico, the European Commission spokesman for
transport and energy, also told The Slovak Spectator that
Slovakia's commitments are very clear, and that the EC expects
that the country will respect them.
Meanwhile, the head of the Slovak mission to negotiate the
shutdown of Jaslovské Bohunice, Ján Bajánek, told the news wire
SITA that Belgium is likely to support the technical solutions
that Slovakia proposes for an integrated closure.
The Slovak mission has visited 12 of the established EU
countries.
According to Bajánek, Belgium understood the increased risks of
subsequent closure of the nuclear plant's blocks. He said that
the mission still plans to visit Germany.
"We will inform our partners about the results of the mission in
a meeting of experts at the European Commission, and we will see
where to go from there," Bajánek said.
According to Bajánek, there are two possible outcomes. Either
the EU accepts Slovakia's proposals or they reject it, requiring
the country to stick to the letter of the accession agreement.
He confirmed that Slovakia did not want to reopen the accession
agreement.
However, Bajánek says that if the EU countries select the second
option, the costs of closure could increase by as much as 100
percent.
Under the agreement, Slovakia is guaranteed a sum of Sk16.7
billion (€440 million) in compensation to close and decommission
the blocks. Slovakia can draw from this fund until the end of
2013.
Magdalena MacLeod contributed to the report. [3/21/2005]
Copyright © 1998-2003 The Rock spol. s r.o. All rights
*****************************************************************
24 Scotsman.com: New Boss for Nuclear Power Firm
Tuesday, 22nd March 2005
By Graeme Evans, PA City Editor
British Energy appointed a US-born chief executive today after
current boss Mike Alexander stood down in the wake of two years
of restructuring.
Bill Coley, who has been a non-executive director at British
Energy since June 2003, takes on responsibility for eight
nuclear power stations in the UK.
Two years ago he retired from the board of Duke Energy and as
group president of Duke Power, a regulated generation,
transmission and distribution division of the major US utility
where he had a 37-year career.
The departure of Mr Alexander, who took the helm in March 2003,
comes after he steered the British Energy through a life-saving
debt-for-equity swap.
The process, which required the support of the Government and
the European Commission, was completed in January but Mr
Alexander said then that “past under-investment and
unacceptable output†meant the task was not over.
British Energy chairman Adrian Montague said: “Now that he has
re-listed the company and laid the groundwork for the
operational and cultural rebuilding of British Energy he has
decided to seek a new challenge elsewhere.
“We are fortunate that Bill Coley has taken on this challenge
as he has outstanding qualities for the job.â€
2005 Scotsman.com
*****************************************************************
25 St. Cloud Times: Board wants input on nuclear plant addition
www.sctimes.com
Mon, Mar. 21, 2005
By Kirsti Marohnkmakmarohn@stcloudtimes.com
The public has until April 13 to comment on the first phase of an
environmental review of Xcel Energy's plan to store additional
nuclear waste at its Monticello plant.
The state Environmental Quality Board is collecting public input
on the proposed scope of the environmental impact statement an
in-depth study of the effects of the project on the environment.
Xcel proposes to build a storage facility at the Monticello site
to store dry casks of spent nuclear fuel. The company wants to
apply to the federal government for a 20-year license renewal
that would allow it to continue operating the plant until 2030.
Xcel's plans include building a 200-foot-by-460-foot building to
store up to 30 canisters in concrete vaults. The cost is
estimated at $55 million.
The Monticello facility currently stores spent fuel rods in a
cooling pool inside the plant.
The pool will be full in 2010.
The Environmental Quality Board is proposing that the
environmental review cover a range of issues, including radiation
levels, groundwater protection and the length of time the waste
would be stored.
It also will cover alternatives to building the storage facility,
such as storing the waste at another site or re-racking the pool
to make more room.
A draft of the environmental review is expected to be completed
by August. The final document will be submitted to the Public
Utilities Commission around October.
Open House
The public open house on the scope of an environmental impact
statement for Monticello nuclear plant:
2 p.m. April 4, Monticello Community Center. Presentation at 7
p.m.
On the Net
For more information, go to the Environmental Quality Board's Web
site at www.eqb.state.mn.us. Click on "Monticello Dry Cask
Storage Environmental Impact Statement."
(updated 12/31/2002) © 2005 St. Cloud Times. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
26 ThisisLondon: British Energy gets rid of chief exec
thisislondon.co.uk
Robert Lea, Evening Standard,
22 March 2005
BRITISH Energy, the heavily loss-making nuclear power generator
rescued from bankruptcy last year by taxpayer support, has
ousted its chief executive amid recriminations in the City that
he may not have been the right man for the job.
Just two years in the job, Mike Alexander is likely to leave
with a pay-off in excess of £500,000. Alexander, 56, was
headhunted by British Energy chairman Adrian Montague from
British Gas group Centrica in 2003.
He was hailed as the executive capable of turning round the
company's operational fortunes as it embarked on a multi-billion
pound financial restructuring.
However, in a shock announcement today, British Energy said
Alexander had stepped down and would be replaced with immediate
effect by Bill Coley, a 61-year-old veteran of the US power
industry who has been in semi-retirement for the last two years,
including a role as a non-executive director of British Energy.
The unorthodox appointment - just two months after the company
had relisted on the Stock Exchange - had City analysts
speculating that Alexander had been replaced by someone with
greater experience of running a nuclear power plant. Coley was
37 years at American nuclear generator Duke Energy, retiring in
2003 as chief executive of utility arm Duke Power.
One City source said: 'It is interesting that they have
appointed someone who so obviously has experience of running
plant.'
Alexander's curriculum vitae includes previously being chief
operating officer under Sir Roy Gardner at Centrica. Though he
had earlier been managing director of the group's energy dealing
business British Gas Trading and had senior roles at oil and gas
explorers BG and BP, Alexander had not previously run a
power-producing business.
His departure raises questions over Montague's original decision
to hire him. Montague, the £300,000 a year Government-fixer
parachuted into British Energy by the Treasury, said of
Alexander's appointment in 2003 that he had 'just the right
combination of skills and experience'.
Only last month, however, Alexander was forced to unveil
increased losses at the group and took a swipe at the previous
management's years of underinvestment. Coley's appointment is
unlikely to be long term and Montague is set to instigate the
search for a new chief executive.
Mired deep in the red
WHILE the rest of the power industry racks up record earnings -
profits at Mike Alexander's old firm Centrica last year topped
£1bn - British Energy, the largest producer of electricity in
the country, is deep in the red with losses of £349m for the
nine months to 31 December.
It has spent the last two years avoiding bankruptcy and last
autumn was saved by a temporary delisting from the stock market
and a debt-for-equity swap that all but wiped out its private
shareholders. Its main problems have changed little: its fleet
of nuclear generators are high-maintenance and unreliable and
cost more to run than they get from selling the electricity they
produce.
*****************************************************************
27 AFP: Indonesia moving ahead with plans for nuclear power
Tuesday March 22, 06:45 AM
PARIS (AFP) - Indonesia is moving ahead with plans for a
civilian nuclear power program, Jakarta's ambassador to the UN
atomic agency Thomas Aquino Sriwidjaja said in Paris.
Speaking at a conference on nuclear power here, Sriwidjaja said
Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim country, was "preparing to
operate a nuclear power plant by most likely in the next decade."
Like Iran, which the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) is investigating on US charges that it is secretly
developing nuclear weapons, Indonesia is a major oil producer.
Nevertheless, Sriwidjaja said Indonesia is having difficulties
meeting its domestic energy demand. "The oil and gas reserves in
Indonesia are insufficient to balance the rapidly increasing
demand for energy, particularly in the form of electricity," he
said.
An IAEA-supported study found that Indonesia needs an energy mix
"in which the contribution of oil should be reduced and replaced
by gas, coal, renewable energy and other alternative energy,
including nuclear energy," Sriwidjaja said.
He said Indonesia was seeking help from developed nuclear states
in technology, investment and research and would fight
anti-nuclear sentiment with a public information program.
Indonesia has also implemented anti-terrorist measures to
protect its nuclear research facilities.
Copyright © 2005 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
28 CBC - New Brunswick: Kyoto argument not flying for Lepreau
WebPosted Mar 21 2005 09:51 AM AST
OTTAWA — MP Andy Scott says federal officials are not buying
Premier Bernard Lord's connection of refurbishing Lepreau to the
Kyoto protocol.
As New Brunswick's senior federal cabinet minister, Scott says
he's doing what he can to help the province find money to
refurbish the nuclear power plant at Point Lepreau.
Premier Bernard Lord has said without money from Ottawa the
province may shut down the nuclear plant and build a coal-fired
plant to replace it.
+ From March 11, 2005:
Lord would like the federal government to spend Kyoto protocol
money on Lepreau, in order to prevent the building of a
coal-fired plant.
Scott says that hypothetical link to greenhouse gas reductions
has not been well received by federal officials.
*****************************************************************
29 News & Star: N-plant on telly
Published on 21/03/2005
WEST CUMBRIA: Sellafield will feature as part of a 12-part BBC
documentary series to be broadcast this summer.
Coast will consist of 12 hour-long programmes, each concentrating
on a particular part of the British coastline.
Sellafield will feature on a section that covers the sealines
recovery project, reprocessing and decommissioning plans for the
site.
CARLISLE: Efforts to rejuvenate the Denton Holme area of Carlisle
could take another step forward tomorrow night.
The latest stage in the area’s Have Your Say survey will be
outlined when the Denton Holme and Longsowerby Neighbourhood
Forum meets in Morely Street community centre at 7pm.
A group has been examining what could be included in a design
statement to improve the area and will outline their latest
findings at the meeting.
CUMBRIA: Work on Barrow’s first offshore wind farm has been
delayed while the paperwork is fine-tuned.
Thirty giant turbines are to be built four miles off Walney for
owners British Gas and the Danish Oil and Natural Gas company.
Work on the £105m field was set to start next month.
The main contractor appointed to deliver the wind farm, Vestas
KBR, has picked Middlesbrough-based Marine Projects International
to install the turbines in the Irish Sea.
Nests for owls
WEST CUMBRIA: British Nuclear Group is helping to conserve barn
owls in Cumbria by placing nesting boxes on land within the
Sellafield estate.
The Environmental Education Project at Yottenfews has funded
three barn owl nesting boxes, supplied by the World Owl Trust at
Muncaster.
The aim is to provide barn owls with a comfortable home in which
to raise their young as traditional sites, such as old barns,
have become very scarce.
For details and to report barn owl sightings contact Jenny Holden
at the World Owl Trust on 01229 717393.
PENRITH: A new mobile phone shop has moved into Penrith, creating
three full-time jobs.
The Carphone Warehouse has opened at the former H Clark and Sons
butchers store in Devonshire Street.
*****************************************************************
30 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of
FR Doc 05-5474
[Federal Register: March 21, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 53)]
[Notices] [Page 13545] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21mr05-109]
No Significant Impact Approval of the License Termination Plan
for the Big Rock Point Reactor Facility, Charlevoix, MI AGENCY:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James C. Shepherd, Project
Engineer, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste
Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Rockville, Maryland 20852. Telephone: (301) 415-6712;
fax number: (301) 415-5398; e-mail: jcs2@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuing an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-6,
issued to the Consumers Energy (CE) Company (licensee), that
would authorize CE to implement the License Termination Plan
(LTP) submitted for the Big Rock Point Power Station (BRP). The
NRC prepared this environmental assessment (EA) to determine the
environmental effects from LTP approval and subsequent release of
the site for unrestricted use, as described in the final rule
``Radiological Criteria for License Termination'' (62 FR 39058).
The NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of
no significant impact pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21.
II. EA Summary
The purpose of the proposed action is to authorize the licensee
to complete decommissioning of the Big Rock Point site to
unrestricted release criteria as defined in 10 CFR 20.1402, i.e.
that the calculated dose to a member of the public from residual
radiation at the site will be less than 25 mrem per year. All
systems and equipment used during reactor operation will be
removed from the site and disposed in accordance with
regulations, except for the cooling water intake that will remain
submerged in Lake Michigan, and the facility septic drain field
located about 100 meters (300 feet) west of the former reactor
facility. The licensee has moved all reactor fuel to an
independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) located about
one kilometer (one half mile) south of the former reactor area.
The ISFSI and its support facilities will be maintained until the
fuel is transferred to Department of Energy, expected to occur
about 2012.
The staff has prepared the EA in support of the proposed license
amendment. The NRC has examined the licensee's proposed amendment
request and concluded that there are no significant radiological
environmental impacts associated with this action, and it will
not result in significant nonradiological environmental impacts.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the EA, NRC has concluded that there are no
significant environmental impacts from the proposed amendment and
has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement.
IV. Further Information
Documents related to this action, including the application for
amendment and supporting documentation, are available
electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can
access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System
(ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public
documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related
to this notice are: (1) The licensee's License Termination Plan,
Rev. 0, dated April 1, 2004, ML031050635, (2) the licensee's
License Termination Plan, Rev. 1, dated July 1, 2004,
ML042640320, and (3) the EA, ML042890054. If you do not have
access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's Public Document
Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. These documents may also be viewed
electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR,
O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for
a fee.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of March 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Daniel M. Gillen,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste
Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear
Material
Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 05-5474 Filed 3-18-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
31 Guardian Unlimited: Experts Discuss Nuclear Power As Energy
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday March 21, 2005 8:31 PM
AP Photo PAR103
By LAURENCE FROST
AP Business Writer
PARIS (AP) - Only by building more nuclear power stations can
the world meet its soaring energy needs while averting
environmental disaster, experts at an international conference
said Monday.
Energy ministers and officials from 74 countries were in Paris
for the two-day meeting on the future of nuclear energy, as
concerns about global warming and fossil fuel supplies renew
governments' interest in atomic power.
``It's clear that nuclear energy is regaining stature as a
serious option,'' said Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the
International Atomic Energy Agency - the U.N. nuclear watchdog -
which organized the conference.
ElBaradei said the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol, which
commits governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, was
focusing minds.
Power plants fired by oil, coal and gas are major sources of
carbon dioxide and other gases that cause global warming. The
Kyoto accord will force plant operators to pay for their
pollution, making nuclear power facilities more competitive by
comparison.
``In the past, the virtual absence of restrictions or taxes on
greenhouse gas emissions has meant that nuclear power's
advantage, low emissions, has had no tangible economic value,''
ElBaradei said. But the Kyoto Protocol ``will likely change that
over the longer term.''
Soaring fossil fuel costs, including the historic highs charted
by oil prices during the past year, are a more immediate worry
for governments - and a reminder of the petroleum shocks of the
1970s that persuaded countries, including France, to intensify
nuclear production.
But accidents at the Three Mile Island facility in Pennsylvania
in 1979 and at Chernobyl, Ukraine, seven years later undermined
public confidence in nuclear power.
Although there is still deep public concern about the risk of
accidents and transportation and storage of radioactive waste,
nuclear advocates say there also is a new awareness that relying
on fossil fuels could lead to an even greater environmental
catastrophe.
``The climate will probably change no matter what we now do, but
we should, at the very least, make every effort to slow it
down,'' Donald Johnston, secretary general of the Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development, said in a video
statement. ``We ignore its importance at our peril.''
Environmental groups, however, insist that nuclear power is not
the solution to the climate problem.
``Today, nuclear energy accounts for 17 percent of electricity
consumption and 3 percent of energy consumption,'' said Helene
Gassin, who heads Greenpeace's energy campaign in France. The
climate problem ``goes far beyond the electricity issue.''
When Finland begins construction of a new reactor later this
year, it will become the first Western European country to do so
since 1991. France plans to start building a new-generation
reactor in 2007.
Nuclear plants produce one-third of Europe's electricity, saving
greenhouse emissions ``equivalent to those of all of Europe's
cars,'' French Industry Minister Patrick Devedjian said.
In a message to the conference, U.S. Energy Secretary Sam Bodman
cited a University of Chicago study that showed nuclear power
``can become competitive with electricity produced by plants
fueled by coal or gas'' because of new technologies delivering
more efficient reactors.
Echoing recent comments by President Bush, Bodman said:
``America hasn't ordered a new nuclear power plant since the
1970s and it's time to start building again.''
Even in some countries that have been fiercely opposed to
nuclear power, the mood is shifting. For example, Italians voted
against the use of atomic energy in a referendum the year after
Chernobyl, and the government began gradually decommissioning
plants.
``Regarding nuclear power, we perceive a clear change in public
opinion, notably by the young generations,'' Italian Industry
Minister Antonio Marzano said.
The real boom in nuclear power is expected to focus on
developing countries, particularly in Asia.
China is expected to increase its nuclear production capacity
from the current 6.5 gigawatts to 36 gigawatts by 2020,
according to IAEA figures, while India plans to multiply its
production capacity tenfold and Russia is expected to double its
capacity to about 45 gigawatts.
A gigawatt equals 1 billion watts.
U.S. nuclear plant builder Westinghouse Electric Co. is among
contenders for an $8 billion contract for four new Chinese
reactors to be awarded by year's end.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
32 FDA approves nuclear medicine for kids
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 14:50:30 -0800
Date: March 18, 2005
For Release: Immediately
Contact: HHS Press Office
(202) 690-6343
Headline: HHS AWARDS BIOSHIELD CONTRACT FOR LIQUID POTASSIUM IODIDE
The Department of Health and Human Services today awarded a $5.7
million contract to Fleming & Company, Pharmaceuticals of Fenton, Mo. for
the manufacture and delivery of 1.7 million pediatric doses of liquid
potassium iodide (KI).
This supply of liquid KI, which is being purchased under the
BioShield program, would be used in the event of a release of radioactive
iodine, a commonly produced material in commercial nuclear power
facilities.
The liquid KI formulation is the first to be developed specifically for
children. Its black raspberry taste is designed to make it more palatable
to children.
Current adult dose tablets are bitter and must be broken into
pieces to get a child's dose. The new formulation is delivered using a
graduated eyedropper. "The acquisition of this new and easy-to-administer
pediatric KI formulation is an important step forward for our nation's
radiological preparedness program," Assistant Secretary for Public Health
Emergency Preparedness Stewart Simonson, said.
Because the thyroid gland rapidly absorbs any iodine in the body,
people need to take KI soon after an incident that involves the release of
radioactive iodine, such as could occur in the vicinity of a nuclear
commercial power facility. The KI saturates the thyroid gland with iodine,
thus preventing the thyroid from absorbing additional, radioactive iodine.
However, KI does not prevent the effects of any other radioactive
elements.
Approval of the liquid KI as a pediatric formulation was given last
year by the Interagency Weapons of Mass Destruction Medical Countermeasures
Subcommittee. Children are the most susceptible to the dangerous effects
of radioactive iodine.
Once it is delivered to HHS, the pediatric KI will be made available to
states that submit and receive approval from HHS for plans they develop to
distribute the new product in communities around commercial nuclear power
plants.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved KI in tablet form as
a nonprescription drug for use as a "blocking agent" to prevent the human
thyroid gland from absorbing radioactive iodine. On Jan. 12, 2005, the FDA
granted approval to Fleming for their product ThyroShieldTM (Potassium
Iodide Oral Solution, USP) 65 mg/ml for children.
###
************************************
*****************************************************************
33 Hawk Eye: Harkin weighs in on delay
Sunday, March 20, 2005 Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST
Senator urges advancement of advisory board recommendation.
By KILEY MILLER
kmiller@thehawkeye.com
Two days after firing off a complaint about another long delay
in getting government assistance for Iowa Army Ammunition Plant
workers sick with cancer, Sen. Tom Harkin wants to know why his
first letter is suddenly irrelevant.
The Iowa Democrat sent a second letter Thursday to John Howard,
director of the National Institute of Occupation Safety and
Health, demanding to know why the agency appears to be
flip–flopping on a ruling that could have sped the claims
process for former nuclear weapons workers at the plant.
In early February, the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker
Health ruled NIOSH should loosen the purse strings of the Energy
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program and
automatically give plant employees $150,000 if they are
diagnosed with any of 22 cancers.
The ruling would have benefited anyone who worked for the Atomic
Energy Commission or Department of Energy between 1949 and 1974
on Line 1 of the plant.
It was on Line 1 that up to 4,000 workers secretly built and
tested components of nuclear weapons, a Cold War effort that
only came to light a few years ago.
Families of deceased workers also could hope for compensation
checks.
The compensation program bases payments on the amount of
radiation that bombarded an energy worker's body on the job. But
the advisory board members, themselves nuclear energy workers
and experts on radiation, said dose reconstructions were
impossible for men and women at IAAP because vital information
was still classified.
Harkin chided Howard and fellow NIOSH administrator Larry
Elliott in a letter Tuesday for failing to forward the advisory
board's recommendation to Secretary Mike Leavitt of the
Department of Health and Human Services.
Leavitt is supposed to get 30 days to act on the board's
suggestions. The issue then goes to Congress for another
month–long review.
But on Wednesday, news came from Elliott that new standards
specifically for IAAP made dose reconstructions possible for the
years after 1962 without using classified information.
Harkin's Iowa counterpart, Republican Sen. Charles Grassley,
zipped his own letter to Howard Thursday demanding answers about
the sudden change in the records status.
Now comes word that Harkin also wants to know what changes have
made dose reconstruction viable again. He pointed out that NIOSH
had access to all information in a revised profile of the IAAP
site prior to the February advisory board meeting.
Further, Harkin said the Department of Energy had informed
Howard's office by Feb. 14 that the revised site profile was
"unclassified." In other words, the information was not
declassified; it was never classified in the first place.
"If no new information has become available, it is inconceivable
that NIOSH would now suggest that the board reconsider its
decision," Harkin wrote. "In order to ensure the integrity of
this program, I urge you to either immediately detail exactly
what new information has arisen... or act promptly to reaffirm
the original recommendation and notify Secretary Leavitt of the
Board's action without further delay."
The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461
· 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · webmaster@thehawkeye.com
*****************************************************************
34 Salt Lake Tribune: Facing Fallout: At odds over nuclear history
Article Last Updated: 03/21/2005 06:44:13 AM
Utah cancer survivor says Atomic Testing Museum ignores the
plight of downwinders
By Christopher Smart The Salt Lake Tribune
LAS VEGAS - When Michelle Thomas was growing up in the 1950s
and '60s, her mother tacked up a hand-drawn map of their St.
George neighborhood. She would mark an "X" for every house where
someone had cancer.
That diagram - filled with dozens of X's - isn't on display
at the newly opened Atomic Testing Museum on Las Vegas' storied
Flamingo Road. But that isn't what angers Thomas.
"It's like we didn't even exist," says the lifelong St.
George resident. "As a downwinder, that's deeply offensive."
Aided by a wheelchair last week, Thomas toured the new
8,000-square-foot facility that highlights the development of
nuclear weapons at the Nevada Test Site, 65 miles northwest of
Las Vegas.
She sees the museum as a monument to the bomb with little
attention to its price in human lives. "In a word," she says,
"propaganda."
Thomas can walk with a cane, but her polymyositis - the
degenerative autoimmune disorder she has endured for the past 30
years - makes it difficult. Born in 1952, just after the onset
of above-ground nuclear testing, she also has suffered from
ovarian cysts, breast cancer and a benign salivary gland tumor.
The $4.5 million museum - built with public and private
funds, including handsome donations from defense contractors
Bechtel and Lockheed Martin - harks to the final days of World
War II and the dawn of the Cold War. The Defense Department,
called War Department during World War II, and the Atomic Energy
Commission were racing to develop the atomic bomb to defeat the
Japanese and, later, the hydrogen bomb to stave off the Soviets.
The museum is replete with technological and cultural
timelines that encompass both the forward march of nuclear arms
capability as well as pop icons like Marilyn Monroe and Elvis
Presley. It features mock civilian bomb shelters as well as
other signs of the times, like women sporting atomic hairdos.
Thomas groans upon spying a life-size cutout of a nude Miss
Atomic Bomb, a beauty pageant winner whose private parts are
covered by a mushroom cloud.
"That's ironic," she smirks. "We've all had cancer of the
ovaries and breasts."
But while the museum and its gift shop boast kitschy
trinkets, the bulk of the exhibition is serious and sobering.
"The purpose of the museum is to capture the history of the
Nevada Test Site and nuclear testing in general," explains
curator Bill Johnson.
Exhibits emphasize the huge national undertaking that was
the arms race. "If there is a message," Johnson says, "it is
that the Cold War really was a war."
But people in southwestern Utah's Washington County and
thousands of other downwinders were unwilling participants,
"guinea pigs" who were lied to about the effects of radioactive
fallout, Thomas says.
"We are veterans of the Cold War. But we didn't sign up,"
she says. "We were always told the government was very
interested in our health. We thought, 'Oh, aren't we lucky.' "
Federal officials tested St. George schoolchildren's
thyroids twice a year, Thomas recalls, and sometimes recommended
the gland be removed. During bomb tests, residents were advised
to stay indoors. "It was like, 'Go inside and watch "I Love
Lucy" for a couple of hours and everything will be fine.' "
At the Las Vegas museum, visitors get a glimpse of the
violence in an above-ground nuclear test in a small auditorium.
After a countdown, benches vibrate as the screen shows a roiling
nuclear explosion. Blasts from air cannons mimic the shock wave.
Al O'Donnell, an 82-year-old museum docent who worked at the
test site for all 100 above-ground explosions between 1951 and
1968, says the blasts were vital to America's security.
"What I did, I did to protect the liberty of the United
States," he says during a 10-minute video. "I'd do it all over
again."
As the auditorium lights go up, Thomas struggles to hold
back tears and tells O'Donnell, who is standing nearby, that she
paid a price for the testing. "I've been walking with a cane all
my life and my friends are dead. I don't have the freedom you
talked about."
In an emotional exchange, O'Donnell tells Thomas he is sorry
for the pain and suffering that came out of the tests. He also
concedes that many of his colleagues died from the radiation.
"I'm afraid to go up to St. George," he says. "I'm afraid
they'd stone me to death."
Dina Titus, a professor of political science at University
of Nevada-Las Vegas, also makes an appearance on the bomb-test
video, noting that downwinders indeed were misled by the
government. Her two-minute monologue is among the examples that
curator Johnson and others point to as attempts to include
downwinders in the museum.
In an interview with The Salt Lake Tribune, Titus, who
criticizes the weapons program in her 1986 book Bombs in Our
Backyard, explains that at the onset of the testing, southern
Utah residents backed the program, portrayed to them as vital to
the nation's security.
"Not only were they harmed, but they were lied to by the
people who said they would protect them," Titus says. "It was
like a double whammy."
A downwinders exhibit should be added, Titus says. The price
they paid was too high. "It wasn't worth it, to put people at
risk like that."
The museum's most important function, Titus adds, is that it
houses all the records from the 928 tests at the Nevada site
(828 below ground) between 1951 and 1992. Among those documents
is government evidence dating to the late '40s and early '50s
that fallout is hazardous.
Despite such knowledge, the downwinders' battle for
recognition and compensation took almost 40 years.
After meeting 27-year-old Connie Selzer, of Washington,
D.C., during the tour, Thomas worries that many museum patrons
will walk away with little or no knowledge of downwinders.
"It's a whole side of the story I didn't know about," Selzer
says after chatting with Thomas. "It's like not knowing about
the Holocaust."
Near the tour's end, Thomas looks quizzically at an exhibit
that includes a chunk of 9-11 World Trade Center wreckage.
The Cold War and the creation of the nuclear weapons were
fueled by fear and hate, she says. "This is a reminder to be
afraid."
Talk of resuming nuclear testing - including from Utah
Congressman Chris Cannon - baffles Thomas.
"It's like going back 50 years when they came to town and
said, 'Don't be afraid,' " she says. "For them to say that now
is serious crazy-making."
csmart@sltrib.com
Atomic Testing Museum
* Location: 755 E. Flamingo Road, Las Vegas.
* Hours: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Saturday and 1 to 5
p.m. Sunday.
* Admission: $10 for adults; $7 for those under 17 or over
65.
© Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
35 lamonitor.com: Nuclear workers comp program gets new start
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor
Only six percent of the claims filed at Los Alamos National
Laboratory for sick workers were approved during the years the
Department of Energy participated in an entitlement program.
But nearly a thousand cases that were denied have another chance
under what is supposed to be a more effective system.
The federal official now in charge of the program to compensate
workers who have become ill from toiling in the nuclear complex
will hold three town meetings next week in northern New Mexico.
The purpose is to explain the changes in the Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Program (EEOICP). The program
was amended by Congress last July to place the Department of
Labor (DOL) in charge of administering the program.
"We are committed to providing fair, uniform and timely
adjudication of these claims," said Peter Turcic, director of
EEOICP at DOL. "We understand people have been waiting quite a
while to decide these claims."
Turcic said the laws are complicated and that interested people,
people who have applied already and people who may yet be
eligible to apply for compensation, should try to attend the
meeting.
"It will be very useful to them to come and hear how we intend
to operate, so they have an idea what's happening to their
claims," he added.
Turcic and local staff members will be on hand to answer
questions at two meetings in Espanola Wednesday and another
meeting in Santa Fe on Thursday.
DOL has been the administrator of Part B of the establishing act
since the original law became effective in 2001.
Part B has to do with benefits for workers with radiation
cancers, beryllium diseases and silicosis, contracted while
working in weapons production and testing programs. Those
workers who suffered from specific illnesses are eligible for
lump-sum payments of $150,000, plus compensation for medical
costs.
Their survivors can also make the same claim under the program.
DOL has taken in nearly 63,000 claims and made payments
exceeding 1 billion to over 13,000 individuals, according to the
department.
The major change in the program has to do with what was called
Part D of the original EEOICP, formerly administered by DOE.
This provision was intended to help sick nuclear workers obtain
state workers compensation for toxic illnesses that were not
covered under Part B, but which were considered work-related.
Part D was abolished by an amendment to the act last year, which
created a replacement provision known as Part E. An important
difference is that DOL - not DOE - will administer Part E.
Applications already in the works under Part D with DOE will
automatically be transferred to DOL.
"If they have filed the Part D claim, we now have the case,"
Turcic said.
Claimants should have received a notice to that effect and have,
or will receive additional notice when the claim reaches the
district office.
Turcic said the main difference was that the former program was
supposed to assist sick workers navigate a variety of state
workers compensation programs, in which the responsible employer
or contractor no longer existed. Or, in the language of the law,
there was no "willing payer."
The new provision, expected to take effect in May, would be a
consistent national program with a single standard for payments
by the federal government.
"Thousands of workers sacrificed to keep our country safe," said
Victoria Lipnic, assistant secretary of labor for employment
standards, in a prepared statement. She vowed to ensure that
eligible employees and their survivors are well served.
Actual compensation still varies under Part E, because it
depends on a formula that factors the degree of employee
disability and number of years the worker was disabled.
But most nuclear complex employees with work-related illnesses
would now be covered.
The relationship between Part B and Part E is apparent in the
most recent statistics for Los Alamos National Laboratory, where
DOL has received 1917 cases and approved only 115 for benefits,
while denying 1091.
The remainder are under adjudication.
"The vast majority of denials were cases that were filed under
Part B for non-covered conditions," Turcic said. "But they may
receive benefits now under Part E."
Staff members from the program's local resource center also
visit Los Alamos monthly. More information is available by
calling (866) 272-3622.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
36 DenverPost.com: Extend probe on Yucca Mountain
Article Published: Monday, March 21, 2005
editorial
The possibility of falsified data about the controversial project
creates doubt that should not be ignored. Let an independent
panel look into it.
An independent investigation is needed into whether scientific
studies at the heart of the Yucca Mountain controversy were
falsified. At stake is the central question of whether the
planned nuclear waste depository near Las Vegas will be safe for
thousands of years, or start leaking radioactive materials into
drinking water within a few generations.
Last week, contractors for the U.S. Department of Energy
uncovered e-mails sent by U.S. Geological Survey workers in
which a federal employee admits to fabricating data about the
Yucca Mountain project. The USGS says it's unclear if
researchers just hadn't provided adequate proof their work was
good, or if they flat-out made up the data. But sources who have
seen the e-mails or had the contents read to them say the USGS
worker apparently outright fabricated the data. USGS wouldn't
identify the employees, but did say the key player doesn't work
in its Lakewood center.
The studies involve how quickly water will seep through volcanic
rocks surrounding the stored nuclear wastes. The government long
ago abandoned the idea that Yucca Mountain's rock walls alone
would protect public health, so it now plans to put 77,000 tons
of atomic wastes into metal barrels and store the barrels in
tunnels beneath the mountain.
But in the late 1990s, researchers at the Los Alamos labs in New
Mexico said water would seep through the tunnels within 50 years
after the site opened, carrying chemicals from nearby rocks and
corroding the barrels. In about 200 years, the barrels would
start leaking, and 50 years after the radioactive materials
escaped, they would contaminate nearby water supplies. At best,
Yucca Mountain would keep the wastes safe for about 300 years,
far less time than the tens of thousands of years DOE has
promised Congress.
So DOE hired the USGS to do another study from 1998 to 2000, and
USGS reported back that the site was safe. It's that study that
contains the data the government now believes may be suspect.
The USGS plans an internal inquiry but also has asked the
Department of Interior's inspector general to investigate. Those
steps still leave the impression that the agency is
investigating itself. The Yucca Mountain project is of such
national significance that a thorough, objective investigation
should be done by a completely independent entity.
All contents Copyright 2005 The Denver Post or other copyright
*****************************************************************
37 Las Vegas SUN: Nevada official: More e-mails show data faulty at Yucca Mountain
By KEN RITTER ASSOCIATED PRESS
LAS VEGAS (AP) - A Nevada official fighting a proposed national
nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain said Monday that more
e-mails have been found suggesting that data supporting the
Energy Department's selection of the site may be tainted.
Messages drawn from a computer database of Energy Department
information on the project note that several instruments were
not calibrated correctly before they were used to take
measurements at the site.
"If you're using equipment that isn't calibrated and isn't
accurate, the data is not accurate," said Bob Loux, the top
Nevada state official working to stop the Yucca Mountain
project. He said the e-mails cast more doubt on the science
underpinning the project.
An Energy Department spokeswoman said the e-mails showed James
Raleigh, a Las Vegas-based Energy Department subcontractor on
the Yucca project, was doing his job.
"It was the normal quality assurance process at work," said Anne
Womack Kolton, a department spokeswoman in Washington, D.C. "We
expect there are many e-mails that reflect the back-and-forth
about work product and what was needed to meet quality assurance
standards."
Raleigh is an employee of J.K. Associates, a contractor with
Bechtel SAIC, the chief contractor on the Yucca project. He did
not respond Monday to messages seeking comment.
Loux said the newly found e-mails bolstered the state's claim
that the Energy Department shaped science to justify plans to
entomb 77,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain, an
ancient volcanic ridge 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said last week that other e-mails
which were recently discovered indicated a U.S. Geological
Survey worker fabricated documentation from 1998 to 2000 about
computer modeling involving water infiltration and climate at
the site.
The U.S. Geological Survey e-mails have not been released.
Loux said a state researcher found the e-mails dealing with
equipment calibration on Thursday on the Licensing Support
Network, the Energy Department's Internet database of Yucca
project documents. The messages do not specify what the
instruments were being used to test.
*****************************************************************
38 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Premature confidence
Today: March 21, 2005 at 9:25:14 PST
LAS VEGAS SUN
Earlier this month Nevada got some good news from the budget
committees of both the House and Senate. In putting together
their budget resolutions for the 2006 fiscal year, neither
committee included President Bush's plan to divert 70 percent of
the money from federal land sales in Nevada back to Washington.
This was not a sure bet by any means that Bush's proposal had
been beaten back, but it was an encouraging sign. Bush's scheme
is a major issue for Nevada -- we could lose as much as $700
million a year.
The five members of our congressional delegation -- Senate
Minority Leader Harry Reid and Rep. Shelley Berkley, both
Democrats, and Sen. John Ensign and Reps. Jim Gibbons and Jon
Porter, all Republicans -- are fighting Bush's plan. From the
start, the delegation members declared unity on the point that
none of the money from the federal land sales should end up in
Bush's budget. The president wants the money to partially make
up for his cut-taxes-and-spend policy, which has created a
record federal deficit. But the money does not belong to the
federal government. Under the provisions of the 1998 Southern
Nevada Public Land Management Act, it belongs to Nevada.
We support our delegation on this issue. Bush's plan is an
outrage. It's an affront to every resident of Nevada that Bush
would even think about taking our money, which is going toward
our schools, water lines, airports and environment. He swore the
government could afford his tax cuts. Now let him prove it,
without pilfering a benefit that partially compensates Nevada
for the fact that 87 percent of its land belongs to the federal
government.
It's critical now for our congressional delegation to be on the
same page in fighting Bush on this issue. We're concerned,
however, about Gibbons' embrace of statements made by Rep.
Richard Pombo, R-Calif., chairman of the House Resources
Committee. This committee, which oversees issues involving
federal land, could revive Bush's proposed money grab in a
heartbeat. A subcommittee that reports to Pombo endorsed Bush's
general idea two weeks ago, but recommended that the federal
government filch 35 percent of Nevada's money, rather than the
70 percent proposed by Bush.
That's why we winced last week when Gibbons heralded his
friendship with Pombo, whose rise to committee chairman he
supported in 2003. In a press release headlined, "Key House
leader supports Gibbons' effort to keep (lands act) money in
Nevada," Gibbons took credit for winning Pombo over to our side.
"I am greatly pleased that Chairman Pombo will work with me to
protect the money that belongs to the people of Nevada," Gibbons
gushed.
But will he? All Pombo said was that he will "continue to work
with Reps. Gibbons and Porter to make sure that Nevada is well
taken care of ... that Nevada comes out on top when all is said
and done." Contacted Friday, Pombo's spokesman, Matthew Streit,
acknowledged that all Pombo has ever said is that the federal
government shouldn't take 70 percent.
We hope Gibbons stops grandstanding and begins working together
with the whole delegation on this issue. His individual and
possibly premature support of Pombo could weaken our position
that the federal government has no right to any of Nevada's
money.
*****************************************************************
39 RGJ: Yucca’s delayed, not ended
+ [Reno Gazette-Journal] [Reno Gazette-Journal] March 21, 2005
Reno, Nevada, USA 775-788-6200
EditorialRENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL
3/20/2005 10:40 pm
U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons, a geologist, was not surprised at news
that Yucca Mountain data was falsified.
The discovery that someone — possibly several someones — may
have fabricated data for the Yucca Mountain project is
scandalous, but it is good news for Nevada. It means progress on
opening the repository will be delayed yet again. It’s not so
good for Washington.
Proving how very public electronic communications can be,
Department of Energy examiners preparing to file the licensing
application uncovered a flurry of e-mail messages between U.S.
Geological Survey scientists discussing falsification of data.
It seems that water flowing through the mountain may very well
corrode storage casks and carry radioactive waste into the water
table, after all.
There have been suspicions all along about “sound science.” An
inquiry was launched in 2003, prompted by whistleblowers who
reported problems with quality assurance, modeling program
errors and lost data. In the end they declined to testify amid
fears they would lose their jobs. All this speaks strongly for
predetermined collusion, if not conspiracy in Washington.
Three different recent incidents may help to unravel the plan as
it currently exists. A federal court rejected the Environmental
Protection Agency’s radiation standards and ordered that the
project meet heightened levels. Congress cut the president’s
budget request, and now, falsified documentation has compromised
the project.
The site, as Attorney General Brian Sandoval said, is “literally
a volcano that sits on an earthquake fault, above an aquifer,
next to the Nevada Test Site, next to one of the nation’s
largest organic farms, next to the state’s largest dairy,
adjacent to … the United States’ fastest growing metropolitan
area, next to one of the busiest Air Force bases in the
country.” In Washington, none of that seems to matter.
With all this going on, Energy officials will have a hard time
meeting their December deadline to apply for an operation
permit. In fact, Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials say it
is no longer possible to open by 2010. Further, questions raised
by the latest discovery cast suspicion on all other data.
Regardless of how far into the future the delays will push the
project, the Energy secretary emphasizes the need for a
permanent geological nuclear waste repository. The
administration will continue to target Yucca Mountain.
Nevadans tried a variety of creative tactics calculated to stop
or slow progress, from protesting the site on Indian land to
proposing a bill that would make it obsolete. Washington won’t
stop its forward motion on the project; Nevadans shouldn’t stop,
either.
align="right">© Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co.
*****************************************************************
40 Great Falls Tribune: Anaconda: Contamination cancels BiMart's bid to build
www.greatfallstribune.com
Sunday, March 20, 2005
The Associated Press
ANACONDA — BiMart, an Oregon-based discount chain, has decided
against building a store on a 7 1/2-acre in Anaconda after
finding the land is contaminated with the metal beryllium, a
suspected carcinogen.
Anaconda-Deer Lodge County officials recently received a letter
from the company, canceling a sale agreement.
BiMart had planned a $1.3 million store.
County planning director Linda Bouck said the land agreement
proceeded as far as it did because the county relied on
information from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and
Atlantic Richfield Co. The company acquired assets and
liabilities of the old Anaconda Co., which experimented with
beryllium in the 1950s and had mining and smelting operations in
the Butte-Anaconda area for many years.
The county conveyed to BiMart that the potential store property
was "a remediated Superfund site," company spokesman Dick
Hunsaker said. Superfund is a government program for major
environmental cleanup.
"Remediated doesn't necessarily mean there's no contamination on
site," Charlie Coleman of the EPA in Helena told The Montana
Standard. "When we say 'remediated,' it could mean there's
buried waste with a cap on it. When a developer comes on, that's
what we try to articulate."
But Bouck said Coleman gave the county specific assurances the
site did not have a beryllium problem. Those assurances came
after a contractor BiMart hired refused to dig the land, because
he suspected beryllium contamination, Bouck said.
"We didn't have anything that led us to believe there was
beryllium out there," Coleman said. Atlantic Richfield performed
cleanup work at the site and subsequent sampling by EPA revealed
"a typical suite of metals," including arsenic, cadmium and
lead, he said.
Although finding beryllium is a surprise, "it shouldn't have
been totally unexpected," given demolition work and other
activity that has occurred at the site, Coleman added.
Bouck said she hopes BiMart will build elsewhere in Anaconda.
In its letter to the county, BiMart asked to be reimbursed for
"unexpected costs" involved in identifying the beryllium
problem, but did not specify an amount. Bouck estimated it at
$40,000, for soil testing and other work.
It was not immediately clear whether the county will make the
payment.
Originally published March 20, 2005
Copyright ©2004 Great Falls Tribune. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
41 Gazette.com: The nuclear options
Mar. 19, 2005 Our View - Saturday
Yucca Mountain repository, even if flawed, safer and better than
status quo
We don’t entirely blame Sen. Harry Reid and other members of
Nevada’s congressional delegation for working every angle they
can when trying to derail the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste
repository. No matter how safe the waste will be when stored
deep inside a mountain on the Nevada Test Site, no one,
understandably, would be enthusiastic about playing host to it.
But Reid’s latest proposal — to permanently leave this
radioactive material at dozens of sites where it’s temporarily
stored — is so reckless that it actually serves to reinforce the
need for Yucca Mountain. After all, if the remote, secure,
exhaustively studied Yucca Mountain isn’t a safe enough place to
store these materials — as Reid and other critics of the project
contend — how much more risky is it to create dozens of far less
safe, far less secure sites around the country. That only
expands the list of potential targets for terrorists and nuclear
proliferators, and multiplies, many times over, the danger of
environmental contamination. In addition, this approach would
effectively kill off a nuclear energy industry that generated 20
percent of U.S. electricity, because the reactors would have to
go cold once temporary, on-site storage reaches capacity.
“It should be clear to anyone that this project is not going
anywhere,” Reid said at a budget hearing this week (though he
neglected to explain that it wasn’t going anywhere due to the
obstructionism of himself and a handful of anti-nuclear
activists). “One option may be for the federal government to
take responsibility for the nuclear waste at the reactor sites.
This is the right thing to do and I look forward to discussing
this option with my colleagues.”
We can only hope his colleagues slam the door in Reid’s face
once they recognize the implications of the plan.
At present, tons of highly radioactive waste is being held at
temporary storage sites across the country, usually right
alongside the reactors that generate it. Many of these sites are
in densely populated areas. Clearly, this is not an ideal
situation from an environmental or security standpoint. These
wastes were supposed to be moved to a central repository for
longterm safekeeping, paid for with $10.5 billion that energy
companies have been paying the federal government, based on
Uncle Sam’s promise to come up with a permanent solution.
After exhaustive analysis, the storage options were narrowed to
Yucca Mountain. But anti-nuclear activists and a handful of
politicians, including Reid, have done everything possible to
delay or derail the project. The tactics not only threaten to
choke off nuclear power generation, because plants will have to
shut down once temporary storage facilities reach capacity, but
it’s costing taxpayers millions of dollars in payouts to
companies that were promised a solution.
Last fall, the federal government agreed to pay at least $300
million to nuclear power companies due to the delay, and it
faces similar fines and payouts unless Yucca Mountain is opened
as promised. “With other utilities waiting in line to file
similar suits, experts said (The Department of Energy) could owe
estimated damages from $2 billion to $56 billion,” according to
one news story.
“The agreement means that taxpayers in every state, including
those who do not receive electricity supplies from nuclear power
plants, are now officially paying the cost of the federal
government’s failure to meet its obligations,” said a
spokesperson for the Nuclear Energy Institute.
Yucca Mountain isn’t a perfect solution. But it’s the best
alternative available at the moment and far, far better than
permanently storing radioactive waste where it is. Reid
reportedly is preparing legislation to execute his plan. We
hope, when other members of Congress understand the bill’s
dangerous and costly implications, it will suffer a
much-deserved meltdown.
Freedom of Information Act needs an update
Expansion of government normally brings unnecessary bloat and
even greater intrusions on the rights of Americans. But several
congressional efforts to update the Freedom of Information Act
probably deserve support, even if one creates a commission to
oversee open records compliance.
Texas Sen. John Cornyn, a Republican, and Vermont Sen. Patrick
Leahy, a Democrat, last month introduced the Open Government Act
of 2005, which would reform the Freedom of Information Act of
1966 and, they say, enhance and expand the accessibility,
accountability and openness of the federal government. FOIA
hasn’t had any significant updates in more than a decade, in
spite of a revolution in electronic databases, the Internet and
e-mail correspondence. The law would require more reliable
reporting on agencies’ FOIA performance, help ensure timely
responses to requests for public information, establish FOIA
hotlines so people can track the status of their requests and
impose real consequences for noncompliance.
Cornyn and Leahy submitted a separate bill last week to create a
16-member advisory commission on FOIA processing delays to
review agencies and recommend any changes that might improve
response times to records requests. These changes are probably
necessary, if only to reinforce the need to keep government
records open to the public. The senators noted that the Senate
Judiciary Committee has not held an oversight hearing on open
records compliance since 1992. The Senate Homeland Security and
Government Affairs Committee, which shares jurisdiction over
federal government information, has not held an FOIA oversight
hearing since 1980.
We strongly urge others in Congress to join Cornyn and Leahy in
reasserting the value and need for open government. - Our
Copyright 2005, The Gazette, a division of Freedom Colorado
Information. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
42 WCAX.com: Yucca Mountain woes seen having little effect on Yankee
March 21, 2005
MONTPELIER, Vt. There's more bad news for the proposed nuclear
waste site that Vermont Yankee officials have been hoping will be
the eventual home of the plant's highly radioactive waste.
Government investigators are looking into allegations that
hydrological studies around the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada may
have been falsified.
Vermont lawmakers, though, say that news isn't likely influence
their deliberations about whether to let Vermont Yankee store
highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel in steel and concrete casks
on its Vernon property.
Lawmakers say consensus appears to be gelling around a plan to
allow so-called dry-cask storage, but to charge Vermont Yankee an
annual fee for each cask.
Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights
Copyright 2001 - 2005 WorldNow and WCAX. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
43 DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD: Safe Storage proposal
FR Doc 05-5450
[Federal Register: March 21, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 53)]
[Notices] [Page 13482-13485] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr21mr05-57] [[Page
13482]]
[Recommendation 2005-1] Nuclear Material Packaging AGENCY:
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. ACTION: Notice,
recommendation.
SUMMARY: The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board has made a
recommendation to the Secretary of Energy pursuant to 42
U.S.C.2286a(a)(5) regarding the issuance of a requirement that
nuclear material packaging meet technically justified criteria
for safe storage and handling outside of engineered contamination
barriers. DATES: Comments, data, views or arguments concerning
the recommendation are due on or before April 20, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Send comments, data, views, or arguments concerning
this recommendation to: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board,
625 Indiana Avenue, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004-2001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth M. Pusateri or Andrew L.
Thibadeau at the address above or telephone (202) 694-7000.
Dated: March 15, 2005.
John T. Conway, Chairman. Recommendation 2005-1 To the Secretary
of Energy Pursuant to the 42 U.S.C. 2286a(a)(5), Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, As Amended Dated: March 10, 2005.
Background
In Recommendation 94-1, Improved Schedule for Remediation in
the Defense Nuclear Facilities Complex, the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board (Board) urged the Department of Energy
(DOE) to improve the packaging and storage conditions of its
large inventory of nuclear materials once used for weapons
manufacture. In particular, the Board recommended that DOE place
plutonium metals and oxides in storage configurations meeting
DOE's standard for long-term storage (DOE-STD- 3013-2004,
Stabilization, Packaging, and Storage of Plutonium-Bearing
Materials). Some sites applied Recommendation 94-1 to excess
materials only. The Board has continued to evaluate whether other
categories of nuclear materials are stored in a safe manner.
DOE has made progress in the stabilization and storage of its
excess nuclear materials. The storage requirements for other
categories of nuclear materials, however, are not as well defined
and controlled. Specifically, DOE Order 5660.1B, Management of
Nuclear Materials, does not address safe storage requirements.
Other than two narrowly focused standards--DOE-STD-3013-2004 and
DOE-STD-3028-2000, Criteria for Packaging and Storing
Uranium-233-Bearing Materials--there is no explicit DOE-wide
requirement to ensure the safe storage of nuclear materials.
Currently, the technical adequacy of packaging--the combination
of containers and other components providing a contamination
barrier--for nuclear materials, including liquids, is dependent
on the safety bases of individual facilities. Typically,
facilities have credited engineered features, such as the
confinement structure and ventilation system, for protecting
offsite individuals and collocated workers. For facility workers,
however, the controls are generally administrative, such as
continuous air monitors, personal protective equipment, periodic
contamination surveys, and other aspects of the radiological
control program, in conjunction with proper evacuation training.
In accordance with DOE Standard 3009, Preparation Guide for U.S.
Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented
Safety Analysis (DOE-STD-3009-94, Change Notice 02), accidents
that pose the risk of significant radiological exposure to
workers, such as a breached nuclear material storage package,
should be prevented or mitigated using safety-significant
controls. The preferred hierarchy of controls favors engineered,
preventive features over administrative controls.
Establishing packaging requirements for nuclear materials
within the DOE complex requires consideration of a diverse
population of material types for storage for uncertain periods of
time. From a safety standpoint, nuclear material packaging must
protect against a number of challenges that could breach the
container and release radioactive material. Many of the materials
of concern generate gases that result in container pressurization
and may be pyrophoric or highly reactive. The container design
must take into account corrosion, oxidative expansion of stored
metal, effects of radiolysis, diurnal pumping, and damage due to
impacts from drops and tooling during handling. The Board's
recent review of nuclear material packaging at Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory (LLNL) revealed that many of these insults
had not been fully considered when packaging choices were made
for nuclear materials not covered by Recommendation 94-1. In
fact, many of these current packaging configurations are similar
to the inadequate configurations addressed in Recommendation
94-1, and are documented as being susceptible to eventual failure
in the report of the Recommendation 94-1 Materials Identification
and Surveillance Working Group, entitled Summary of Plutonium
Oxide and Metal Storage Package Failures (LA-UR-99-2896).
In general, the hazards posed by nuclear materials covered
under DOE's Implementation Plan for Recommendation 94-1 are the
same as those for nuclear materials not considered excess. When
nonexcess materials are removed from glovebox confinement for
interim storage, relocation to another work station, assay, or
other purposes, the packages are susceptible to the same types of
failures as those addressed in Recommendation 94-1. The longer
the materials are stored, the greater are the chances that the
packaging will fail, especially if the packaging has not been
designed appropriately for the actual duration of storage. The
Board found that approximately 15 percent of the nonexcess items
at LLNL's Plutonium Facility are stored in packaging more than 5
years old. Some of the older items, previously declared excess,
remain in their existing packaging while awaiting stabilization
and packaging under DOE-STD-3013-2004. This situation emphasizes
the need to establish a technical basis for packaging, such as
designating the time period for which a particular container is
confirmed to perform its function adequately, in conjunction with
tracking the age of containers in use.
Two recent events serve as further reminders of the
importance of using packaging that is properly designed for its
function:
An August 5, 2003, event at Los Alamos National Laboratory's
(LANL) Plutonium Facility resulted in multiple workers receiving
plutonium-238 uptakes as a result of the degradation of a package
stored longer than planned. This event is documented in a DOE
Type B investigation report (HQ-EH-2004-1). The release of
material and the resulting contamination and worker uptakes were
due, in large part, to the inadequate packaging of plutonium
being stored and handled outside of a glovebox.
An October 6, 2004, incident at LLNL involved the accidental
drop of a package containing salt-bearing [[Page 13483]]
plutonium oxide. This event is documented in an Occurrence
Reporting and Processing System report
(OAK--LLNL-LLNL-2004-0046). Although no plutonium was released,
this event highlights the need to specify robust packaging
requirements for materials handled outside of a glovebox. State
of Nuclear Material Packaging
DOE-STD-3013-2004 sets forth requirements for a robust
storage configuration for long-term storage of plutonium-bearing
materials. The requirements ensure containment through a
combination of material form, packaging design, and surveillance
of containers. However, the robust, welded configurations in the
standard may not be desirable when a short storage period is
anticipated pending use of the material.
There are no equivalent requirements for interim storage. As
part of its response to Recommendation 94-1, DOE finalized
guidance for the storage of plutonium-bearing materials not
packaged for long-term storage under DOE-STD-3013. This guidance,
identified in a January 25, 1996, memorandum from Deputy
Secretary of Energy Curtis entitled Criteria for Interim Safe
Storage of Plutonium-Bearing Solid Materials, provides a
technically justified approach to safe packaging and storage of
plutonium-bearing materials for a period of up to 20 years.
Although these Interim Safe Storage Criteria (ISSC) were not
intended to apply to materials in working inventory, much of the
guidance remains germane to storage of all nuclear materials
outside of approved engineered contamination barriers (e.g.,
gloveboxes or certified shipping containers).
The ISSC were only implemented for selected excess materials
and were never formally issued as part of the DOE Directives
System. In practice, the sites use a wide variety of packages,
many of which do not meet the ISSC. According to the lessons
learned from the DOE Type B investigation of the worker uptakes
at LANL, packages containing radioactive material should be
assumed unsafe until proven otherwise or the materials are
repackaged to current standards. Yet sites continue to rely on
container types that have been used historically, but have no
technically justified safety or design basis. These container
types are generally forms of packaging typically used in
non-nuclear applications (e.g., paint cans, food pack cans).
Thus, they are not designed to protect against the hazards of the
nuclear materials they contain for the duration of storage.
Several commonly used containers and their potential
inadequacies are briefly summarized in an attachment to this
Recommendation. Many other containers are in use for specialized
applications. Remaining Problems
In response to the Board's May 20, 2002, correspondence on
safety of nuclear materials storage, the National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA) established the Inactive Actinide
Working Group (IAWG), with the goal of developing a comprehensive
approach to the characterization, packaging, and storage of a
subset of nuclear materials. As presented in a February 7, 2003,
letter from NNSA to the Board, the IAWG was to meet this goal
through the development of three strategies for the following:
acceptance and retention of nuclear materials, material
characterization and storage adequacy, and disposition. The Board
has been observing the IAWG's efforts and has made three
observations.
First, a key product of the IAWG effort will be the strategy
for material characterization and storage adequacy. Based on
discussions with IAWG participants, the delivery of this strategy
has been delayed, in large part because of disagreements among
member sites on the requirements necessary for justifying
adequate storage. The Board believes these requirements should
provide for sufficient characterization based on an appropriate
combination of analysis and process knowledge to determine the
appropriate packaging. Characterization information should also
be used to develop a surveillance program prioritized according
to expected material and container risk (including, for example,
material type, material form, and the age and type of container).
Second, in a June 2000 report entitled A Strategic Approach
to Integrating the Long-Term Management of Nuclear Materials, DOE
recognized the need to update the existing DOE Order on nuclear
materials management. In particular, this report urged
improvements to the nuclear materials management process.
However, neither the current Order nor the report explicitly
considers storage safety. The Board believes that DOE should
require a technical basis for nuclear material packaging and
storage safety. Efforts to meet this requirement should take
advantage of the knowledge about storage adequacy being developed
by the IAWG, as well as existing guidance, such as the ISSC.
Third, the IAWG strategy does not include other program
offices in the defense nuclear complex, such as the Nuclear
Energy, Science, and Technology (DOE-NE) facilities involved in
defense nuclear activities. Currently, materials and activities
in transition between the facilities of different program offices
have the potential to be overlooked. For example, operators at
the Savannah River Site have begun converting the neptunium-237
solutions covered under Recommendation 94-1 to oxide and placing
the oxide in packaging intended for 1 year of storage at that
site prior to offsite shipping. The long-term storage of large
quantities of neptunium oxide has not been performed previously
in the complex, and the technical basis for ensuring the safety
of such storage is incomplete. Nonetheless, these materials will
be transferred to DOE-NE for use, where they may continue to be
stored in their existing packaging for a period of up to 20
years. In addition, the Board has learned that DOE-NE intends to
assume more direct control of activities involving plutonium-238,
which have to date been performed at NNSA sites. The significant
radiological hazards associated with this material necessitate
appropriate storage containers for the expected storage period.
The Board believes the requirement for a technical basis for
nuclear material packaging and storage should encompass all
program offices in the defense nuclear complex. DOE may wish to
consider implementing this requirement for all program offices,
including those outside of the defense nuclear complex.
The Board is encouraged by other efforts currently under way
to improve nuclear material packaging. As a result of discussions
between the Board's staff and LLNL, the Livermore Site Office, in
a December 3, 2004, letter, directed LLNL to develop a technical
basis for the adequacy of storage packages as part of a Special
Nuclear Materials Storage Plan covering ``all packaging
activities.'' LLNL replied in a letter of January 31, 2005,
outlining the required activities, milestones, and funding to
develop and implement an approved packaging and storage program.
Implementation of the plan is contingent upon the availability of
key personnel and funding. Likewise, the proposed Documented
Safety Analysis (DSA) for the LANL Plutonium Facility requires
the use of a proposed facility packaging standard and designates
material containers as a safety-related component. However, the
new DSA has been awaiting NNSA approval. In general, these
efforts represent an improvement, but they do not represent a
comprehensive DOE-
[[Page 13484]]
wide effort, and significant differences remain in the quality of
the efforts at individual facilities. Recommendation
Nuclear material packaging provides the primary containment
boundary to protect facility workers during storage and handling
activities. The Board believes the development of technically
justified criteria for packaging systems for nuclear materials is
necessary on a DOE-wide level. Therefore, the Board recommends
that DOE:
1. Issue a requirement that nuclear material packaging meet
technically justified criteria for safe storage and handling.
Packaging should, in general, provide a robust barrier between
facility workers and the stored nuclear materials once they are
removed from an approved engineered contamination barrier. It may
be appropriate to include this requirement in an updated nuclear
materials management Order.
2. Identify which nuclear materials should be included in the
scope of the above requirement and then determine the technically
justified packaging criteria needed to ensure the safe storage
and handling of those materials. The scope need not include waste
materials, fully encapsulated forms, or de minimis quantities
such as analytical laboratory samples. The criteria should
account for the nuclear material form and properties, expected
future use, and duration of storage. It may be appropriate for
this information to be included in a packaging Manual.
The ISSC may provide the beginning of a sound technical
foundation for developing such criteria. Although some
modifications may be necessary to make the ISSC more applicable
to short-term storage, the Board believes the basic ISSC
principles--for example, the requirement for a minimum of two
contamination boundaries for high-hazard materials such as
plutonium, assurance that leak-tightness is maintained for
materials requiring a sealed environment, ability of the
containers to withstand maximum expected internal pressures, and
protection against common insults such as drops--should be
maintained. The criteria should also include provisions for
surveillance programs to verify that the container and any
limited-life components are performing in a manner consistent
with the duration of storage.
3. Prioritize implementation of the improved nuclear material
packaging requirement consistent with the hazards of the
different material types and the risk posed by the existing
package configurations and conditions. John T. Conway, Chairman.
Attachment Selection of Commonly Used Nuclear Material Packaging
Food-Pack Cans
Food-pack cans are thin-walled tinned carbon steel containers
used in the food industry. No additional manufacturing or
structural requirements have been specified for application with
nuclear materials. These cans typically rely on a double-crimped
metal-to-metal closure with a thin layer of sealing compound to
provide leak- tightness. Historically, many sites have reported
failures of food-pack cans. Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory (LLNL) has reported anecdotal evidence suggesting that
none of its food-pack cans have failed to the point of detectable
contamination outside the container (UCRL-ID-11733). However,
this same report states further that some degree of oxidation was
observed in all of the examined food-pack cans containing
plutonium metal, suggesting the lack of an airtight seal. Leakage
of oxygen through nonairtight food-pack cans has been responsible
for a number of container failures reported at other sites, due
to oxidative expansion of plutonium metals (LA-UR-99-2896).
Improvements have been made to the technology, including
better sealing equipment, as discussed in a May 1984 report
entitled The Effectiveness of Corrective Actions Taken to
Preclude Events Involving Tin Cans and Plutonium (RHO-HS-SA-59
P). Some evidence suggests, however, that these containers still
may not be adequate for prolonged storage of nuclear materials.
Approximately half of the sampled lot of food-pack cans sealed 10
to 14 years earlier at the Hanford Plutonium Finishing Plant
using the improved methodology failed leak testing, and nearly
all showed further indications of a potential lack of seal (LA-
UR-99-3053).
Additional testing performed at Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory confirmed that the performance of food-pack cans is
highly dependent on the quality of the seal (PNL-5591). During
these tests, 33 industry-standard food-pack cans were sealed
according to federal specifications. The testing revealed leak
rates ranging from less than 10-5 cubic centimeters per second
(cc/sec) to more than 2 cc/sec. These findings should receive due
consideration when food-pack cans are used for storage
applications in which a hermetic seal is required. LLNL continues
to use food-pack cans as inner and outer containers for the
storage of plutonium metal and oxide, and other sites may be
storing nuclear materials previously packaged in food-pack cans.
Paint Cans
Paint cans are thin-walled cans with a press-fit lid that are
commonly used to store paint. They have been used as both inner
and outer containers for the storage of some nuclear materials,
including plutonium metal. The press-fit lid is typically placed
by hand using a mallet, which results in a questionable seal
lacking any evidence of quality control. According to a January
16, 1987, LLNL site report entitled Incident Analysis/Plutonium
Burn in Storage Can, oxidation was found to be common for
plutonium metal stored in paint cans (memorandum from R.H. Condit
to K. Ernst). The report goes on to calculate that a 4 micron gap
integrated across the seal area would be sufficient to permit
complete oxidation of 100 grams of plutonium metal in 1 year. A
leak of this size can reasonably be assumed to be present in the
press- fit closure; therefore, the adequacy of these cans for
nuclear material storage applications requiring a seal cannot be
ensured. Although LLNL reports that ingress of air is expected
because the lid and rim of the can are not designed to be
airtight (UCRL-ID-117333), paint cans remain approved for use for
certain applications at the laboratory. Other sites may also be
storing nuclear materials that were previously packaged in paint
cans.
Taped Slip-Lid Cans
Slip-lid cans are thin-walled cans with a loose-fitting cover
that is often taped. While convenient and inexpensive, the use of
these containers has resulted in several breached storage
packages, including the plutonium-238 package that led to the
Type B event at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). Many
nuclear material packages consisting of nested taped slip-lid
cans remain at the Department of Energy's defense nuclear
facilities. By design, these cans were never intended to serve a
containment function. Furthermore, except for tape, a mechanical
closure is absent, resulting in a container that may not be able
to provide even gross retention of the materials within. The
effectiveness of tape in performing this sealing function over
time and under high radiation conditions is poorly understood.
For this reason, the Interim Safe Storage Criteria (ISSC)
specifically prohibit
[[Page 13485]]
crediting slip-lid cans as one of the two required contamination
barriers. Yet several sites continue to use this type of
packaging. For nonmetallic plutonium, including items containing
plutonium-238, LANL plans to rely on stainless steel taped
slip-lid cans only as an inner container; currently, however, a
large number of items remain at the laboratory in nested slip-lid
cans. Moreover, several varieties of slip-lid cans continue to be
approved for use as inner and outer storage containers for
certain materials at LLNL. Hagan Can
LANL's Comprehensive Nuclear Material Packaging and
Stabilization Plan approves the use of a standard container known
as the Hagan can, a robust, screw-top container with an O-ring
seal and filtered vent. The Hagan can generally meets the
expectations of the ISSC and has undergone testing to certify its
performance (Wickland and Mataya, PATRAM 98, 1998). However, drop
testing was performed at a height lower than the expected maximum
storage height; therefore, additional analysis or testing is
required. Under the proposed Documented Safety Analysis for
LANL's Plutonium Facility, the Hagan can is classified as a
safety-significant engineered feature. The Hagan can appears to
be an appropriate outer package for nuclear material storage,
although, as recognized by LANL, the service life of the Viton
(an organic fluorocarbon compound) O-ring requires verification
through a surveillance program. Currently, Hagan cans are widely
used only at LANL; however, their use may be under consideration
at other sites.
Conflat Can
A can fabricated with a Varian-type Conflat flange results in
a hermetically sealed, robust container that can be used to store
plutonium metal. A copper gasket on a bolted flange closure is
designed to maintain a long-term hermetic seal against oxidation
of plutonium metal. This closure type has been standard in the
high-vacuum industry for many years and has been certified to
maintain a leak-tight seal under various temperature and pressure
conditions. The Conflat can is identified in LANL's Comprehensive
Nuclear Material Packaging and Stabilization Plan as the inner
container for the storage of plutonium metal. The use of Conflat
cans for storage of other nuclear materials requiring a sealed
environment may also be appropriate. Conflat cans have been used
periodically at some sites for special storage applications, but
their use is not widespread or uniform.
Metal Drums
Several sites commonly use U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT) Type A containers and similar types of metal drums for
overpacking of packages of nuclear materials for onsite
transportation and storage. These containers have been certified
as Type A radioactive material packages per DOT specifications.
For transportation purposes, this certification usually is
limited to a single year. The use of these containers for interim
storage beyond the certification period appears appropriate, but
consideration should be given to periodic inspection and
replacement for limited-life components, such as lid gaskets. The
Criteria for the Safe Storage of Enriched Uranium at the Y-12
Plant (Y/ ES-015/R2) allow interim storage of enriched uranium
materials for a period of up to 10 years in DOT Type A or Type B
containers. Y-12 Prolonged Storage Container
The Y-12 Y/ES-015/R2 criteria specify the use of stainless
steel cans similar to food-pack cans for prolonged
low-maintenance storage for up to 50 years. While the reliance on
a single robust barrier for the storage of enriched uranium may
be appropriate, it is unclear whether the requirement to maintain
mechanical and seal integrity during normal handling includes
protection against drops. In addition, a lid sealant compound is
specified in the appendix to Y/ES-015/R2, but no discussion of
its longevity is provided. While fewer radiological hazards and
less chemical reactivity are associated with enriched uranium
than with plutonium and some other nuclear materials, further
testing of these containers would better demonstrate their
reliability for long-term storage. Currently, the Y-12 container
specification is planned for use only at the Y-12 National
Security Complex. Plastic Bags and Bottles
Historically, plastic bags have been relied upon to provide
contamination control for a limited period. Bag materials, which
include polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride, and related polymers,
play an important role in the overall packaging system. Their
principal use is for contamination control during the ``bagout''
operation, when the nuclear material container is removed from
the glovebox. Unfortunately, some types of bags have proven to be
detrimental to the integrity of packages left in storage for
prolonged periods of time. For example, the radiation-induced
degradation of polyvinyl chloride bag material led to the
production of hydrochloric acid, which in turn contributed to the
corrosion and eventual failure of containers that occurred during
the Type B event at LANL. The choice of material also impacts the
generation of radiolytic gas and effectively defines the service
life of a package when the outer container is not leak-tight. In
repackaging campaigns at LLNL, as well as at other sites, such as
Hanford, bags commonly have been found to be in a discolored or
otherwise degraded state (UCRL-ID-117333 and WHC-SD-TRP-067).
While plastic bags have been in use for a long time, little
quantitative information exists on the effects of time,
temperature, and radiation field exposure on maintenance of an
effective contamination barrier. It is recognized that plastic
bags may be necessary for contamination control, but they should
not be relied upon as a long-term contamination barrier.
In some cases, plastic bottles (e.g., safe bottles) have been
used for the storage of solutions containing nuclear materials,
especially enriched uranium, outside of processing equipment.
While bottles are constructed of thicker plastics than are bags,
they undergo the same chemical and radiolytic degradation with
time and must be compatible with the chemical properties of the
contained liquids. Furthermore, whereas bags provide only
contamination control, bottles are relied upon to provide a
complete contamination barrier, including structural integrity.
Any reliance on plastic bags or plastic bottles for extended
periods of time should be informed by the available knowledge of
polymer degradation, in combination with information gleaned from
surveillance programs.
[FR Doc. 05-5450 Filed 3-18-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3670-01-P
*****************************************************************
44 DOE Plans For 1000 To 1200 New US Reactors Sharing Research Internationally
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:30:23 -0500
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:PUUvDMDvUgAJ:www.mbe.doe.gov/budget/05budget/content/es/nuclear.pdf+Dept.+of+Energy/Energy+Supply/Other+Defense+Activities/Nuclear+&hl=en
Jeannine & All,
I'm having trouble
copying/pasting the site or pages 385 till
somewhere just past page 403 down. If I can get it
I will e-mail it to you.Maybe all of it will
appear with the URL above. All one has to do is
just as Jeannine says, http://www.google.com
Dept. of Energy/Energy Supply/Other Defense
Activities/NuclearEnergy/Overview
DON'T use quotation marks around this phrase &
it's all there to read.
-Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dolph Honicker"
To:
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 9:58 PM
Subject: RE: Yucca Fraud Update, ElBaradei
Statement On Nuclear Power, Nuke Comeback
> Dear Bill et al,
>
> I have been reading the FY2005 Congressional
Budget for the Department of
> Energy, and it clearly says that even if Yucca
Mountain is operational, it
> can only contain the spent fuel that the
exising US Nuclear Power Plants
> will produce through the year 2015. I didn't
know that it will have such a
> limited capacity, and I bet most people don't.
Yucca mountain is just a
> symbolic jesture to give DOE and NRC bragging
rights that they have "solved"
> the nuclear waste problem. What DOE really has
planned is to bring back
> reprocessing and the Breeder Readtor. Look it
up yourselves. Go to Google,
> put in "Dept. of Energy/Energy Supply/Other
Defense Activities/Nuclear
> Energy/Overview" FY2005 Congressional Budget
will appear as the first site.
> Click on that and see if you can pull it up.
My computer won't, but a
> friend sent me the first parts, up to page 384.
If anyone can get the rest,
> I'd like to see from page 385 forward.
>
> This has the whole outline of their plans for
Generation IV Nuclear Energy
> Systems, (that translates to "Breeder Reactors)
Advanced Fuel Cycle
> Initiatives ( "reprocessing") International
promotion by sharring research
> and development with Argentina, Brazil, Canada,
the European Union, France,
> Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of
South Africa, Switzerland, and
> the United Kingdom.
>
> The tendrills are spread through 24 Universities
in 19 states. Remember the
> old "dream"(lie) of ""To cheap to meter" The
new one is called the Nuclear
> Hydrogen Iniitiative with the promsce of
replacing oil with Hydrogen. It is
> still in the research and development stage,
however, and is being persued
> at many of the National Labs and Universities,
with Idaho National Lab
> taking the leadership role in its development.
>
> 1000 to 1200 new reactors in the U. S., at the
rate of 50 to 60 a year, are
> proposed to be built by the year 2025. The Blue
Print is here. This is the
> most comprehensive document I have found, and it
needs to be read and
> discussed by all of us. The industry knows
about it. It is their "Roadmap"
> to recovery.
>
> The Nuclear Industy wasn't dead. It has just
been in hibernation. Like Rip
> Van Winkle, it is awake and roaring agian, with
our tax dollars. Reduce
> school lunches, finance the nuclear industry,
world wide and always refer to
> nuclear power as "Emission free nuclear power"
Don't let them get away with
> this. Tell everyone that nuclear power plants
routinely release radioactive
> pollutants into the air and water that cause
cancer, leukemia, and birth
> defects, and that that is too high a price to
pay for electricity.
>
>
> Jeannine Honicker
> djhonicker@msn.com
>
> >From: "Bill Smirnow"
> >To: "Bill Smirnow"
> >Subject: Yucca Fraud Update, ElBaradei
Statement On Nuclear Power, Nuke
> >Comeback
> >Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 20:46:00 -0500
> >
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************