***************************************************************** 05/08/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.105 ***************************************************************** 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 RIA Novosti: PUTIN CALLS NOT TO DEPRIVE IRAN OF POSSIBILITY TO USE N 2 Reuters: Iran warns its nuclear threats not empty 3 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Plainly Tell North Korea that Nuclear Tes 4 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: U.S. reportedly asked China to cut oil to Nor 5 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: EDITORIALS Time to show some concern 6 RIA Novosti: NORTH KOREA SLAMS US INTENTIONS 7 Xinhua: DPRK: No talks with US out of six-party framework 8 Korea Times: Roh, Hu Urge NK to Return to Dialogue 9 AFP: Talk of six North Korea nuclear bombs worries US, UN 10 Guardian Unlimited: Ministers Urge N. Korea on Nuclear Talks 11 US: NY Times Says Cold War Arsenals "Almost Quaintly Irrelevant" 12 US: [NukeNet] Bad Nukes Editorial in NY Times 13 US: Deseret News: Reid says Demos are set to gain 14 US: Salt Lake Tribune: BUNKER-BUSTER REPORT: Earth-penetrating nuke 15 US: projo.com: The future of energy 16 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Phish drummer joins New England Coalition 17 [NYTr] Egypt "Bogs Down" UN Nuclear Conference 18 [progchat_action] Fw: REPORT ON GLOBAL NETWORK CONFERENCE 19 The Observer: A question we can duck no longer 20 Guardian Unlimited: One last chance to ensure world safety 21 AxisofLogic: US-UK-Italian Uranium Science Fraudulent 22 Xinhua: IAEA to bring nuke technology under stricter control 23 Xinhua: NPT conference fails to adopt agenda 24 Japan Times: ASEM talks kicks off amid strained ties with neighbors 25 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Nuclear Chief Pushes 'Sea Change' NUCLEAR REACTORS 26 Chernobyl: Victim's First Hand Reportage- Voices from Chernobyl, Swe 27 US: [du-list] radioactive dust concerns at Maine Yankee cleanup 28 [NukeNet] IAEA Head Pushes Sea Changes Re Nuke Power, 29 UK: Huge radioactive leak closes Thorp nuclear plant 30 [NukeNet] Chernobyl: Victim's First Hand Reportage- Voices 31 Guardian Unlimited: Huge radioactive leak closes Thorp nuclear plant 32 The Observer: Secret papers reveal new nuclear building plan 33 The Observer: Labour's nuclear option 34 UK The Times: Cabinet clash over nuclear power 35 US: Portland Press Herald: Maine Yankee says long goodbye 36 Daily Yomiuri: Local govts imperil N-policy 37 The Herald: Pressure rises on nuclear power 38 US: palm beach post: FPL joins in design for nuclear reactorse 39 Mail & Guardian: Don't shoot the messenger (South Africa PBMR React 40 Scotsman.com News: Ukraine Plans to Build 11 Nuclear Reactors 41 Scotsman.com News: Nuclear Power Option 'Blocked by Beckett' 42 US: monticello times: NRC meeting draws light crowd 43 Orlando Sentinel: Powerful, brave voices tell story of Chernobyl 44 US: PRN: Perry Nuclear Power Plant Returns to Service 45 Independent: Plans for nuclear energy set to spark cabinet row 46 Independent: Blair demands nuclear power to protect high 'living sta 47 Scotsman.com: Government urged to set up nuclear build plan 48 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria Launches New N-Plant Contractor Tender NUCLEAR SECURITY 49 US: KUAM: Repairs made to USS San Francisco's bow 50 RIA Novosti: RUSSIA'S UPDATED NUCLEAR SUBMARINE TO BE BACK IN SERVIC 51 BBC: Concern mounts over North Korea 52 BBC: Crew blamed for grounding US sub 53 BBC: North Korea 'may have six bombs' 54 WorldNetDaily: Nuclear violations 55 UCS: Japanese Plutonium Program Threatens Nonproliferation Regime, NUCLEAR SAFETY 56 The unsecured and unsafe storage of nuclear hazards capable of 57 US: Jeff St. Clair: Bush Administration Kills Nuclear Fallout Study 58 Independent: Navajos take part in global forum 59 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Facing the consequences 60 US: Swans Commentary: IS DEPLETED URANIUM (DU) DANGEROUSLY RADIOACTI 61 Japan Times: Nagasaki A-bomb survivors express anger at Bockscar exh NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 62 US: Portland Press Herald: Tainted soil near homes to be moved 63 Sunday Times: Radioactive leak closes £2bn nuclear reprocessing plan 64 Las Vegas RJ: Lawmakers cut funding for Yucca Mountain fight 65 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Don't move it, solve it 66 US: MaineToday: Tainted soil near homes to be moved - 67 Japan Times: NPT group urges halt to Rokkasho plant 68 Las Vegas SUN: State lawmakers cut funding for Yucca Mountain fight 69 Deseret news: Yucca might not accept waste from Goshute site 70 US: Herald and News: Old uranium mines to be cleaned up 71 US: PNS: Residents Worry About Rocket Fuel in the Inland Empire's Dr PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 72 ABQjournal: Nanos: LANL on 'Stronger Footing'; Lab Chief Takes 73 SF Chronicle: Nuclear physicist takes over helm of Los Alamos lab 74 i-Newswire.com: Energy Secretary's Statement on Los Alamos Lab Leade ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 RIA Novosti: PUTIN CALLS NOT TO DEPRIVE IRAN OF POSSIBILITY TO USE NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES 9/05/2005 MOSCOW, May 8 (RIA Novosti) - President of Russia Vladimir Putin has urged the international community not to deprive Iran of the possibility to use nuclear technologies. "We cannot and must not deprive the Iranian people of the possibility to use modern technologies and the achievements of science and technology," the Russian President said in an interview with France 3 TV channel. At the same time, he believes that it is also necessary to take into account the geopolitical position of Iran and its relations with other countries. "That is why, we are urging Iran to place all its programs under full control of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). We consider as right the decision to freeze any work over the creation of the nuclear cycle technology, i.e. the technology for uranium enrichment, which could lead to the creation of weapons-grade nuclear fuel," Vladimir Putin said. According to him, in this sense, Russia is cooperating very actively with its European partners and the USA. Putin confirmed that the Russian-Iranian cooperation was "under the tough international control and the control of the IAEA," and involved exclusively a nuclear program for peaceful purposes. Putin's interview with France 3 was timed to coincide with the 60th anniversary of the Victory in World War II. On the eve of that date, the President of Russia gave an unprecedented series of numerous interviews to foreign mass media and answered a total of 120 questions. © 2005 "RIAN Novosti" ***************************************************************** 2 Reuters: Iran warns its nuclear threats not empty Sat May 7, 2005 01:13 PM ET TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran warned on Saturday it could pull out of nuclear negotiations with the European Union if progress is not made soon and said its threat to resume some enrichment-related work was not an empty one. "The Iranian nation will never give up its rights ... we cannot accept any more time killing," Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi told state television from New York. "Based on the (November) Paris agreement, we agreed if negotiations do not reach a result after three months, the talks will end. We are now at this stage and will make decisions soon," he added. Iran insists its nuclear programme will only be used to generate electricity and has rejected EU and U.S. calls for it to abandon for ever plans to produce its own nuclear fuel by enriching uranium. Iran's nuclear fuel activities, including enrichment, are currently suspended while talks with the EU continue. But Tehran has said it is planning to start up some enrichment-related fuel work soon to show its displeasure at the slow pace of negotiations. EU officials have warned they would back U.S. calls for Iran's case to be sent to the United Nations Security Council if Tehran resumes any nuclear fuel work. Kharrazi said Iran would not be intimidated. "The Islamic Republic has the capability to cope with crises and threatening Iran with political and economic crises will not stop us from seeking our rights," he said. "Our threats are not empty ones, but decisions which will be made (in due time)... We are now at this stage, we are waiting to see what the policy-makers decide, and will act accordingly." ***************************************************************** 3 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Plainly Tell North Korea that Nuclear Test Will Result in > Updated May.8,2005 23:40 KST International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei said, "I hope every leader is on the phone with North Korean authorities to dissuade them from a nuclear test. If Pyongyang detonates a nuclear device, it would have disastrous political consequences for Asia and the whole world, not to mention environmental implications in terms of radiological fallout." The White House warned, "North Korea's nuclear test will be regarded as a provocative act," while a senior U.S. administration official said, "If North Korea tests a nuclear device, South Korea would sustain a serious blow, including an over 50 percent plunge in share prices." ***************************************************************** 4 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: U.S. reportedly asked China to cut oil to North May 9, 2005 KST 14:14 (GMT+9) May 09, 2005 ¤Ñ BEIJING ¡ª The United States has asked China to cut off fuel supplies to North Korea to pressure Pyongyang to return to the six-nation nuclear disarmament talks, but the Washington Post reported officials in Beijing rejected the request. Quoting U.S. officials who were briefed on the talks, the Post reported Beijing was considering other measures to squeeze North Korea. Christopher Hill, U.S. chief negotiator for the six-nation talks, proposed the idea of interrupting oil supplies at a meeting in Beijing on April 26, the report said. China turned down the idea, saying that a fuel shutdown might clog the oil pipeline to the North. The Chinese said cutting off food deliveries would have the greatest effect, the report said. Beijing was considering expanding a ban on certain exports to the North, but did not elaborate, the Post said. China is North Korea's largest trading partner. The North mainly exports minerals and fisheries products to China and imports energy, food and other light industry products. Between January and November last year, North Korea imported $70 million in fuel oil from China. Although the Post report quoted U.S. officials saying that China was considering what to do to motivate North Korea to return to the stalled nuclear disbarment talks, diplomats and officials in Beijing were skeptical about what options they are. "China is currently using the card that it would provide more economic assistance to North Korea in return for resolving this nuclear crisis," a diplomatic source in Beijing said. "Even if the U.S. position is to lean toward greater pressure, China's key position will not change." Other sources discounted the idea that Beijing might shut down the pipeline. In 2003, international media reported that China had cut off its oil supply to the North for three days to pressure it to sit down and negotiate with Beijing and Washington. Another diplomat in Beijing said the shutdown was caused by "technical problems," adding that linking the interruption with sanctions and pressures was not feasible. "Pressuring North Korea with a pipeline shutdown is not a Chinese Foreign Ministry principle," a ministry official said. Sources in Beijing said China would rather choose carrots than sticks to induce North Korea to the stalled talks. North Korea and Chinas investment agreement signed during the North Korean Prime Minister Pak Pong-ju's visit to Beijing in March this year can be considered a carrot, they said. by Yoo Kwang-jong, Choi Won-ki myoja@joongang.co.kr> Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use | ***************************************************************** 5 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: EDITORIALS Time to show some concern May 9, 2005 KST 14:14 (GMT+9) Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon has said that the situation regarding North Korea's nuclear program cannot be considered hopeful at the moment, and the patience of the international community has reached its limit. His words indicate that there seems to be little chance for the "major turning point for a peaceful solution" that he mentioned only a few days ago. As Mr. Ban has said, the North Korean nuclear crisis is reaching a serious point. The leaders of the United States and China, after recent urgent talks over the telephone, have expressed their concerns over Pyongyang's nuclear program. The tension between North Korea and the United States is running especially high over the possibility of a North Korean nuclear test. But our government's reaction seems puzzlingly inadequate. A Uri Party lawmaker even suggested that a North Korean nuclear test could be a call for negotiations. Another legislator blamed "the irresponsible reporting of foreign media and the neoconservative forces behind it." Of course, we do not know how the situation will end. There is no need to cause panic among the public with doomsday talk. But the governing party, with its responsibility for national security, should also keep the worst-case scenario in mind and set all countermeasures accordingly. What if North Korea does indeed conduct a nuclear test? The government's reaction is just as frustrating. It seems that only the foreign minister is mentioning that there is a crisis. All the other ministers are keeping silent about this urgent issue. The government needs to review whether its reaction so far had been appropriate. It had predicted that North Korea would return to the six-party talks, but it does not even have any reliable communication channel with Pyongyang at the moment. Albeit belatedly, the government should come up with a blueprint to deal with the North Korean nuclear issue and explain it to the public. If it continues to act as unworried and equivocal as it is doing now, we could indeed face grave danger. 2005.05.08 Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. ***************************************************************** 6 RIA Novosti: NORTH KOREA SLAMS US INTENTIONS 9/05/2005 MOSCOW, May 7 (RIA Novosti) - Pyongyang is very irritated in connection with the latest tough-worded statements by the President of the United States and the US State Secretary that refer to North Korea as an outpost of tyranny. This was disclosed to RIA Novosti May 7 over the phone by Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the State Duma's foreign-affairs committee. Kosachev now heads a Russian delegation during talks in Pyongyang. "Pyongyang emphatically rejects such rhetoric, insisting that the US side publicly disavow its statements," Kosachev noted. In his words, North Korean leaders believe that these US statements highlight Washington's intention to forcibly "democratize" North Korea by means of a revolution similar to those in the post-Soviet neighborhood. North Korea "plans to insist that the United States remove its nuclear weapons from South Korea where they are reportedly deployed and from nearby regions," Kosachev noted. "The North Korean leadership said that the country possessed nuclear weapons, referring to this as a fait accompli," Kosachev added. At the same time, he stressed that North Korean representatives had confirmed their commitment to "imparting a nuclear-free status to the Korean Peninsula." Pyongyang believes that this goal can only be attained through talks," Kosachev went on to say. Among other things, North Korea is studying the possibility of resuming six-sided talks, if the United States renounces its statements. © 2005 "RIAN Novosti" ***************************************************************** 7 Xinhua: DPRK: No talks with US out of six-party framework www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-05-08 02:06:29 PYONGYANG, May 8 (Xinhuanet) -- The Foreign Ministry of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) said on Sunday that Pyongyang has no intention to hold bilateral talks with the United States separate from the framework of the six-party talks on the nuclear issues on the Korean Peninsula. "We have never requested the DPRK-US talks independent of the six-way talks," said a spokesman for the foreign ministry. "We had already clarified our stand that we cannot have any form of talks with the US nor can we deal with it as long as the DPRK is branded as 'an outpost of tyranny'." The official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), citing the spokesman, said that the government needed to clarify its standpoint over the recent US reports that Pyongyang will not continue taking part in the six-party talks but proposed DPRK-US talks. "Because there were press reports that the US is ready to recognize the DPRK as a sovereign state and hold bilateral talks within the framework of the six-party talks," he said, "we only expressed our intention to directly meet the US side to confirm whether those reports are true before making a final determination." "If the US truly wishes to settle the nuclear issue through thesix-party talks, it should stop ignoring and insulting its dialogue partner and try to create an atmosphere favorable for theresumption of the six-way talks," the spokesman said. He also reiterated DPRK's stand on establishing a non-nuclear Korean Peninsula through negotiation. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 Korea Times: Roh, Hu Urge NK to Return to Dialogue Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation By Shim Jae-yun Korea Times Correspondent MOSCOW - President Roh Moo-hyun and Chinese President Hu Jintao on Sunday called on North Korea to return to the six-party talks to discuss ways of resolving the escalating crisis over its nuclear weapons programs. During a summit meeting here on Sunday night, the two heads of state agreed that the nuclear issue must be addressed through dialogue without resorting to military options, according to Chong Wa Dae officials. ``They expressed deep concern over the lingering uncertain situation involving the North Korean nuclear problem,'' presidential secretary on foreign policy Chung Woo-sung said during a media briefing. Chung went on to say that the two leaders agreed on the need for the two nations to engage in more proactive efforts to find a peaceful solution to the nuclear standoff. Roh and Hu are here to attend the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II together with some 50 leaders from around the world. ``Presidents Roh and Hu discussed other issues of mutual concern, including the lingering dispute over Japan's distortion of modern history in its school textbooks and its claim of sovereignty over the Dokdo islets in the East Sea,'' Chung said. The South Korean head of state is also expected to have a brief meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday, officials said. The nuclear crisis is likely to dominate the informal, 15-minute discussion, which will be held at the end of the War Victory ceremony, they said. International concerns have deepened over Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions in recent weeks. Intelligence reports confirmed last month the North has shut down its Yongbyon plutonium reactor, possibly to extract spent fuel that could be used to bolster its nuclear arsenal. The United States on Saturday warned it has a ``robust deterrent capability'' to deal with North Korea amid signs it may be preparing for a nuclear test. Roh and Hu discussed ways to mediate an end to the dispute. South Korea and China have been opposing moves by hardliners in the U.S. administration to bring the North Korean nuclear issue to the United Nations Security Council, which they believe would exacerbate tensions. During their summit, the two leaders also urged Japan to address its historical wrongdoings in a more sincere and apologetic manner. However, they did not release a joint statement on the outcome of the talks. The summit has been drawing attention as it comes following a strong outcry in both South Korea and China regarding Japan's attempts to glorify its actions during World War II. Roh is scheduled to have a summit meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi in late June to discuss the textbook and Dokdo issues. He called on Japan to act first in a bid to resolve the lingering historical misgivings during a meeting with a group of Japanese politicians in Seoul last Friday. The president will attend the main ceremony of the war anniversary in Red Square on Monday. North Korea was also invited to the event but notified Russia it would not attend. Two ranking military officers will take part in the ceremony in the role of war veterans, not official representatives. ``On the occasion of the ceremony, President Roh will attempt to highlight the nation's image as an initiator of peace and prosperity in Northeast Asia, despite being the last divided nation in the world,'' presidential secretary Chung said. He will place a wreath on a grave for unnamed soldiers who died during World War II and attend an official lunch hosted by Putin. After his three-day stay here, Roh will fly to Uzbekistan Tuesday for summit talks with President Islam Karimov to discuss ways of promoting bilateral economic and security cooperation. Roh will invite ethnic Koreans residing in the Central Asian nation to a dinner meeting Wednesday after attending a luncheon organized by business leaders from the two nations. Roh and first lady Kwon Yang-suk arrived in Moscow Sunday and were received by Putin and his wife. jayshim@koreatimes.co.kr 05-08-2005 23:06 ***************************************************************** 9 AFP: Talk of six North Korea nuclear bombs worries US, UN Monday May 9, 08:45 AM WASHINGTON (AFP) - A UN atomic agency estimate that North Korea could have six nuclear weapons ratcheted up official Washington's worries that the Stalinist state may test a bomb as early as next month. CNN television Sunday asked International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei if North Korea had as many as six nuclear weapons. "I think that would be close to our estimation," he said. "We knew they had the plutonium that could be converted into five or six North Korea weapons. "We know that they had the industrial infrastructure to weaponize this plutonium. We have read also that they have the delivery system." ElBaradei's comments came two days after the New York Times reported that US officials familiar with satellite and intelligence data believed the Stalinist state was building a reviewing stand and filling in a tunnel, signs of a potential underground nuclear test. US officials have been urging North Korea to rejoin China, Japan, Russia and South Korea to join the United States in so-called six-party talks, which have been stalled since June, when the North quit the talks, citing "hostile" US policy. North Korea declared on February 10 that it had developed nuclear weapons to defend itself from the United States. However, the pace of events picked up this week, with press and IAEA reports on North Korea's nuclear weapons and delivery capabilities. As recently as April 29, the Pentagon referred to North Korea's ability to arm a long-range missile with a nuclear warhead as "theoretical." Since then, ElBaradei urged the international community to persuade North Korea to back off what could be an attempt to use the weapons as blackmail. "I'm not sure they will gain anything by testing other than provoking every member of the international community and bring -- and play a brinkmanship policy, which nobody will benefit," ElBaradei told CNN. US Senator Pat Roberts, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, urged North Korea to return to the six-party talks. The threat of a nuclear test "is the only card they have to play," the Kansas senator told CNN. "I think basically that (North Korean leader) Kim Jong-Il believes this is his card to play to stay on the world stage to make demands." However, Democratic California Senator Dianne Feinstein said it was not too late for US officials to meet North Korean demands for bilateral meetings instead of the six-way talks and said that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice should be involved. "I think Kim Jong-Il wants this dialogue. I see no reason, I see no harm in sitting down (at) the table with him and seeing if we can't change his direction," she told CNN. President Bill Clinton's secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, said the United States had missed opportunities to defuse the showdown earlier, "I'm very concerned about the box that we are now in with North Korea." The stakes are high and the threat is real, former acting CIA director John McLaughlin said. "This is one of the few countries in the world that is hostile to the United States and developing and has in its possession missiles that have an intercontinental capability," he said. A North Korean test would cause "a lot of insecurity fallout," ElBaradei said. "The impact on the whole East Asian and Japan, South Korea is tremendous." Copyright © 2005 AFP. All rights reserved. All information ***************************************************************** 10 Guardian Unlimited: Ministers Urge N. Korea on Nuclear Talks From the Associated Press [UP] Saturday May 7, 2005 5:01 PM AP Photo XKAN118 By NATALIE OBIKO PEARSON Associated Press Writer KYOTO, Japan (AP) - Asian and European nations urged North Korea on Saturday to return immediately to nuclear disarmament talks as concerns grew that the communist state was preparing to test an atomic bomb. Pyongyang could expect the security assurance and financial assistance it seeks in return for a decision to abandon nuclear weapons development and return to six-nation negotiations, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon said at a news conference. The ministers, wrapping up a two-day Asia-Europe Meeting in Japan, called on North Korea ``to return to the negotiating table of the six-party talks without any further delay ... to achieve the denuclearization of the peninsula in a peaceful manner through dialogue.'' Those talks include the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia. A U.S. defense official, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, said Friday that photos by U.S. spy satellites show North Korea making moves that could be construed as preparations for an underground nuclear test. Japan's Defense Agency also said it had information that the communist nation might be preparing for a nuclear test. Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura stressed that Tokyo had not confirmed whether the preparations were real but acknowledged that the communist country posed an increasing threat. ``It is very difficult to ascertain any of this,'' he said. ``In the meantime, nuclear and missile development has likely been proceeding steadily,'' since North Korea broke off the talks last June, Machimura said. Although North Korea has claimed it has nuclear weapons, an actual test would be a first. U.S. intelligence and other estimates put the number of their weapons between one and six. Machimura told Ban on Friday that Japan might bring North Korea's nuclear ambitions before the U.N. Security Council if the North continued to boycott talks. That would be a first step toward possible sanctions against the reclusive communist regime. North Korea's leaders have said they would consider sanctions a ``declaration of war.'' Jitters over North Korea's nuclear activities, as well as the test-firing earlier this week of a short-range missile toward Japan, set off a flurry of meetings at the Japan conference. Japanese, South Korean and Chinese officials met later Saturday and agreed to strengthen their efforts to bring North Korea back to the six-party negotiations. The ASEM forum includes the 25 EU states, the European Commission, the 10-country Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Japan, China and South Korea. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 11 NY Times Says Cold War Arsenals "Almost Quaintly Irrelevant" Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 11:55:15 -0400 This extraordinary line by the NYTimes and David Sanger needs letters/rebuttal. Not a word about international law and the obligation of the US, Russia and others to live up to the law and abolish their nuclear arsenals more than 35 years after the treaty went into effect and 16 years after the fall of the Berlin wall. Nor a peep about Russia's inability to monitor incoming objects and the very serious potential for accidental nuclear war. Not a word about nuclear winter. Amazing propaganda from the Times and Mr. Sanger. Orwellian, really. > the immensity of the cold war arsenals seems almost quaintly irrelevant today. Also, < Still, the nightmare that most worries experts these days is of nukes in the hands of those who did not learn nuclear discipline in the cold war days. This[just above] is an elitist position, be it accurate or not in referring to "experts." Nothing about the public and collective sentiment regarding nuclear weapons from around the world when polls have shown that many people want all nuke weapons abolished. >That is why, although the United States and Russia still have roughly 95 percent of the world's nuclear weapons, Washington and the world seem consumed these days by the remaining 5 percent. Again, Sanger refers to "Washington" [elitist and undemocratic] and grossly distorts reality with his line about the world being consumed by the remaining 5 per cent as much of the world is first and foremost concerned with the 5 NWS abolishing their nuclear arsenals in their entirety as they are mandated to under international law: http://www.cornnet.nl/~akmalten/docs.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/08/weekinreview/08marsh.html? Who Scares the Rest? (See Bottom Left) a.. By DAVID E. SANGER Published: May 8, 2005 MAYBE North Korea really is preparing to make the ground shake, to prove that its 50-year quest to acquire a nuclear arsenal has succeeded. Or maybe Kim Jong Il, son of the country's founder, is just playing with the rest of the world's heads. Interactive Graphic Truths of the Second Nuclear Age Either way, North Korea demonstrates a truth of the second nuclear age: The political power of atomic weapons no longer rests on the size of your stockpile, which was the measure during the cold war. Instead, it is linked to your ability to convince the world that you might just be crazy enough to use, or sell, whatever you've got. For those purposes, a half-dozen weapons are as good as 5,200, the current (if shrinking) size of America's operational arsenal. That is why, although the United States and Russia still have roughly 95 percent of the world's nuclear weapons, Washington and the world seem consumed these days by the remaining 5 percent. Though there is plenty of reason to worry that loose nuclear materials in the former Soviet Union could end up with Al Qaeda or Chechen separatists, the immensity of the cold war arsenals seems almost quaintly irrelevant today. Kofi Annan, the United Nations secretary general, alluded to that paradox in a suggestion he made in New York Monday at the opening of a review of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. If Washington and Moscow wanted to encourage the rest of the world to disarm, he said, they should meet their own obligations under the treaty and commit "to further cuts in their arsenals, so that warheads number in the hundreds, not the thousands." The Bush administration, which is contemplating new bunker-busting nuclear weapons, did not embrace the invitation. Nor did Vladimir Putin, Russia's president, who recently described the collapse of the Soviet Union as a geopolitical disaster. Still, the nightmare that most worries experts these days is of nukes in the hands of those who did not learn nuclear discipline in the cold war days. Three years ago, the fear was that Pakistan and India might let their rivalry in Kashmir ignite a nuclear exchange. They have since backed down, and kept their most recent face-off to the cricket fields. But North Korea doesn't play cricket. It negotiates by threats and escalation. So while heightened activities detected last week at a test site in the mountainous northeast may be a ruse, they may also be signs of North Korea's effort to gain more bargaining power by demonstrating that it really can set off a nuclear bomb. A test would instantly vaporize 15 percent or so of North Korea's suspected arsenal, of course. But it might still make sense to Mr. Kim, for the increase in the political value of the weapons left in storage. "I think it is easy to underestimate what the political effect of one weapon going off in Northeast Asia might be," said former Senator Sam Nunn, who spends much of his time trying to stem proliferation. "It would set in motion long-term concerns about other countries that want to develop nuclear weapons. It would create the impression - right or wrong - that the Koreans might be willing to use one or sell one." These days, he said, "there is no shortage of willing buyers." ***************************************************************** 12 [NukeNet] Bad Nukes Editorial in NY Times Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 19:14:56 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) I have not seen any any letters printed responding to this. Has anyone seen any letters printed in reponse to this? We submitted an Op-Ed that we already had in the works on the same day and they passed on it immediately. I assume a bunch of folks sent letters& May 4, 2005 EDITORIAL The Nuclear Power Option image00118.jpg n his sketchy speech on energy policy last week, President Bush placed a high priority on nuclear energy, which he described as "one of the safest, cleanest sources of power in the world." The president had good reason to suggest an important role for this much-feared energy source. The price of natural gas, the current fuel of choice for power plants, has risen sharply. And there is mounting evidence that damage from global warming may dwarf any environmental risk posed by nuclear power. It is therefore critical to keep nuclear power as part of the nation's energy mix. But Mr. Bush will have to address some crucial concerns before the public will follow him down the nuclear path with much enthusiasm. For starters, there is the awkward fact that nuclear power plants pose a risk of proliferating the materials and skills to make nuclear weapons. That is not an issue in the United States, which already has a mammoth nuclear arsenal. But if the United States resurrects its stagnant nuclear industry, other nations may also turn to nuclear power, with the risk that rogue nations may someday use the fuel to make bombs. The Bush administration will need to find ways, perhaps through the nuclear nonproliferation review that started yesterday, to ensure that power plants do not become an easy route to nuclear weapons. Beyond that, Mr. Bush will need to ensure that the pools holding spent fuel at domestic nuclear plants can be made safe from terrorists. He will have to devise a backup plan for storing nuclear waste, should the proposed burial site at Yucca Mountain prove untenable after legal and regulatory setbacks. He will need to invest in new, potentially safer reactor designs to allay longstanding concerns about accidents. Finally, one familiar impediment to nuclear power - the high capital costs required up front - could remain troublesome, unless the cost of competing fuels soars higher. None of these concerns need rule out this promising source of power. But they will need to be addressed forthrightly. Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top Rob Sargent Senior Energy Policy Analyst National Association of State PIRGs & affiliated organizations 44 Winter Street Boston, MA 02108 P: 617-747-4317 F: 617-292-8057 C: 617-312-7546 rsargent@pirg.org www.pirg.org Arizona PIRG * CALPIRG * Environment California * CoPIRG * Environment Colorado * ConnPIRG * Florida PIRG * Georgia PIRG* Iowa PIRG* Illinois PIRG* INPIRG * Environment Maine * MaryPIRG * MASSPIRG * PIRGIM * MoPIRG * MontPIRG * NHPIRG * NJPIRG Citizen Lobby * NMPIRG * NYPIRG * NCPIRG * OhioPIRG* Oregon State PIRG * PennPIRG * PennEnvironment * RIPIRG * TexPIRG * U.S. PIRG * VPIRG * WashPIRG * WISPIRG _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net Attachment Converted: image00118.jpg: 00000001,0a9fc405,00000000,00000000 ***************************************************************** 13 Deseret News: Reid says Demos are set to gain [deseretnews.com] Saturday, May 7, 2005 He tells S.L. audience that Bush's actions help their cause By Doug Smeath Deseret Morning News Democrats can gain significant ground in conservative Western states, and if they do, it will largely be thanks to President Bush, the Senate minority leader told Utah Democrats on Friday, a few hours after apologizing for calling the president a "loser" during a lecture in a high school civics class. Sen Harry Reid, D-Nev., apologized Friday for calling Bush a "loser" during a lecture at a high school. J. Scott Applewhite, Associated Press Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., told a crowd of about 900 gathered for the party's annual Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, a run-up to the party's state convention today, that the groundwork has already been laid in states like Utah. "The chief cornerstone of any political party is political activists, and we have 900 here tonight," he said. "The foundation is in place here in Utah, but the structure above the foundation is not. . . . Most of the assistance (in building the structure) is going to come from one person: President Bush." Reid outlined several steps Bush has taken that he believes will weaken the president's popularity and will be felt throughout the GOP. Among those was the president's push to privatize Social Security. "Social Security is not in crisis," he said. "If we as Congress do nothing with Social Security, President Bush will still draw his benefits until he's 106." He said the Republicans' support for the so-called "nuclear option," a proposed rules change to do away with the filibuster in Senate debates over judicial nominees, is widely unpopular and represents "an absolute abuse of power" among Republicans who already control the White House and both houses of Congress. Earlier Friday, Reid told a high school civics class in Las Vegas that Bush is "a loser." "The man's father is a wonderful human being," Reid told students at Del Sol High School when asked about the president's policies. "I think this guy is a loser." Shortly after the event Reid called the White House to apologize, his spokeswoman Tessa Hafen said. Reid spoke with Bush adviser Karl Rove, asking him to convey the apology to Bush, who was traveling in Europe. At the Utah event, Reid emphasized that the Democrats did not do as poorly in the 2004 election as is widely believed. While Bush was re-elected and seats were lost in Congress, Reid said Democrats gained at the grass-roots level, going from a 12-seat deficit in state legislatures to a 64-seat lead. But, he said, Democrats could have done better nationally. "We as Democrats ignored rural America," he said. He said Democrat John Kerry had wide support among voters in the Reno and Las Vegas areas, which represent 91 percent of Nevada's voters. He said the state should have gone to Kerry, but because rural voters were so strongly supportive of Bush, their large turnout left Bush the state's winner by 2 percentage points. "We have a message for rural America. While the banks are being supported by the Republicans, we're supporting the farmers," he said. "We're supporting better health care." He said a myth that needs to be countered is that Democrats lack values and religion. Reid, a member of the LDS Church, said his Democratic colleagues in the Senate "are every bit as religious" as the Republicans. In a briefing with reporters before the dinner, Reid said that Utah's LDS voters should listen to the church's general authorities, who regularly remind members to vote not based on party but based on who is the better candidate. "Morality is in the eye of the beholder," he told reporters. At the dinner, he told of receiving a joint letter from several mainstream Christian churches across the country condemning Bush's budget as "immoral" because of its effects on the poor and its cuts in education funding. "What they've done to teachers is immoral," Reid said. "What they've done to firefighters is wrong. What they've done to police officers is wrong. What they've done to nurses is wrong. What they've done to science is wrong." © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 14 Salt Lake Tribune: BUNKER-BUSTER REPORT: Earth-penetrating nuke would not spare civilians No such thing Opinion Article Last Updated: 05/07/2005 01:25:35 AM There can be no such thing as a clean, tidy little nuclear bomb that would destroy a deeply buried target without killing a lot of people. Wishing otherwise, as the Bush administration does, cannot change the laws of physics. That's the conclusion of a science panel that studied the government's proposal to build an earth-penetrating nuclear bomb, a so-called bunker-buster. The panel's report punches a hole in the government's argument for designing, and subsequently testing, such a bomb. The study found that a bunker-buster could destroy the target, but it would not be much better at sparing people nearby than an above-ground nuclear warhead of the same yield. For one thing, it would create a huge amount of radioactive debris. Casualties would range from hundreds to millions of people, depending upon the explosive force of the weapon, whether the target was in an urban or a rural area and how fallout was distributed by the winds. Despite the report, Donald Rumsfeld, the secretary of defense, still wants to build a bunker-buster. He argues that 70 countries are building facilities underground, sometimes in solid rock, that can resist attack by nonpenetrating nuclear weapons. "We don't have the capability of dealing with that," he told a Senate hearing. "The only thing we have is very large, very dirty, big nuclear weapons. So . . . do we want to have nothing and only a large, dirty nuclear weapon, or would we rather have something in between?" What seems to elude the secretary, in this talk worthy of Dr. Strangelove, is that any attack by nuclear weapons would be catastrophic. All nukes are big and dirty. That's what the science panel is trying to tell him. While Rumsfeld is talking like this, the United States is trying to hector other nations, including Iran and North Korea, into giving up their efforts to obtain nuclear weapons. Yet by refusing to drastically reduce and eventually eliminate its own nuclear arsenal, as the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty requires, the United States is, in effect, arguing for the military utility of nuclear weapons. If the United States, the most powerful conventional and nuclear military power in the world, believes it must modernize its nuclear force by building a bunker-buster, why would Iran and North Korea, which are threatened by the United States, conclude they should not do everything in their power to join the nuclear club? © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 15 projo.com: The future of energy Providence, R.I. | Opinion: Editorials 01:00 AM EDT on Friday, May 6, 2005 Visionaries tell us that sometime in the next quarter-century we might not need polluting coal, oil and (less polluting) natural gas to supply our energy needs. We'll have environmentally benign hydrogen fuel cells to run our vehicles and keep our electrical grid humming with electrons stripped off hydrogen atoms. And we'll also have more solar and wind energy. It's a beguiling image -- our cities as clean and fresh-smelling as the Cascades and the country finally rid of the "foreign entanglements" (Goodbye, Saudi Arabia; goodbye, Venezuela) that George Washington warned of. Finally! After all, America's production peaked 30 years ago. World oil production may be peaking now. Theorists such as Amory Lovins concede that we will still need some fossil fuel to electrolytically extract hydrogen from water. Facilities for that purpose could be in remote locations, where the hydrogen would be pressurized and then piped to buildings where fuel cells would provide heating, ventilation, air conditioning and lights, and to "hydrogen stations" for fuel-cell-powered cars. Still, some maintain that the hydrogen economy would require a lot more energy than that. What about the fact that energy is never transferred with perfect efficiency -- that some is dissipated as heat? Then there's nuclear energy, which is getting a new look as our energy challenge steepens -- environmentally, economically and geo-politically. A kilogram of uranium undergoing fission produces 400,000 kilowatt hours of electricity. If it's recycled through various stages, it can produce 7 million kwh. Burning a kilogram of oil, by contrast, produces four kwh. There are 104 nuclear-power plants in America, most constructed between 1970 and 1990, generating about 20 percent of our electricity. We'd need about a thousand plants to produce the BTUs that our economy consumes. This is possible. While permitting of new plants has stagnated for the last 20 years, the technology of nuclear power has not. One thing that new plants won't have is fuel rods. The safer, cheaper "pebble bed" reactors use graphite-coated spheres of uranium the size of tennis balls. Then there is the long-frustrated hope that energy from nuclear fusion, which doesn't present the radioactive-waste perils that fission does, might become a reality sometime in the next decade. For now, there are many questions to be resolved: What do we do with nuclear waste? What are safe levels of radiation exposure? What about the dangers of terrorism? We must answer these difficult questions, yet nuclear energy -- we would hope via fusion -- would seem at this point to be one of the keys to a great dream: a non-polluting energy future. © 2005, Published by The Providence Journal Co., 75 Fountain ***************************************************************** 16 Brattleboro Reformer: Phish drummer joins New England Coalition May 08, 2005 Brattleboro, VT By CAROLYN LORIé Reformer Staff BRATTLEBORO -- Now that Phish has disbanded, drummer Jon Fishman is channeling his frenetic rock and roll energy into a new career -- environmental activist. To that end, the Essex resident will be voted in as the newest board member of the nuclear watchdog, the New England Coalition. The vote will take place today at the group's annual meeting in Walpole, N.H. According to Fishman, during Phish's 20-year tenure as Vermont's favorite homegrown rock band, he wanted to use the band's fame to promote causes he believed in. His band mates, though equally passionate about many of the same issues, felt their focus should stay on the music. So the drummer put his activist urges on hold and stuck to the business of being a rock star. But now that he's lived out every musician's dream, he said he is eager to leave the insular world of celebrity and fulfill his civic obligations. "When you become a rock star, it's easy to adopt a the-world-doesn't-matter attitude," said Fishman. "[But] I want the world to be a better place. I have to, I've got children." As soon as the band made the decision to call it quits, Fishman sought out environmental projects to get involved with. Inspired by Robert Kennedy Jr.'s "Crimes Against Nature," the musician got involved with the Conservation Law Foundation, an environmental advocacy group based in New England. It didn't take long for Fishman to get inundated with requests for support from various nonprofits. One of those requests came from Peter Alexander, executive director of the Brattleboro-based New England Coalition. After talking to Alexander, Fishman says he came to the conclusion that all other efforts to protect the environment were moot as long as nuclear power plants are in operation. "The nuke-thing is at the root of the tree," he says. "What good is a clean lake if you've got a radioactive cloud over it?" The coalition was founded in 1971 and for the past two years has devoted most of its effort to battling the request made by officials at the Vermont Yankee nuclear power station in Vernon to increase power by 20 percent. Fishman says he hopes his fame will help the coalition grab the attention of other Vermonters who have concerns about nuclear power. But, he adds, he isn't interested in just being a celebrity spokesman: He wants to be an informed participant and advocate. To reach his goal, the drummer has embarked on an education process that includes reading up on current issues and meeting key players in the state's environmental movement. "I've got to practice what I preach," he says. In addition to joining the board and addressing today's annual meeting, Fishman will join Alexander's Goodtime Band as part of a fund-raiser for the coalition. "To have him join the board is a huge honor and privilege," said Peter Alexander, who heads the band. "And to have him play with us is a musician's dream come true." Today's annual meeting of the New England Coalition will be held at Alyson's Orchard in Walpole. It is open to the public and will start at 5 p.m. There will be a picnic dinner at 6 p.m. and a dance event at 7:30 p.m. The suggested donation is $10. Seating is limited. For more information call the coalition office at (802) 257-0336. Copyright ©1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., ***************************************************************** 17 [NYTr] Egypt "Bogs Down" UN Nuclear Conference Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 10:26:00 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Egypt is trying to bring attention to the "comprehensive" part of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. The big nuke states will avoid, at any cost, talking about their own nuclear weapons programs and proliferation, and of course the US wants to use the conference to spread hysteria about Iran and North Korea -- and god forbid anyone should mention the outlaw states like Israel that have refused to even sign on. So Egypt, and any other country like Cuba which seeks to use the treaty conference for real progress on nuclear non-proliferation, will be accused of "scuttling" agreements and impeding the conference.-NY Transfer] AP via Yahoo - May 6, 2005 http://story.news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050506/ap_on_re_us/un_nuclear_treaty Egypt Bogs Down UN Nuclear Conference By CHARLES J. HANLEY AP Special Correspondent UNITED NATIONS - Egypt's last-minute objection Friday scuttled a seeming agreement on how to move ahead with a monthlong review of the world's key nuclear treaty, leaving the conference still without an agenda in its fifth day. A deadlocked, unproductive conference could weaken the 35-year-old Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, perhaps opening the way over time to more nuclear weapons states in the world, arms control experts say. "We have to start work, and we have to start substantive work," said the frustrated conference president, Sergio de Queiroz Duarte of Brazil. The Egyptians wanted agenda language that focused more on assessing how well the nuclear weapons powers have done in taking specific steps toward nuclear disarmament, under commitments they made in 2000 at the last of these twice-a-decade conferences. Nuclear "have-nots" complain that the Bush administration, in particular, has taken steps contrary to those commitments, such as rejecting the nuclear test-ban treaty. Washington, for its part, wants the conference to focus on what it alleges are Iran's plans to build nuclear arms in violation of the treaty, and on North Korea's withdrawal from the treaty and claim to have nuclear bombs. Under the 1970 pact, nations without nuclear weapons pledge not to pursue them, in exchange for a commitment by five nuclear-weapons states the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China to negotiate toward nuclear disarmament. A third "pillar" of the treaty guarantees access to peaceful nuclear technology for nonweapons states. Citing that article, Iran has developed uranium-enrichment facilities, which can produce fuel for nuclear power plants and, if the process is extended, material for nuclear bombs. On this nuclear-fuel issue, proposals have been made for the treaty conference to consider international controls over fuel production and guarantees of fuel supplies, in order to keep sensitive enrichment technology out of more hands. Other proposals focus on the treaty's disarmament "pillar," such as again pushing for activation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and for negotiation of a treaty ending production of bomb material everywhere. Those were two among "13 practical steps" toward disarmament the weapons states committed to at the 2000 conference. In the months leading up to this conference, where decisions generally must come by consensus among the more than 180 delegations, the United States resisted agenda language referring to those commitments too specifically. In the end, sometime this week, an explicit reference to the 2000 conference was dropped from the proposed agenda, delegates reported. Duarte, the conference president, apparently thought he had agreement on the document Friday morning and announced it would be adopted. Then the Egyptian delegation objected, asking for insertion of words, such as "outcomes," to signify the 2000 commitments. "We will continue to search for consensus," an unhappy Duarte said, and private consultations followed. Although only Egypt objected on the open floor, a well-placed diplomat, speaking privately, said Cairo had considerable support from other members of the 116-nation Nonaligned Movement. A prolonged delay might keep the global gathering from dealing with the most contentious issues surrounding the nonproliferation treaty. Although not legally binding, like a treaty, consensus positions taken at these reviews are considered political commitments. * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 18 [progchat_action] Fw: REPORT ON GLOBAL NETWORK CONFERENCE Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 01:50:08 -0500 (CDT) ----- Original Message ----- From: Global Network To: Global Network Against Weapons Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 7:53 AM Subject: REPORT ON GLOBAL NETWORK CONFERENCE REPORT ON GLOBAL NETWORK CONFERENCE The 13th annual Global Network (GN) space organizing conference was held in New York City on April 29-30. Over 200 people attended the weekend GN event that concluded with participation in the No Nukes! No War! march by the United Nations and rally in Central Park. Crowd estimates for the demonstration ranged from 30,000-40,000 and was organized by Abolition Now and United for Peace & Justice. The GN business meeting was held on April 29. Following a series of reports, Dave Knight, the GN United Nations Representative, led a strategy discussion. Here are some of the ideas people came up with: a.. Hold public debates with those who say they oppose space weaponization but who support the use of space technology to direct warfare on earth. (The GN is opposed to this "militarization" of space that uses space satellites to implement "shock and awe" war like the invasion of Iraq). b.. Keep making the moral and ethical arguments against the nuclearization and weaponization of space. c.. Expand outreach to student groups. d.. Make more effort to reach teacher organizations. e.. Continue making the connections between budget cuts for human needs programs and an expanding Star Wars program. f.. Keep publicly identifying the aerospace corporations involved in Star Wars. g.. Talk more about how the U.S. is addicted to war and how military spending creates fewer jobs than if our tax dollars were invested in alternative job creation. h.. Find ways to reach out to popular culture. i.. Produce a guide for home study groups on this issue. j.. Expand outreach to churches. k.. Utilize art more often to express our concerns. (Peace Action Maine recently held an art opening called "War Flowers: Swords into Plowshares" to introduce the economic conversion issue in the state. The art show will travel around the state throughout 2005-2006). l.. Learn more about framing of issues. m.. Send word about the GN's speakers bureau out more often. n.. Make connections with those who talk to people in their jobs (bartenders, taxi drivers, hair dressers...) o.. Connect with the movement called "De-cap," the global call against poverty. During this meeting the GN also committed to hosting a program at the World Peace Forum 2006 in Vancouver, Canada. (The director of the forum attended our April 30 conference as well). The meeting concluded with discussion about where the GN's 2006 annual space organizing conference would be held. No decisions were made and it was agreed that we would put out a call to our affiliates for proposals. Some locations were suggested such as Vancouver, Japan, Eastern Europe, and the United Kingdom. It was agreed that our next meeting should be held outside of the United States. On April 30 a standing room only crowd of 200 packed into the Musicians Union hall for the day long GN space organizing conference called Full Spectrum Resistance. GN board convener Dave Webb, from Yorkshire CND in England, welcomed people who had come from all over the U.S. and from around the world. Mixing music by Holly Gwinn Graham and Tom Neilson throughout the day, the conference heard local reports from key activists around the world and then listened to a panel discuss strategy. Karl Grossman reported that Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) had called the GN office to say she intends to lead a fight to defund Project Prometheus, the nuclear rocket that is being funded at over $400 million in 2005. Rep. McKinney is sending a "Dear Colleague" letter to Congress inviting them to join her in the effort. (We urge all of our supporters to contact their congressperson urging them to join her.) The Sisters of Loretto brought a group of high school students from a rural Missouri community and one of them read a beautiful essay he had written about the impact of nuclear war on nature. A second group of students, organized by GN board member Wolfgang Schlupp-Hauck in Germany, made a fine presentation outlining a more positive vision for 2020 than the current Space Command vision of control and domination of the heavens. During one session it was reported that 12 of our friends in Australia had organized a solidarity action at an Australian space facility on April 29. A second announcement was given about students at the University of Hawaii occupying the office of the university president in protest of the military industrial complex takeover of the institution. A wonderful buffet dinner was catered and a fine group of kitchen volunteers, led by Carole Abrahams from New York City, kept the crowd eating and drinking all day long. Dr. Michio Kaku, a GN founding member, was the first of two keynote speakers. As usual, Michio received a rousing reception. He was followed by Jenny Jones, the former deputy mayor of London who had come to New York as part of the Mayors for Peace delegation. Each year the GN gives out a "Peace in Space" award to a person who has made extraordinary effort on behalf of the movement. This year we gave two awards, both to Canadian activists, for their tireless and successful efforts to keep Canada from joining the U.S. Star Wars program. The award went to Tamara Lorincz (Halifax Peace Coalition) and Steven Staples (Polaris Institute in Ottawa). They each also made outstanding presentations during the conference. Dave Webb presented a moving photo memorial of GN board member Satomi Oba who recently unexpectedly died. Satomi, a past recipient of our Peace in Space award, lived in Hiroshima, Japan and we have created our 2005 Keep Space for Peace Week poster in her honor. On Sunday, May 1 many of us from the conference gathered to march from the United Nations to Central Park. We carried several GN space banners and were quite moved at the beautiful and creative line of march. When we arrived at Central Park for the rally a huge peace sign was being created with the bodies of the marchers. I had the honor of being invited to speak to the crowd and made good use of my time explaining how space satellites were used to coordinate the invasion of Iraq. I also mentioned Bush's plans for deployment of anti-satellite weapons and the nuclear rocket. The GN conference was truly a wonderful gathering of our global family of space for peace activists. Once again we heard many people remarking about the loving and generous spirit that filled the conference. We are grateful for all the work each of you do and look forward to many more gatherings in the years ahead. Bruce K. Gagnon Coordinator Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space PO Box 652 Brunswick, ME 04011 (207) 729-0517 (207) 319-2017 (Cell phone) globalnet@mindspring.com http://www.space4peace.org http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Our blog) ***************************************************************** 19 The Observer: A question we can duck no longer [UP] We can't rely on renewable energy to cut emissions, says Brian Wilson Sunday May 8, 2005 The Observer The reason energy policy was the dog that didn't bark during the election campaign is that each party has a problem in making its public position sound credible. They all pay homage to the need to address climate change. It is more difficult to put forward solutions that are both convincing and cost-free to the electorate. But there is going to have to be a major review of how the UK plans to meet its domestic targets and international obligations on emissions. The pretence that this can be achieved through renewables and energy efficiency will have to be abandoned. Two pennies are dropping. The first is that there is a dichotomy between aiming for massive reduction in demand while making political virtue out of cheap energy. It just isn't happening, particularly in the domestic sector. Second, the pursuit of renewables is self-defeating if their benefit in carbon reduction terms is cancelled out for 20 years by the decline of nuclear power. More than anything else, it is this latter consideration that has put nuclear back on the agenda. Contrary to Greenpeace conspiracy theories, there is no done deal about nuclear plants. Labour governments are no longer in the business of building power stations, nuclear or otherwise. So it is still far from clear whether there will be sufficient impetus from the private sector to make new-build a reality. The least the industry will look for is a government-backed hedge against the kind of short-term price slump that brought British Energy to the verge of bankruptcy. The lesson of that episode was that nuclear cannot survive in a wholly market-based system because there are irreducible regulatory costs attached to it. Progress has been made over the past couple of years in encouraging interest groups to recognise common cause rather than look for enemies. There should be major places in Britain's energy mix for nuclear, renewables and clean coal technology and the overall effect will only be to limit the disproportionate reliance being planned for imported gas. According to the government's own projections, 70 per cent of Britain's electricity will come from gas by 2020 and 90 per cent of that gas will be imported. For a country whose entire industrial history has been based on energy self-sufficiency, that is a massive step. There are implications for foreign policy as well as economic and energy strategies. I detect a growing recognition that assumptions about gas being both cheap and available for decades to come have been a little too glib. And how environmentally responsible is it to scour the world for gas in order to turn it into electricity? The other critical policy area is transport - but the sensibilities here are, if anything, greater. We didn't hear much from the Liberal Democrats during the election about raising fuel duty by more than inflation, while their opposition to congestion charging in Edinburgh confirms that, for the time being, they, too, are more concerned about votes than floods. No party can evade these issues for much longer. Warning signs are flashing from the US where - thanks to SUVs - the average fuel efficiency of vehicles has actually declined since the early 1980s. If there is a way of controlling such trends that does not involve taxation, no party has yet unveiled it. The three imperatives of energy policy must be security of supply, affordability and carbon reduction. Within these parameters, there is huge potential for creative policy making. · Brian Wilson was Energy Minister from 2001-2003 Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 20 Guardian Unlimited: One last chance to ensure world safety How Tony Blair deals with Britain's nuclear future will indicate if he really is serious about listening more and being less aggressive Mary Riddell Sunday May 8, 2005 A few weeks from now, the world will mark the anniversary of Hiroshima. Sixty years have passed since a US President announced the dropping of an atomic bomb and warned the enemy to capitulate or face 'a rain of ruin from the air, the like of which has never been seen on this earth'. Memories of black drizzle and melting bodies have faded, but old threats have a longer half-life. As Tony Blair takes office for the third time, the nuclear folder is open on his desk. Decisions must be taken in this parliament on both energy and weaponry. Opponents of the former worry about preserving the planet. Opponents of the latter worry about whether there will be a planet to preserve. Back in the 1980s, I campaigned, like many people I knew then, to warn of the folly of Britain's stance. Though everyone in my rural backwater in north-east Scotland was courteous, it was clear that nuclear Armageddon struck them as less likely than being savaged by a stray hippopotamus on Inverurie high street. They were right. The Cold War ended, the mood changed and CND became dissociated from mild peaceniks and linked, often unfairly, with better-red-than-dead extremism. The nuclear issue was also a requiem to old Labour. Michael Foot's 1983 manifesto pledge of unilateral disarmament was more than the longest suicide note in history. It was also a memorandum to all future leaders: love the bomb or face political death. By the time Neil Kinnock gave up his subscription, being in CND was as advisable for the ambitious politician as admitting to membership of the Spearmint Rhino gentlemen's topless club. A generation on, Mr Blair is back in the nuclear arena with two decisions to take. Should Britain replace its fleet of Trident submarines, at a minimum cost of £10 billion? And should he authorise a new wave of nuclear power stations? The backdrop to both questions is the month-long meeting in New York of the 188 signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. This five-yearly review has finished its first week and the auguries are not brilliant. Kofi Annan has warned that nuclear catastrophe would have global consequences. North Korea, which pulled out of the treaty, has just tested an unarmed short-range missile. Iran has threatened to break a deal with Europe and resume its nuclear fuel programme. Delegates have barely been able to agree an agenda, let alone a way ahead. Back in the days of mutually assured destruction, the world seemed poised to implode at a button's push. How strange to think that we ought be more frightened now. Rogue states can build weapons, calculating the threat will keep America at bay. The stateless can pick up ingredients for a dirty bomb almost at will, when 600 tonnes of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium is littered around Russia alone. Once, it was all about deterrence. But in an age of pre-emption, planned US mini-nukes are not for show, while the outgoing Defence Secretary, Geoff Hoon, warned of deploying British nuclear weapons almost as casually as if he was talking about pea-shooters. The unthinkable has become the usable and Britain and America are knotted in contradictions. Demonising Iran and North Korea alone sits oddly with the tacit approval of India, Pakistan and Israel, which are known (or assumed in Israel's case) to have the bomb. Demanding that others disarm while Washington and London build new weapons is optimistic, to say the least. Nor is there much logic in Article IV of the treaty, which enshrines 'the inalienable right... to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes'. Unless, of course, you are talking about Iran again, in which case it is assumed, probably correctly, that a civil programme may become the smokescreen for producing weapons-grade uranium. Since you cannot have one treaty for those who consider themselves the good guys and another one for the rogues, it is incumbent on Britain to adopt the standards it demands of others. On arms, the case barely needs making. Britain does not need nuclear weapons and, on the evidence of Hoon's swagger, it is not to be trusted with them either. On power, there are many arguments against rushing down the nuclear route. The postwar myths of 'atoms for peace' and 'electricity too cheap to meter' sound hollow now, against the reality of toxic waste and a £650 million government bail-out for the nuclear firm, British Energy, in 2002. Mr Blair and his blue-skies thinker, Lord Birt, are said to be evangelists for nuclear power. They should think of other ways to meet the 20 per cent reduction target in carbon dioxide emissions by 2010. Even doubling the UK's nuclear capacity would only account for an 8 per cent drop. The first step is simply to use less fuel, rather than committing to an option which is neither clean nor cutprice. And, even if it were, there is a wider risk. The military and civil programmes cannot be wholly separated. London may not blur the two in the same way as Tehran, but we are supposed to set a good example. A defining feature of this Labour term is its promised safety kitemark. More listening, less aggression is the mantra of a humbler Prime Minister who may owe his re-election to voters' faith that he means it. But aggression has its own momentum, even when those who espoused war are suing for peace. Some terrorists attached to dubious states, or none, may have no compunction in seeking nuclear solutions. If Mr Blair is really to step away from US unilateralism and align himself with Europe and with all those who renounce brutal weapons, then his last best chance is now. The Hiroshima anniversary rolls round. Iraqi children still lie shrouded in the streets, as Japanese ones once did. Mr Blair is not the only one who is sick of war. Contrary to newspaper reports, experts such as Nigel Chamberlain, of the nuclear think-tank BASIC, are almost certain that the Prime Minister has not yet made his decision on nuclear arms. Indisputably, though, he is on the brink of doing so. If Britain cannot lead the club of armed nations towards a nuclear-free world by 2020, then no one will. This time around, a Labour leader's decision to give up a nuclear fleet would not strike the electorate as folly. It would look like careful stewardship of a planet at unprecedented risk from casual crooks and states engaged in a game of daredevil deterrence with a US whose preference is to strike first and think later. Forget the ID cards, the oppressive anti-terror legislation and the rash of super-casinos that Mr Blair cannot now drive through parliament. Many of us never wanted them and few will mourn their absence. But he should also forget a post-Trident deterrent, for the safety of this country and all others. The global nuclear stockpile, though reduced, could still destroy the planet many times over and the non-proliferation pact creaks at its ancient seams. The world has had its second chance of survival. Unlike Mr Blair, it may not get a third. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 21 AxisofLogic: US-UK-Italian Uranium Science Fraudulent : Patients Betrayed by Italian Scientist U.S. Military By Bob Nichols May 8, 2005, 10:27 May 8, 2005 – (Oklahoma City) Nuclear Weapons Lab scientist Leuren Moret today accused three Western governments of condoning and promoting science fraud relating to Radiation Poisoning from the use of Uranium Weapons in Iraq and Central Asia by Italian scientist Antonietta Morena Gatti. Moret has spoken in forty-two countries and numerous international court cases about the hazard uranium represents to the human race. Moret consulted famed former Manhattan Project scientist and consultant to the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab, Marion Fulk, before making the announcement. The Manhattan Project constructed the first atomic bombs used against humans in war time in August 1945. Moret stated "Gatti posted mass spec profiles on her website which showed what common metals were detected but the profiles were cut off (edited) where uranium shows up on the profile. The presentation of her information was done in a way that hides or omits the uranium spike which is the likely culprit." Moret stated about Gatti "It was obvious that Gatti is very competent, and would know that uranium might be a factor to take into consideration in her research, and would certainly know how to identify and measure it. It is very unlikely that this is simple gross negligence, sloppy science, or incompetence." Moret continued "This dreadful woman [Gatti] has violated the trust of Susan Riordan, dishonored the memory of Terry Riordan, and scammed all to further her own ambitions. It is vital at this time for the Italian government to cover up the harm of DU because there are sick Italian soldiers who served in the Balkans and Iraq, and Italian soldiers are shooting DU into the fisheries in coastal Sardinia where fisherman are making a huge political stink. Moret concluded "I think Gatti's 'science spin' is reprehensible... and I am sorry for Susan and Terry that they have been used in such a political way." The Terry Riordan Memorial fund at the includes this information about Captain Terry Riordan: "Terry Riordon was a member of the Canadian Armed Forces serving in the Gulf War. He passed away in April 1999 at the age of 45. The official cause of death was Gulf War Syndrome." Terry went to the Persian Gulf in December 26, 1990 with honor, dignity and pride - serving his country as Captain J. Terry Riordon of the Canadian Armed Forces. Terry left Canada a very fit man who did cross-country skiing and ran in marathons. On his return only two months later he could barely walk." "He returned to Canada in February 1991 with documented loss of motor control, chronic fatigue, respiratory difficulties, chest pain, difficulty breathing, sleep problems, short-term memory loss, testicle pain, body pains, aching bones, diarrhea, and depression. After his death depleted uranium (DU) contamination was discovered in his lungs and bones." "For eight years he suffered his innumerable ailments and struggled with the military bureaucracy and the system to get proper diagnosis and treatment. His wife, Susan Riordon, speaks most eloquently of the nightmare of physical, mental and emotional hardship endured not just by Terry but his entire family." "He was ultimately unsuccessful in getting the answers or help he needed in his lifetime. His final wish was to donate his body to independent research on DU. That was Terry's gift to all who served in the Persian Gulf. He wanted his body to supply the answers to years of suffering and frustration. Through his gift UMRC was able to have obtain conclusive evidence of internal DU contamination in his lungs and bones. Even after death Terry continues to contribute to his country and his fellow veterans." "You can honour Terry Riordon's memory and other veterans who gave their lives and health for their country. UMRC has established the "Terry Riordon Memorial Fund" to help make possible scientific research on uranium and informed medical diagnosis of exposed persons. By making a financial donation, you are supporting essential work that has as yet to be undertaken seriously by public agencies in Canada." "All contributions are tax deductible in the United States and Canada. Donations are made payable to Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC). Please indicate that the donation is directed to the 'Terry Riordon Memorial Fund'." "UMRC is pleased to be supported by Susan Riordon, Captain Riordon's widow. She is also the Chair, Canadian Peacekeeping Veteran Association (CPVA) - Atlantic Regional." © Copyright 2005 by AxisofLogic.com Bob Nichols is a Project Censored Award Winner and lives in Oklahoma. He is a frequent contributor to AxisofLogic.com, other online publications and the "San Francisco Bay View" newspaper. Nichols is a former employee of the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant. Nichols can be reached by email at this GoogleMail address: ***************************************************************** 22 Xinhua: IAEA to bring nuke technology under stricter control www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-05-07 12:27:30 Beijing May 7 -- The United Nation's nuclear watchdog says global support should be in place to bring uranium and plutonium technology under stricter control. Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency made such comment at a month-long conference to review the workings of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. He added that more work need to be mobilized to keepnuclear bomb-making gear out of more hands. "Everybody understands that if we continue in that fashion, pretty soon, in the next 10, 20 years, we'll have 20, 30 countries whom I would call virtual nuclear-weapons states, meaning countries that could move within months into converting their civilian capacity or capability into a weapons programme." Against the backdrop that Iran's intention to resume its uranium-enrichment program, and fears of North Korea's new-round of nuclear test, ElBaradei warned that the UN body should not just sit still (Source: CRIENGLISH.com) Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 Xinhua: NPT conference fails to adopt agenda www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-05-07 21:33:48 Beijing May 7 -- Scores of countries have agreed on an overdue agenda for the conference reviewing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but a last-minute objection by Egypt stalled progress once again. Egypt is seeking a greater agenda focus on assessing how well the nuclear powers have done in meeting commitments on specific steps toward nuclear disarmament. Many non-weapon states complain that the United States has taken steps contrary to the commitment, such as rejecting the nuclear test-ban treaty. The conference president, Brazilian diplomat Sergio de Queiroz Duarte, announced he will gather delegates to continue discussions. Iranian-U.S. disagreements during the first four days of the month-long conference previously stalled the adoption of the agenda. The international meeting on halting the proliferation of nuclear weapons kicked off on Monday at the United Nations headquarters in New York. (Source: CRIENGLISH.com) Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 24 Japan Times: ASEM talks kicks off amid strained ties with neighbors Saturday, May 7, 2005 By ERIC JOHNSTON Staff writer KYOTO -- The two-day foreign ministerial conference of the Asia-Europe Meeting began in Kyoto on Friday evening as tensions lingered over Japan's rocky relations with its Asian neighbors and its differences with the European Union over the lifting of an arms embargo on China. Prior to the opening of the ASEM conference, Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura held a series of informal meetings with his counterparts from the European Union, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and South Korea. Current tension between Japan and neighboring South Korea and China over historical viewpoints and territorial issues as well as Japan's disagreement with the European Union over its plans to lift its arms embargo on China, dominated the discussions. During Machimura's talks with South Korean Foreign Affairs and Trade Minister Ban Ki Moon, the two sides repeated their positions on the territorial row over disputed islets in the Sea of Japan controlled by South Korea and also claimed by Japan. Machimura told reporters that the issue was brought up during the talks, but that no progress had been made. On Monday, Chin Dae Je, the South Korean information and communication minister, paid a surprise visit to the islets -- called Takeshima in Japan and Tok-do in South Korea -- to inspect communications antennas. Machimura said progress had been made on issues pertaining to history and expressed Japan's desire for a new joint Japanese-South Korean panel of scholars to study various historical issues concerning the two countries. Machimura said he agreed with Ban that Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi should visit Seoul in late June for talks with President Roh Moo Hyun. Machimura told reporters that he and Ban shared the view that, despite recent tensions, bilateral relations were headed in a positive direction. Differences appear to remain between the two on how to pressure North Korea to return to the stalled six-party talks on its nuclear program. "In June, it will have been nearly a year since the last six-nations conference was held," Machimura told reporters. "Japan seeks a diplomatic solution with China taking a major role. But if the talks cannot be restarted, other options will have to be considered." Hatsuhisa Takashima, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, said Machimura and Ban did not specifically discuss taking the North Korean nuclear issue to the United Nations Security Council, but acknowledged it was still possible. "That is one option. But another option is holding five-nation talks without North Korea," Takashima said. South Korea prefers diplomacy without taking the issue to the United Nations, which would normally involve discussing sanctions. During his talks with EU officials earlier in the day, Machimura repeated Japan's opposition to the EU's plans. But Jean Asselborn, minister of foreign affairs for Luxembourg, which currently holds the EU presidency, said the issue should be discussed on a rational basis. "Lifting the embargo does not mean replace with nothing, but means replace with it with a code of conduct," he told a Friday news conference. The Japan Times: May 7, 2005 ***************************************************************** 25 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Nuclear Chief Pushes 'Sea Change' From the Associated Press [UP] Saturday May 7, 2005 1:01 PM AP Photo NYR119 By CHARLES J. HANLEY Associated Press Writer UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Sixty years after Hiroshima, Mohamed ElBaradei has big ideas for changing the way the world handles the atom. The sweeping overhaul he envisions - bringing uranium and plutonium technology under tougher, possibly international control - would mean a ``sea change'' in the nuclear realm. But it's necessary, the U.N. nuclear chief says, ``because we are facing a threat.'' ElBaradei spoke with The Associated Press on Friday at the end of a week in which he canvassed support for his ideas at a conference here of more than 180 nations reviewing the status of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. He said he expects to win global support to begin planning such changes, in part because of the current alarm over Iran's ability to establish a uranium-enrichment capability. ``Everybody understands that if we continue in that fashion, in the next 10, 20 years we'll have 20, 30 countries that I would call virtual nuclear-weapons states, meaning countries that could move within months into converting their civilian capacity or capability into a weapons program,'' said ElBaradei, director-general of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran's enrichment program, using centrifuges that can produce uranium fuel for either nuclear power plants or nuclear bombs, is a major issue at the treaty review. Tehran says the program is meant only for peaceful purposes of civilian energy; Washington contends it is a cover for eventual bomb-building. Under the 1970 nonproliferation treaty, states like Iran without nuclear weapons renounce them forever in exchange for a commitment by nuclear-weapons states to move toward disarmament. Access to peaceful technology is guaranteed under the treaty, but ElBaradei said the spread of such capabilities has become a ``serious problem.'' The tighter controls he envisions ``would be a real sea change in the way we have been managing nuclear energy,'' the IAEA chief said. He has asked the current treaty conference to consider several possible approaches suggested by an IAEA expert group in February. They range from simply tightening controls on current commercial sales of dual-use equipment, to turning all enrichment and plutonium reprocessing operations - another potential bomb-making system - over to multilateral control, by region or continent. ElBaradei himself has proposed a five-year moratorium on new nuclear fuel facilities anywhere while the world's nations negotiate over new controls. Addressing the U.N. conference Monday, he offered to investigate ways to guarantee international supplies of fuel for those who need them. In consultations since then with treaty nations, he has found a ``mixed reaction'' to the moratorium idea, ElBaradei said, since Iran is not the only country with plans for new uranium-enrichment or plutonium-reprocessing facilities. But he said he hopes the IAEA will get formal approval from the treaty conference or his agency's member nations to explore legal, institutional, financial and other aspects of possible new controls. ``I'm pretty confident that I will be asked by either the nonproliferation treaty parties or our IAEA member states to continue that work,'' he said. The Americans demand that Iran dismantle its enrichment equipment. President Bush has proposed simply banning sales of enrichment and reprocessing technology to nations other than the dozen or so who already have it, and ensuring that any who want fuel can buy it ``at reasonable cost.'' ElBaradei said that idea ``has merit'' but also has two problems. He said one is that many countries already can develop the sensitive technology on their own, and the other is that it raises questions of ``different standards'' - that is, double standards for those allowed to have fuel technology and those denied it. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 26 Chernobyl: Victim's First Hand Reportage- Voices from Chernobyl, Swetlana Alexeyewich Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 10:48:08 -0400 ------------------------------------------------ ---------------------- Svetlana Alexievich order from: amazon.com bn.com booksense.com borders.com local bookstores Voices from Chernobyl Translated by Keith Gessen Recently Released A Reading the World Title A Lannan Selection Russian Literature Series Current Affairs April 2005 253 pages, 5.5 x 8.5 $22.95, cloth, 1-56478-401-0 * SPECIAL SALE--any 100 Dalkey titles for $500 On April 26' 1986' the worst nuclear reactor accident in history occurred in Chernobyl. Until now' all of the books published in English focused on the facts' names' and data. Voices from Chernobyl presents first-hand accounts of what happened to the people of Belarus and the fear' anger' and uncertainty that they lived through. In order to give voice to their experiences, Svetlana Alexievich "Nuclear critic Ray Shadis said some underground "hot spots" are 50 to 100 times the level of naturally occurring radioactivity, yet the plan is for the land to eventually be released without restrictions on its future use. "If you have kids playing in the dirt in that intensely radioactive area, and they can inhale it or eat it, I say that´s not good enough," he said." -------------------- I ask - not good enough for Maine, but OK for Iraq? --------------------- From the AP WIRE Today's stories Sunday, May 8, 2005 2:30 pm Rain causes headaches for workers cleaning up Maine Yankee site By DAVID SHARP WISCASSET, Maine - Last month´s deluge of rain that soaked communities and caused rivers to spill their banks transformed the former Maine Yankee nuclear power plant site into a muddy mess, pushing back the decommissioning timetable. Physical work, already delayed, was supposed to be completed in April. Now workers are looking to complete the task by late May or early June. "It has been a real quagmire," said Eric Howes, Maine Yankee spokesman. Every time it rained, water filled massive holes that once comprised the foundation of the containment building and other structures. The water had to be pumped out, and all of that moisture added to the weight, and therefore the cost, of shipping contaminated soil to a low-level radioactive waste repository in Utah. Progress on the final surveys for radiation slowed, as well. The rain cost the project $3 million to $4 million, said Bill Henries, project manager. "We had so much blinking rain," he said. "It was amazing." Across Maine, many communities recorded double the average rainfall last month. Portland recorded 8.3 inches, the third wettest in 135 years, and Bangor received 6.19 inches. Caribou set a record for the month with 6.9 inches. All of that rain followed a winter in which more than 100 inches of snow fell. The snow, bitter cold and wet spring all contributed to troubles for workers in charge of removing contaminated rubble and cleaning up the 179-acre site of the pressurized reactor that went into operation in 1972. Maine Yankee´s board voted to close the plant permanently in August 1997, 11 years before the expiration of its license. All of that snow and rain created a mud season to remember. Workers have trucked in tons of sand and dirt to make up for the contaminated soil that was removed. Then came the rain that transformed holes where buildings once stood into ponds. Once, workers pumped 160,000 gallons of water in a 24-hour period, Henries said. The water went into holding tanks for testing; it was dumped back into the Sheepscot River once it was determined that it met federal regulations, he said. Because of the high moisture content, 48 rail cars containing soil had to be returned to Wiscasset because Envirocare, the landfill operator in Clive, Utah, voiced concerns about previous shipments that leaked water. Overly saturated soil can leach low-level radioactive contamination into groundwater, so workers in Wiscasset will make sure the soil from the rail cars is dry before it´s repacked and reshipped to the landfill in Utah. A tour of the Wiscasset site late last week gives an inkling of things to come. A visitor can now walk across the land where once stood the 150-foot containment dome, which was brought down by explosives last September. Nine to 10 acres of land will be seeded next week, and the remaining 9 or 10 acres will be seeded around the end of May, Henries said. All that remains are two power substations and a 60-foot transmission tower left because it´s home to an osprey nest, as well as a security building and a nine-acre storage facility for the highly radioactive spent fuel. The spent fuel is stored in 60 large containers made of steel and concrete that are protected by two fences topped with barbed wire, electronic monitoring and an earthen berm, in addition to armed guards. The cost of storing the fuel in Wiscasset indefinitely until the federal government follows through with its promise to build a repository for the highly radioactive waste is expected to be $7 million a year, Howes said. Meanwhile, final site surveys to ensure compliance with radioactive waste standards are nearly completed: only 2.5 acres remain. Maine Yankee is being held to a higher standard for the cleanup than what´s required by Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards. But not everyone is satisfied. Nuclear critic Ray Shadis said some underground "hot spots" are 50 to 100 times the level of naturally occurring radioactivity, yet the plan is for the land to eventually be released without restrictions on its future use. "If you have kids playing in the dirt in that intensely radioactive area, and they can inhale it or eat it, I say that´s not good enough," he said. ©Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. E-mail this story ___ On the Net: Maine Yankee www.maineyankee.com ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater? Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good! http://us.click.yahoo.com/TzSHvD/SOnJAA/79vVAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 28 [NukeNet] IAEA Head Pushes Sea Changes Re Nuke Power, Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 19:12:25 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) IAEA's head ElBaradei's proposals need real support. Please call, fax, meet with your Senators, Reps, MPs and other representatives wherever in the world you are to support him and pushing for the abolition of nuclear weapons and nuclear power reactors[N-bomb factories]. This very well may be make or break time for the proliferation or lack thereof throughout the world of the desire to acquire nuclear weapons be that through the acquisition of commercial nuclear power technology or otherwise. The congressional switchboard in the USA is: 202-224-3121 and 202-225-3121. House: http://www.house.gov Senate: http://www.senate.gov >The tighter controls he envisions ''would be a real sea change in the way we have been managing >nuclear energy,'' the IAEA chief said. >He has asked the current treaty conference to consider several possible approaches suggested by an >IAEA expert group in February. They range from simply tightening controls on current commercial sales >of dual-use equipment, to turning all enrichment and plutonium reprocessing operations -- another >potential bomb-making system -- over to multilateral control, by region or continent. http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-UN-ElBaradei.html? U.N. Nuclear Chief Pushes 'Sea Change' a.. E-Mail This b.. Printer-Friendly By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Published: May 7, 2005 Filed at 9:09 a.m. ET UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- Sixty years after Hiroshima, Mohamed ElBaradei has big ideas for changing the way the world handles the atom. The sweeping overhaul he envisions -- bringing uranium and plutonium technology under tougher, possibly international control -- would mean a ''sea change'' in the nuclear realm. But it's necessary, the U.N. nuclear chief says, ''because we are facing a threat.'' ElBaradei spoke with The Associated Press on Friday at the end of a week in which he canvassed support for his ideas at a conference here of more than 180 nations reviewing the status of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. He said he expects to win global support to begin planning such changes, in part because of the current alarm over Iran's ability to establish a uranium-enrichment capability. ''Everybody understands that if we continue in that fashion, in the next 10, 20 years we'll have 20, 30 countries that I would call virtual nuclear-weapons states, meaning countries that could move within months into converting their civilian capacity or capability into a weapons program,'' said ElBaradei, director-general of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran's enrichment program, using centrifuges that can produce uranium fuel for either nuclear power plants or nuclear bombs, is a major issue at the treaty review. Tehran says the program is meant only for peaceful purposes of civilian energy; Washington contends it is a cover for eventual bomb-building. Under the 1970 nonproliferation treaty, states like Iran without nuclear weapons renounce them forever in exchange for a commitment by nuclear-weapons states to move toward disarmament. Access to peaceful technology is guaranteed under the treaty, but ElBaradei said the spread of such capabilities has become a ''serious problem.'' The tighter controls he envisions ''would be a real sea change in the way we have been managing nuclear energy,'' the IAEA chief said. He has asked the current treaty conference to consider several possible approaches suggested by an IAEA expert group in February. They range from simply tightening controls on current commercial sales of dual-use equipment, to turning all enrichment and plutonium reprocessing operations -- another potential bomb-making system -- over to multilateral control, by region or continent. ElBaradei himself has proposed a five-year moratorium on new nuclear fuel facilities anywhere while the world's nations negotiate over new controls. Addressing the U.N. conference Monday, he offered to investigate ways to guarantee international supplies of fuel for those who need them. In consultations since then with treaty nations, he has found a ''mixed reaction'' to the moratorium idea, ElBaradei said, since Iran is not the only country with plans for new uranium-enrichment or plutonium-reprocessing facilities. But he said he hopes the IAEA will get formal approval from the treaty conference or his agency's member nations to explore legal, institutional, financial and other aspects of possible new controls. ''I'm pretty confident that I will be asked by either the nonproliferation treaty parties or our IAEA member states to continue that work,'' he said. The Americans demand that Iran dismantle its enrichment equipment. President Bush has proposed simply banning sales of enrichment and reprocessing technology to nations other than the dozen or so who already have it, and ensuring that any who want fuel can buy it ''at reasonable cost.'' ElBaradei said that idea ''has merit'' but also has two problems. He said one is that many countries already can develop the sensitive technology on their own, and the other is that it raises questions of ''different standards'' -- that is, double standards for those allowed to have fuel technology and those denied it. _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 29 UK: Huge radioactive leak closes Thorp nuclear plant Date: Sun, 8 May 2005 18:23:19 -0500 (CDT) Monday May 9, 2005 The Guardian (UK) www.guardian.co.uk Huge radioactive leak closes Thorp nuclear plant by Paul Brown, environment correspondent A leak of highly radioactive nuclear fuel dissolved in concentrated nitric acid, enough to half fill an Olympic-size swimming pool, has forced the closure of Sellafield's Thorp reprocessing plant. The highly dangerous mixture, containing about 20 tonnes of uranium and plutonium fuel, has leaked through a fractured pipe into a huge stainless steel chamber which is so radioactive that it is impossible to enter. Recovering the liquids and fixing the pipes will take months and may require special robots to be built and sophisticated engineering techniques devised to repair the #2.1bn plant. The leak is not a danger to the public but is likely to be a financial disaster for the taxpayer since income from the Thorp plant, calculated to be more than #1m a day, is supposed to pay for the cleanup of redundant nuclear facilities. The closure could hardly have come at a worse time for the nuclear industry. Britain is struggling to meet its target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 20% of 1990 levels by 2010, despite a substantial programme of wind farm construction, while generating capacity will also be hit by the rundown of some of Britain's coal-fired power stations. The decision on whether to build a new generation of nuclear power stations is among the most sensitive Tony Blair faces at the start of his third term. A leak of a briefing paper to ministers on the nuclear option yesterday revealed that the contribution new nuclear capacity could make to cutting greenhouse gases had not yet been considered because of opposition from Margaret Beckett, secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, a quango which took over ownership of the plant from British Nuclear Fuels on April 1, has a #2.2bn cleanup budget for this year, its first year of operation, of which #560m was to come from the Thorp plant. Richard Flynn, spokesman for the NDA, said: "If the income from the plant is not forthcoming then obviously it will put back plans for cleaning up." On Friday the British Nuclear Group, a management company formed to run the Sellafield site on behalf of the NDA, held a meeting with the government safety regulator, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII), to discuss how to mop up the leak and repair the pipe. The company has to get the inspectors' approval before proceeding. A problem at the plant was first noticed on April 19 when operators could not account for all the spent fuel that had been dissolved in nitric acid. It was supposed to be travelling through the plant to be measured and separated into uranium, plutonium and waste products in a series of centrifuges. Remote cameras scanning the interior of the plant found the leak. Although most of the material is uranium, the fuel contains about 200kg (440lb) of plutonium, enough to make 20 nuclear weapons, and must be recovered and accounted for to conform to international safeguards aimed at preventing nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands. The liquid will have to be siphoned off and stored until the works can be repaired, but a method of doing this has yet to be devised. The company has set up a board of inquiry to find out how the leak occurred. The NII will set up a separate investigation and has the power to prosecute if correct procedures have not been followed. The Thorp plant produces uranium and plutonium from spent fuel in such large quantities that only a tiny proportion of it can ever be reused for reactor fuel. Its critics also claim it is uneconomic because it has never operated to design capacity since it opened 12 years ago, and is years behind schedule in fulfilling orders. This has angered some customers and the British Nuclear Group is embroiled in a court case with one of its customers, the German owners of the Brokdorf power station, which is withholding fees of #2,772 a day for storage of spent fuel, claiming it should have been reprocessed years ago. In 12 years Thorp has reprocessed 5,644 tonnes of fuel from its first 10-year target of 7,000 tonnes. Last year it failed to reach its target of 725 tonnes, achieving 590. Martin Forwood, of Cumbrians Opposed to Radioactive Environment, said the NDA had been "naive" in placing trust on income from Thorp, given its track record. "Reprocessing is blatantly incompatible with the official cleanup remit of the NDA, which will now find itself out of pocket as a result of the latest Thorp accident. The new owners would do the taxpayer the greatest service by putting Thorp out of its misery and closing it once and for all." The managing director of British Nuclear Group, Sellafield, Barry Snelson, who ordered the plant to be closed down, said: "Let me reassure people that the plant is in a safe and stable state." ---------- http://www.guardian.co.uk/nuclear/article/0,2763,1479527,00.html ---------- ***************************************************************** 30 [NukeNet] Chernobyl: Victim's First Hand Reportage- Voices Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 19:14:45 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Svetlana Alexievich Voices from Chernobyl Translated by Keith Gessen Recently Released A Reading the World Title A Lannan Selection Russian Literature Series Current Affairs April 2005 253 pages, 5.5 x 8.5 $22.95, cloth, 1-56478-401-0 * SPECIAL SALE--any 100 Dalkey titles for $500 On April 26' 1986' the worst nuclear reactor accident in history occurred in Chernobyl. Until now' all of the books published in English focused on the facts' names' and data. Voices from Chernobyl presents first-hand accounts of what happened to the people of Belarus and the fear' anger' and uncertainty that they lived through. In order to give voice to their experiences, Svetlana Alexievich ***************************************************************** 31 Guardian Unlimited: Huge radioactive leak closes Thorp nuclear plant Paul Brown, environment correspondent Monday May 9, 2005 A leak of highly radioactive nuclear fuel dissolved in concentrated nitric acid, enough to half fill an Olympic-size swimming pool, has forced the closure of Sellafield's Thorp reprocessing plant. The highly dangerous mixture, containing about 20 tonnes of uranium and plutonium fuel, has leaked through a fractured pipe into a huge stainless steel chamber which is so radioactive that it is impossible to enter. Recovering the liquids and fixing the pipes will take months and may require special robots to be built and sophisticated engineering techniques devised to repair the £2.1bn plant. The leak is not a danger to the public but is likely to be a financial disaster for the taxpayer since income from the Thorp plant, calculated to be more than £1m a day, is supposed to pay for the cleanup of redundant nuclear facilities. The closure could hardly have come at a worse time for the nuclear industry. Britain is struggling to meet its target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 20% of 1990 levels by 2010, despite a substantial programme of wind farm construction, while generating capacity will also be hit by the rundown of some of Britain's coal-fired power stations. The decision on whether to build a new generation of nuclear power stations is among the most sensitive Tony Blair faces at the start of his third term. A leak of a briefing paper to ministers on the nuclear option yesterday revealed that the contribution new nuclear capacity could make to cutting greenhouse gases had not yet been considered because of opposition from Margaret Beckett, secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, a quango which took over ownership of the plant from British Nuclear Fuels on April 1, has a £2.2bn cleanup budget for this year, its first year of operation, of which £560m was to come from the Thorp plant. Richard Flynn, spokesman for the NDA, said: "If the income from the plant is not forthcoming then obviously it will put back plans for cleaning up." On Friday the British Nuclear Group, a management company formed to run the Sellafield site on behalf of the NDA, held a meeting with the government safety regulator, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII), to discuss how to mop up the leak and repair the pipe. The company has to get the inspectors' approval before proceeding. A problem at the plant was first noticed on April 19 when operators could not account for all the spent fuel that had been dissolved in nitric acid. It was supposed to be travelling through the plant to be measured and separated into uranium, plutonium and waste products in a series of centrifuges. Remote cameras scanning the interior of the plant found the leak. Although most of the material is uranium, the fuel contains about 200kg (440lb) of plutonium, enough to make 20 nuclear weapons, and must be recovered and accounted for to conform to international safeguards aimed at preventing nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands. The liquid will have to be siphoned off and stored until the works can be repaired, but a method of doing this has yet to be devised. The company has set up a board of inquiry to find out how the leak occurred. The NII will set up a separate investigation and has the power to prosecute if correct procedures have not been followed. The Thorp plant produces uranium and plutonium from spent fuel in such large quantities that only a tiny proportion of it can ever be reused for reactor fuel. Its critics also claim it is uneconomic because it has never operated to design capacity since it opened 12 years ago, and is years behind schedule in fulfilling orders. This has angered some customers and the British Nuclear Group is embroiled in a court case with one of its customers, the German owners of the Brokdorf power station, which is withholding fees of £2,772 a day for storage of spent fuel, claiming it should have been reprocessed years ago. In 12 years Thorp has reprocessed 5,644 tonnes of fuel from its first 10-year target of 7,000 tonnes. Last year it failed to reach its target of 725 tonnes, achieving 590. Martin Forwood, of Cumbrians Opposed to Radioactive Environment, said the NDA had been "naive" in placing trust on income from Thorp, given its track record. "Reprocessing is blatantly incompatible with the official cleanup remit of the NDA, which will now find itself out of pocket as a result of the latest Thorp accident. The new owners would do the taxpayer the greatest service by putting Thorp out of its misery and closing it once and for all." The managing director of British Nuclear Group, Sellafield, Barry Snelson, who ordered the plant to be closed down, said: "Let me reassure people that the plant is in a safe and stable state." [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 32 The Observer: Secret papers reveal new nuclear building plan [UP] Oliver Morgan, industrial editor Sunday May 8, 2005 The government's strategy to kick-start a huge nuclear power station building programme is revealed today in confidential Whitehall documents seen by The Observer. In a 46-paragraph briefing note for incoming ministers, Joan MacNaughton, the director-general of energy policy at the new Department of Productivity, Energy and Industry, warns that key policy targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and boost green energy are likely to fail, and that decisions on new nuclear power stations must be taken urgently. It advises that 'it is generally easier to push ahead on controversial issues early in a new parliament'. The document points to the key role new nuclear power stations, which do not emit carbon dioxide, would play in tackling carbon emissions. It states: 'We now have 12 nuclear stations providing 20 per cent of our electricity carbon-free. By 2020 this will fall to three stations and 7 per cent as stations are retired.' It also points to the increased risk of an electricity supply shortage after 2008, when a number of nuclear plants are due to close, and warns of a growing reliance on imported gas supplies. It continues: 'Extending the lives of nuclear stations and/or new build could strengthen the generating sector's contribution to CO2 reductions, by 2020 and beyond.' But it adds that to avoid a very steep drop in nuclear output a decision is needed quickly, because it takes a decade to get stations operational. There are also obstacles that would need to be overcome in building a new generation of plants, including gaining public acceptance and dealing with nuclear waste. The department paper is revealed as the nuclear industry gears up for a major lobbying push for new stations. The Nuclear Industry Association has been pressing on the government the need for 10 new stations to combat climate change, arguing that a large-scale building programme is the only economic way of financing them. UK companies such as Amec and Westinghouse, the power station construction arm of state-owned British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL) - along with foreign companies such as Aveva and Bechtel of the US, have also urged the case in Whitehall. The Whitehall briefing, a 'first day' options paper prepared for the new Secretary of State, Alan Johnson, states that the government is widely expected to 'come off the fence' on nuclear energy and advises that it should work with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Treasury and Number 10 to 'be on the front foot', making a statement on energy policy and its impact on climate change before the summer recess. MacNaughton warns that '(carbon dioxide) emissions have been rising in recent years. We look to be falling well short of the goal to cut them by 20 per cent by 2010, absent (of) new measures'. Two of the reasons are 'falling nuclear generation' and 'weaker than predicted impact of some policy measures'. Key among these is the attempt to boost renewable forms of energy - such as wind farms, solar power and crop-burning stations - by forcing electricity suppliers to source 10 per cent of their supplies from these sources by 2010. The paper admits 7 to 8 per cent is more likely. MacNaughton also admits that the government's stance on the nuclear issue in the last parliament 'to keep the option open' without encouraging it 'was a compromise, endorsed by the PM, between ministers for and against'. Now she says: 'The case for looking at the nuclear question again quickly is that, if we want to avoid a very sharp fall in nuclear's contribution to energy supplies (some fall is already certain and has begun), we should need to act soon given the long lead times (10 years) in getting a new nuclear station up and running.' However, she lists a series of issues that need to be addressed: · 'How might new stations be financed? · What kind of government support might be necessary for new build to take place? · How far would new build be consistent with our market framework for energy? · How best to secure public acceptance? · How far would we need to resolve the long outstanding issue of finding a final depository for high level nuclear waste, as a pre-condition for progressing new build?' The previous compromise was hammered out in a 2003 white paper, Our Energy Future - creating a low-carbon economy. This was the result of a bitter Whitehall battle between pro-nuclear elements in the then Department of Trade and Industry headed by the Energy Minister Brian Wilson and in Downing Street, and a determinedly anti-nuclear group headed by Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett. The new Energy Minister is advised to take a robust line with Defra, not only over nuclear power, but on the amount of carbon dioxide industry is allowed to emit under European regulations. DPEI's wants a higher cap than Defra, arguing that too stringent restrictions will harm productivity. Defra is heading the government's Climate Change Programme Review, which has a crucial role in placing the issue at the top of the agenda for the UK's presidency of the G8 this year. But MacNaughton notes: 'Because Mrs Beckett opposes nuclear new build, the review has not so far considered whether nuclear should contribute to cutting emissions.' Resistance from Defra, where Beckett remains Secretary of State, is likely to remain strong, as she is known to be particularly concerned that no decision has yet been reached on how to store Britain's stockpile of radioactive spent nuclear fuel. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 33 The Observer: Labour's nuclear option [UP] If Britain needs more Sizewell B-style power stations, the key will be winning over investors, writes Oliver Morgan Sunday May 8, 2005 What's in a name? Quite a lot if it is the title of a government department. Labour may not have scrapped the Department of Trade and Industry as the Lib Dems promised. But its new name, Productivity, Energy and Industry, is as clear a sign that one of the ugliest items in the government's not-to-be-opened-before-6 May in-tray is now at the top of the pile: the Nuclear Question. Or rather questions. The first that new DPEI secretary Alan Johnson will have to consider is: 'Do we need to build more nuclear power stations?' The arguments are well-rehearsed: if we are to fulfil our Kyoto commitments, can renewable energy fill the void left by 'carbon-free' nuclear stations as the 20 per cent of UK power they produce dwindles to zero by 2020? Or do we need new nukes? Less well aired is the second question: who will pay for them? It will not be the government, not directly at least. They must be built 'privately'. Technically, there is no change: companies have not been prevented from building stations; they have not done so because the government gave them no encouragement. From this starting point there are difficulties ahead, even if the answer to question one is "yes". One City banker who has advised the government on nuclear financing says: 'If the government decides it wants to do it, it will have to persuade investors. That is bad news. It means the government thinks there is a need for something, while the private sector does not. Investors may take a lot of persuading.' In fact, a sounding-out process had been going on for some time, with officials in 10 Downing Street, the Department of Trade and Industry, the Treasury and the Department for Environ- ment, Food and Rural Affairs listening to arguments from the industry and environmentalists. The industry is putting on a confident show. In an unpublished 'position paper', the Nuclear Industry Association (NIA), which represents about 200 companies, says: 'Nuclear can clearly be an economic and attractive private sector investment proposition, provided that risk can be appropriately managed. 'Key risks arise due to the relatively long time scale of the licensing, approval and construction phases ... [and] the current lack of clarity on waste management policy and the uncertainty over future power prices. These risks are all manageable provided they are appropriately allocated.' The last statement may be true. But, as City experts emphasise, the liberalised electricity market will need to be radically rearranged - and it will cost. Tom Burke, visiting fellow at Imperial College and a former adviser to the environment department, says: 'Essentially, nuclear is very expensive and you have to make a special case to get it to work. That will make a mockery of our "liberalised" market and should concern the companies that operate within it.' The most immediate problem is planning. As Simon Skillings, strategy director for Powergen, whose parent, E.On, operates nuclear stations in Germany and Scandinavia, says: 'New nuclear is not even on the investment radar because the whole regulatory and planning environment is not in place.' The NIA concedes that the planning system is too opaque, saying: 'Delays for any reason bring substantial associated cost due to the substantial capital tied up in the project.' High start-up costs are a key feature of nuclear stations. Bankers estimate the construction of nuclear stations to cost between £1.3 million and £1.7m per megawatt capacity, compared with £340,000 for gas. 'It is a classic trade-off - the initial cost for nuclear is very high, but for gas it is very low, while the price of uranium is low, whereas gas is higher and volatile,' says one banking adviser. 'But the problem for nuclear is you can have gas through planning quickly and built in nine months with a quarter of the investment. If planning and licensing are not sorted out at this early stage, nuclear looks like a non-starter.' Burke says the time scales are so long as to render nuclear's contribution to climate change by 2020 nugatory. 'If you started today, you would not have a reactor going for 10 years. You would not build more until you knew it worked. At that rate you would be very lucky to have three up and running in 20 years.' He adds that at least 10 need to be built as a 'batch' for economies of scale. The NIA concedes that a large number of reactors is needed. It points to evidence from South Korea, where the average construction cost spread across 10 plants was 35 per cent per plant of the cost of building the first one. But the NIA contends that technologies - as shown in Westinghouse's AP1000 reactor and the European Pressurised Water reactor, at the centre of plans for a privately financed station in Finland - are understood well enough to allow confidencefrom the outset. However, investors are even more sceptical about the power market, pointing back three years to the effective insolvency of British Energy, driven by the plunge in prices to an average of some £17/mwh (compared with £30 today). 'The problem for nuclear stations is that a very high proportion of the costs are fixed [thanks, partly to high capital costs],' Skillings says. 'So, while fossil fuel stations can shut down [as several, including Powergen, did in the 2002/03 price slump] without it costing too much, nuclear cannot.' The NIA points to Finland, where contracts spanning decades have been signed, guaranteeing a market and a price range. The UK consensus seems to be that such contracts must form part of the solution here, although the Finnish model cannot be imported off the shelf. One banking adviser says: 'You need some kind of government or regulatory commitment to force people to contract to buy nuclear power. You would have to be careful to make it apply to all suppliers so none are disadvantaged and all share the same risk.' Meanwhile, government will need to convince big industrial players to come on board. 'These capital-intensive projects with the risks involved do not lend themselves to debt-funded project fin ance. You need big industrial players with strong balance sheets and access to equity at the centre of any corporate structure,' the banker says. The difficulty is that several of them remember how painful their long-term contracts were last time. In 2003 Powergen chief executive Paul Golby warned of a bust in the market that could see the lights go out. As consultant Graham Shuttleworth of National Economic Research Associates says: 'Remember TXU. It had a lot of contracts it had to walk away from because they were out of money. It went into administration to liquidate assets to pay them.' TXU's parent was one of the largest utilities in the United States. 'If you believe that power prices will drop to a low level, then you would think nuclear was problematic,' Skillings says. But, he points out, now that carbon is traded via the European emissions trading scheme, its environmental cost becomes a financial one. 'If you believe the cost of carbon is going to be high, that would be an argument in favour of new nuclear stations.' Investors are not convinced by the Finnish example. One adviser says: 'In Finland there are many highly intensive energy users - paper and forestry products industries, for example. And there is a sense of co-operation in the business community. Neither of these translates directly to the UK.' Another difference is 'that in Finland disposal is not a controversial issue'. There is a consensus that it's acceptable to bury waste. However, in the UK disposal is controversial. This year a government committee is expected to come to a decision on what to do - bury waste, keep it on the surface or seek another option. One adviser says: 'My assumption is that if there were to be new nuclear build you would have to have a system like in the US, where the generator pays a certain amount per megawatt produced, reflective of costs, into a government agency, andin return the risk would be underwritten by the public. But unless there is a decision on what to do with the waste, it is difficult to see the government making a commitment to the industry without knowing what kind of commitment it is making.' The NIA again points to Finland, Sweden and the US as evidence for believing the problem can be solved here as well. But Burke says: 'The argument that the government makes people sign a 40-year contract to take nuclear power then agrees to take back the liabilities and uses public money to do it is ludicrous. The truth is that nuclear is not economic and cannot be financed without the market being fixed.' He believes the future lies in clean hydrocarbon technology - burying carbon in reservoirs, under the North Sea in the UK's case. And Skillings also believes this will be a vital part of the solution to non-environmentally harmful energy in the century to come. That is another story. But by itself it does not solve the government's nuclear conundrum. The time bomb continues to tick. Green goals The government is committed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto protocol. It wants to cut them by 12.5 per cent below 1990 levels by 2008-12 and to see carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, cut by 20 per cent by 2010. In addition, it has a long-term target of reducing carbon carbon emissions by 2050. To help, it has set targets for renewable generation: 10 per cent of the UK's electricity generation coming from renewable sources by 2010, with an aim of 20 per cent by 2020. In 2003, 2.9 per cent came from renewables. The government has admitted hitting the targets will be challenging. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 34 UK The Times: Cabinet clash over nuclear power May 08, 2005 Andrew Porter, Deputy Political Editor A CABINET row over whether to build a new generation of nuclear power stations in Britain is set to be one of the first clashes of Tony Blair’s new government. Leaked Whitehall papers reveal that Margaret Beckett, the environment secretary, is resisting the construction of new plants even though officials say they are needed to help cut greenhouse gas emissions. A 46-page briefing by civil servants to Alan Johnson, the incoming secretary for productivity, energy and industry, warns that Beckett will oppose any attempt to bring the nuclear option back on the agenda. However, her views are likely to clash with those of No 10, which is keen to begin a debate knowing that the government must decide by the end of the decade whether new plants need to be built to shore up the country’s energy supplies. A Downing Street adviser said: “You will see over the next few weeks how we are going to push ahead with the solution to Britain’s energy problems and ensure security of supply in the future. “The prime minister will foster a major public debate around the nuclear issue and this is the right thing to do.” The price of oil is making the problem more pressing. But the appointment of Johnson is seen as a significant step by industry insiders. He is regarded as a practical politician who will be alive to the nuclear issue. Other issues that Blair is determined to pursue include the identity cards bill, even though it is likely to be the first casualty of the government’s reduced majority. It will be in the Queen’s speech this month in line with the party’s manifesto pledge. The attempt to push the bill through will be a first test of how rebellious the party’s “awkward squad” will be. Should the bill be defeated, ministers are ready to blame the Tories for blocking a “vital anti-terrorist measure”. The speech, expected towards the end of the month, will also see the return of the child contact bill, which gives parents the right to see children after a break-up and puts in place penalties for those mothers and fathers who refuse to comply with its measures. There will also be a bill to combat the MRSA bug by bringing in a legal duty of care on hospital managers to keep hospitals clean. The prime minister will attempt to sort out asylum abuse by introducing an asylum and immigration bill. This is intended to speed up applications and will introduce a points system for work permit applicants from overseas. David Blunkett, now the work and pensions secretary, met a delegation of people protesting about pensions yesterday. Hundreds marched in London to object to the way workers can often lose their pension entitlement when firms go bust. The event, organised by the Amicus union, was addressed by Melvyn Bragg, a Labour life peer who turned 65 last October. Copyright The Times - timesonline.co.uk ***************************************************************** 35 Portland Press Herald: Maine Yankee says long goodbye The nuclear power plant's radioactive legacy will last for decades after decommissioning is complete. Today's Question: ARE YOU CONCERNED about potential public safety issues at the dismantled Maine Yankee plant? --> MaineToday.com Sunday, May 8, 2005 By JOHN RICHARDSON, Portland Press Herald Writer Staff photo by Doug Jones Hinkley, a 31-year employee of Maine Yankee, measures radiation in a final check for acceptable levels before the area is planted with grass. Staff photo by Doug Jones The last vestige of the plant's foundation, an area between the "hot" part of the Maine Yankee nuclear power plant and the "cold" part, as the engineers refer to them, is excavated and pulverized for shipment to a Utah disposal site. Staff photo by Doug Jones Bill Henries, left, who is in charge of the decommissioning, talks last week with Ted Feigenbaum, president of Maine Yankee, at a groundwater recovery area. The recovery process involves pumping water to a transport vehicle, then storing it in one of two tanks in the building in the background for treatment. MAINE YANKEE TIMELINE 1966: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co. formed. 1968: Construction begins after the Atomic Energy Commission issues a permit. 1972: The Maine Yankee nuclear plant begins commercial operation following a four-year construction period. Original cost: $231 million. 1997: Maine Yankee closes after officials determine it is no longer economical to operate the plant. Planning for the decommissioning process begins. 2001: Maine Yankee starts to demolish buildings. 2004: Maine Yankee's nuclear reactor dome is toppled with about 1,100 pounds of explosives. The reinforced concrete dome structure, which was designed to withstand earthquakes, tornadoes and hurricane-force winds, collapses in less than two seconds. 2005: Decommissioning process will be completed, but Maine Yankee will remain responsible for storing spent nuclear fuel assemblies until a federal storage site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada starts accepting waste. Source: Maine Yankee; News Archives- Research contributed by staff researcher Beth Murphy Each day, we ask MaineToday.com readers for their reactions to events in the news: WISCASSET — The peninsula where Maine Yankee's concrete dome once stood is now an open expanse of sand. Red ribbon circles a few holes where crews dig for the last loads of contaminated soil left by the state's only nuclear power plant. Within weeks, company officials plan to fill the holes, plant grass and declare an end to the seven-year, $500 million cleanup. Maine Yankee's radioactive legacy won't go away that fast, however. Some remnants of the plant will remain buried here, and groundwater will be tested for years to come. And, most troubling to neighbors, state officials and Maine Yankee itself, more than 1,400 used fuel rods - the most highly radioactive waste from the old reactor - will remain stored inside a metal building at the site, likely for another 20 years or more. Maine Yankee is one of the nation's first large nuclear plants to be completely removed to below ground level, and the project is yielding lessons about the challenges that one 25-year-old plant can leave behind. As always, opinions vary about whether the nuclear power's benefits outweigh its costs. "We're getting close," said Bill Henries, the Maine Yankee engineer leading the decommissioning project. Last week, as a red fox trotted across the edge of the sand-covered work site and ospreys flew overhead, front-end loaders scooped soil out of a hole that was once the site of the plant's spent-fuel storage pool. A sensor lowered over the area by a crane tells workers whether what's in the hole exceeds a radioactivity level set by the state, and when the crew can stop digging. Nearby, workers pumped rainwater from another hole and sent it into a treatment building on its way into the Back River. Another pair of workers in hard hats moved slowly across the sand, measuring surface radiation in small grids and recording results that will later be reviewed by state and federal officials. Company officials say the job will be done within budget and only slightly later than planned. A snowy winter, a rainy spring and a problem with shipments of contaminated soil delayed the project's completion a few months. Forty-eight rail cars loaded with soil and bound for a Utah landfill had to be called back to Maine Yankee last month to make sure they didn't contain more water than the landfill operator allows. Some previous shipments were so wet that at least one car dripped water as it traveled across country. Workers now are inspecting the returning rail cars, and in some cases emptying and reloading them. The soil is among the least contaminated waste to leave the site, the last of 400 million pounds of waste that will have been shipped to various landfills around the country when the project ends. But it has been tricky. When the crews move soil or rainwater around the site so they can finish one area and stay on the company's cleanup schedule, they sometimes create new areas of contamination that have to be excavated later. Henries calls this phase, "painting ourselves out of the room." WHAT LIES BENEATH Beneath the sand lies parts of the concrete foundation, as well as old pipes. Company officials say those parts of the plant and remaining soils are not contaminated enough to exceed the state's strict radiation dosage standard - 10 millirems of radiation per year. And, despite the push to finish the job, Maine Yankee officials say nothing is being left behind that shouldn't be. "There has been absolutely no reduction in standards. We have the same standards on the last day that we had the first day," Maine Yankee President Ted Feigenbaum said. Feigenbaum said the project has demonstrated that a plant can safely and efficiently be removed to below ground level. The $500 million cost of decommissioning is a small price compared to the value of power generated by the plant over 25 years, he said. An inspector with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission who visited the site for a periodic inspection this month agreed that the cleanup is nearly done. Once cleared by the NRC, the site will be considered clean enough for someone to build a house there, grow food in the soil and drink water from a well, said Mark Roberts, a nuclear health physicist and inspector for the agency. KEEPING A CLOSE EYE Maine's state nuclear inspector, Pat Dostie, has kept an even closer eye on the project, working at the plant since 1989. At times, he said, that has meant telling Maine Yankee to slow down despite the pressure to stay on an aggressive schedule. "It's like (the schedule) is the force behind everything," he said. Several months ago, for example, Dostie told Maine Yankee officials they had to dig deeper than they planned around the former fuel-storage pool because he found a seam where contamination had concentrated underground. Dostie also said the tight schedule and size of the project meant not every section had a full confirmatory survey to doublecheck Maine Yankee's measurements and make sure the cleanup met state standards. "In some places it would have been nice, but we're resource-limited," Dostie said. "The whole point here was not to really duplicate their work but to feel comfortable with what they've done." And overall, Dostie said, he is. "I feel fairly comfortable about what's being left, only because I've been in there and done a lot of work." Dostie will spend at least another year monitoring the site and going over Maine Yankee's cleanup data. In addition, Maine's Department of Environmental Protection will monitor groundwater for radiation here for the next five years. That makes Maria Holt feel better - to a degree. The Bath woman, one of a network of people who have monitored Maine's nuclear plant, sees the removal of so much contaminated soil as further evidence that Maine Yankee did more damage to the environment and public health than officials admitted. "Every single day Maine Yankee has released man-made radioactivity into the air and water," Holt said. "It's just that you can't see it and you can't smell it. The government says it's OK and it isn't. We should not put our hope for clean energy in nuclear power. It would be a tragic mistake." Marge Kilkelly, a former state legislator from Dresden and the chairwoman of Maine Yankee's Community Advisory Panel, sees it differently. The exhaustive cleanup, she said, has helped reassure her about the attention to safety. "The decommissioning process was a real-eye opener for me in terms of the redundancy of the safety features. I think right now, given the energy crisis that we're obviously looking at, its not surprising that there is discussion of where nuclear fits into the mix," Kilkelly said. "I think everything should be on the table." CHALLENGE OF DISPOSAL Kilkelly and Holt may disagree about nuclear power, but most everyone watching the project agrees about the biggest challenge for Maine Yankee and other nuclear plants: the disposal of used nuclear fuel. The spent fuel rods now stored in casks at the Maine Yankee site were supposed to get shipped away years ago to a central repository that the federal government would operate and protect. But that repository has never been created because of political opposition around the proposed site in Yucca Mountain, Nev. As a result, Maine Yankee and other plants around the country have become nuclear waste dumps. Maine Yankee now expects to have the waste for 20 more years, despite efforts in court to force the Department of Energy to take it, or at least pay for its storage. The former customers of Maine Yankee, including electricity ratepayers in Maine, are paying to store the waste now. "That's really the big problem that's left," said Charlie Pray, whose role as Maine's State Nuclear Safety Adviser has shifted from monitoring Maine Yankee to pushing the federal government to create a national repository. As long as the Wiscasset site remains a high-level nuclear waste storage site, Maine Yankee will maintain a security staff and maintenance staff here. The long-term future of the 200-acre site where the dome once stood remains uncertain. The peninsula will be suitable for redevelopment, Feigenbaum said. There will likely be some restrictions on groundwater use, however, not to mention the challenge of marketing the site. In the long run, it'll likely return to the foxes and ospreys. "This will probably end up being conservation property," Feigenbaum said. Staff Writer John Richardson can be contacted at 791 - 6324 or at: jrichardson@pressherald.com Copyright© Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc. ***************************************************************** 36 Daily Yomiuri: Local govts imperil N-policy PLANNING NATIONAL STRATEGIES--Resources and energy / The Yomiuri Shimbun This is the 15th installment in a series of articles in the "Planning National Strategies" series that considers the situation and problems concerning natural resources and energy. On Feb. 17, Hokushinmaru, a transport ship operated by an Osaka shipping company, pulled alongside a pier at Mutsuogawara Port in Rokkashomura, Aomori Prefecture. Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. will conduct four experiments at a nuclear reprocessing plant, currently under construction in the village, by 2006, when the plant is scheduled to start operations. Hokushinmaru was carrying depleted uranium to be used in the third experiment, completing the total shipment of 52 tons of depleted uranium needed for the experiments. However, preparations for the experiments did not always go smoothly. The depleted uranium had been collected in Tokyo from a plant in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture, and three other processing plants. JNFL needed permission from the Tokyo metropolitan government, which manages Tokyo Port, to use the port before it was shipped to Rokkashomura. But to the shock of JNFL executives, the metropolitan government was reluctant to approve the company's request for permission in early December. Nuclear fuel recycling is Japan's national policy. The Aomori prefectural government and the Rokkashomura municipal government have reached a safety agreement covering the uranium experiments. In this respect, there were no shortcomings in preparations for the experiments, so JNFL executives naturally were stunned at the metropolitan government's reaction. JNFL unofficially asked the Aomori prefectural government if it could transport the uranium by road or rail, but the prefectural government rejected this for security reasons. The metropolitan government eventually accepted JNFL's request after the company's executives held talks with Tokyo government officials. Nuclear power plant safety is enforced at three levels. The Nuclear Safety Commission supervises the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, which supervises electric power companies. In addition, power companies make safety agreements with the governments of municipalities hosting nuclear plants. However, while power companies' relationships with the commission and the agency are stipulated by law, local governments are not legally bound to cooperate with the power companies. "If power companies operate nuclear plants without paying attention to local governments, the governments might retaliate by saying, 'You can't use our ports and roads' or 'We won't agree when you introduce pluthermal generation,'" a safety agency executive said. "There's nothing we can do if mayors rebel against national nuclear policy." Concerned about this situation, some lawmakers have started to insist that the law stipulate the local governments' duties in national nuclear projects. Yosuke Kondo, a Minshuto (Democratic Party of Japan) member of the House of Representatives, pointed out that the No. 1 reactor of Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant had not been restarted even after the safety committee finished inspections in June 2004 because the Fukushima prefectural government would not approve it. The reactor's operation was suspended in October 2002 after TEPCO was found to have falsified safety reports. "The law doesn't stipulate whether local governments have the authority to decide to operate the nuclear power plants, but in reality, they virtually have a power of veto [on the plant's operation]," Kondo said at a meeting of the lower house's Economy, Trade and Industry Committee on April 22. "We can't maintain our nuclear policy unless the law stipulates the local governments' duties." The Local Autonomy Law clearly differentiates the roles of the national and local governments: The central government should be in charge of duties that are "concerned with the nation's existence." All economic activities are founded on the availability of energy. It is time to think how the central and local governments can share duties to provide a stable supply of safe energy. Copyright 2005 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 37 The Herald: Pressure rises on nuclear power Web Issue 2262 May 09 2005 DEBORAH SUMMERS, UK Political Correspondent May 09 2005 The government is under pressure to make an urgent decision on whether it should endorse a new generation of nuclear power stations. Whitehall advisers claim the highly controversial move may be necessary to ensure the UK meets its Kyoto obligations on the reduction of global warming gas emissions. A secret briefing note, drawn up as a "first day" option paper for Alan Johnson, the new energy secretary, warns that key policy targets to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and boost green energy are likely to fail, and that decisions on a new nuclear power stations must be taken urgently. The document, written by Joan McNaughton, director general of energy policy at the new Department of Productivity, Energy and Industry, advises that "it is generally easier to push ahead on controversial issues early in a new parliament". It points to the key role new nuclear power stations, which do not emit carbon dioxide, would play in tackling carbon emissions. According to several Sunday newspapers, the document states: "We now have 12 nuclear stations providing 20% of our electricity carbon-free. By 2020 this will fall to three stations and 7% as stations are retired." It also points to the increased risk of an electricity shortage after 2008, when a number of nuclear plants are due to close, and warns of a growing reliance on imported gas supplies. A DPEI spokesman said: "The new secretary of state Alan Johnson will need to look at the issues." Copyright © Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 38 palm beach post: FPL joins in design for nuclear reactorse www.palmbeachpost.com By Susan Salisbury Palm Beach Post Staff Writer Saturday, May 07, 2005 Florida Power &Light Co. has joined with eight other utilities to hire two companies that will design two new nuclear-power reactors. The reactors would be the first such facilities in 30 years. But NuStart Energy Development LLC, which includes the two nuclear suppliers as well as the nine power companies, is not considering any sites in Florida, an FPL spokeswoman said Friday. "Florida Power &Light does not have any plans to be the first in the industry to build a new nuclear power plant," Rachel Scott said. "We want to support the industry initiative to pursue construction of the next generation of nuclear plants." FPL, a division of Juno Beach-based FPL Group (NYSE: FPL, $40.38), has operated a nuclear power plant on Hutchinson Island in St. Lucie County since 1976. It also operates the Turkey Point nuclear plant in Miami-Dade County. General Electric Co. and Westinghouse, a subsidiary of British Nuclear Fuels Plc, have signed agreements with NuStart to design advanced reactors to be built at existing U.S. plant sites. NuStart spokesman Carl Crawford, who also is manager of nuclear communications for Entergy Nuclear in Jackson, Miss., said the coalition has not announced any sites it is considering. Members can propose their existing sites, and NuStart expects to select the locations by October. The Bush administration set up a program called Nuclear Power 2010 with the goal of getting a nuclear plant under construction by that year, Crawford said. The plant would not begin operating before 2014. "Nuclear energy is the only way we have to create energy without polluting air or contributing to greenhouse gases," Crawford said. NuStart and the Department of Energy are splitting the $520 million needed to prepare the licensing applications expected to be submitted by 2007, Crawford said. The reactors could cost as much as $2 billion apiece to build. "The construction cost of nuclear is the highest method of generating electricity," said David Lochbaum, a nuclear-safety engineer at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a Washington-based watchdog group. "No responsible owner would take such a risk alone." NuStart was formed to apply for 50-50 cost sharing from the DOE and to get the design cost funded so that all the companies can use the engineering work, reducing the financial risk for any one company, Crawford said. Copyright © 2005, The Palm Beach Post. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 39 Mail & Guardian: Don't shoot the messenger (South Africa PBMR Reactor) Monday, May 09, 2005 7:21 AM Jacklyn Cock and Richard Worthington: COMMENT Earthlife Africa Johannesburg feels compelled to respond to the recent presidential rebuke and in particular the suggestion of a self- serving agenda. The official response to our disclosure to the media of an unprotected radioactive site posing a threat to public health, in contravention of existing regulations, has brought welcome attention to the ongoing effects and activities of the nuclear industry, but it sought to undermine our integrity and question our commitment to the common good. Earthlife Africa is proud of its work since its formation in 1988. We can claim a number of successes, including the establishment of the Greenhouse People’s Environmental Centre in Joubert Park, Johannesburg; the prevention of the siting of a toxic waste dump in Chloorkop, Kempton Park; exposure of lethal pollution by Thor Chemicals in KwaZulu-Natal; and adding rigour to numerous environmental impact assessment processes. We can also claim a contribution to the broadening of the general understanding of the environment. Our Nuclear Energy Costs The Earth campaign demonstrates our capacity to reach into grassroots communities, while contributing to policy processes in constructive engagement with the post-apartheid state. The founding principles, policies and objectives of Earthlife Africa are a matter of public record. We work with a range of stakeholders and our advocacy on energy policy is guided by the founding principles of the civil society Energy Caucus, which includes organised labour, the Congress of South African Trade Unions, faith and indigenous people’s groups and community-based organisations. The core of this common platform is a call for a just transition to sustainable energy. The latest Pelindaba incident is an example of the failure of the nuclear industry to fulfil its many assurances to the public and to abide by existing regulations. Another failure is the National Nuclear Regulator’s inability to enforce existing regulation. This is despite ongoing subsidisation of the nuclear industry, which includes a Treasury allocation of R500-million for the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor programme last year. Our opposition to the “nuclear option†for South Africa is not simply a rejection of the secrecy of the industry and its unsubstantiated claims to deliver cheap electricity. It is also a call to redirect finances to human-scale energy development, drawing on our abundant renewable-energy resources through development of local industries that can demonstrably deliver on our national priorities of job creation and poverty alleviation. Earthlife Africa continues to question the opinion of the nuclear industry and International Atomic Energy Agency that there is a human-induced dose of radiation that can be declared “safeâ€. Elevated levels of radioactivity from commercial activities that regulatory authorities choose to classify as “safe†(which have been repeatedly reduced as knowledge develops) are essentially the levels of exposure not proven to cause human harm. That is, levels of exposure below which a company cannot be held legally liable. The efforts of Earthlife Africa are directed to promoting social and environmental justice for the people of Africa. We do not believe that new legislation is required to curtail such activities. Jacklyn Cock and Richard Worthington write on behalf of the Earthlife Africa Johannesburg steering committee of the Nuclear Energy Costs The Earth campaign All material copyright Mail&Guardian. ***************************************************************** 40 Scotsman.com News: Ukraine Plans to Build 11 Nuclear Reactors Sat 7 May 2005 Ukraine wants to build 11 new nuclear reactors by 2030 in a strategic move aimed at boosting its energy independence, the state-run Energoatom company, which operates all nuclear plants in the former Soviet republic, said today. The statement was issued after a meeting yesterday between Energoatom management and Ukraine’s Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko. The prime minister’s office could not be reached for comment. In 1986, Ukraine was the site of the world’s worst nuclear accident, when a reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear plant exploded and caught fire, spewing radiation over much of northern Europe. Ukraine has registered 4,400 deaths. In all, seven million people in the former Soviet republics of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine are believed to have suffered health problems as a result of the accident. Chernobyl’s remaining reactors were finally shut down in 2000 and the country is still asking Western donors for some £530 million to replace a hastily built shelter that secured the destroyed reactor’s core. The country needs new nuclear facilities “because the exploitation term of Ukraine’s oldest reactors expires in 2011â€, the nuclear operator said. The first two reactors should be built at the Khmelnitsky nuclear plant in western Ukraine, Energoatom said. Ukraine also intends to modernise its existing reactors, develop a centralised repository for nuclear waste and spent nuclear fuel, and boost domestic uranium production, the statement said. Ukraine currently operates 15 nuclear reactors, but it is still dependent on Russia, its huge neighbour, for much of its energy supplies. All existing Ukrainian reactors were built by Russian contractors. The European Union pledged last year to finance safety upgrades at the two newest reactors through a multi-million pound programme also assisted by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. ***************************************************************** 41 Scotsman.com News: Nuclear Power Option 'Blocked by Beckett' Sun 8 May 2005 By James Lyons, PA Political Correspondent Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett has prevented the case for new nuclear power stations being considered, leaked documents revealed today. Mrs Beckett will resist any attempt to put the option back on the agenda, says a briefing prepared for Alan Johnson, the new Productivity, Energy and Industry Secretary. The UK faces electricity and gas shortages, leading to steep increases in fuel prices, unless swift action is taken to replace nuclear plants coming to the end of their lives, warns Joan MacNaughton, top civil servant at the DPEI. However, a review ordered to examine how to cut carbon emissions by the Department of Environment last autumn is not considering new reactors, the leak to the Sunday Telegraph shows. Instead, Mrs Beckett favours forcing heavy industry to reduce its emissions which could “damage business competitiveness and security of (energy) supplyâ€, the briefing warns. “Because Beckett opposes nuclear new build, the review has not so far considered whether nuclear should contribute to cutting emissions.†The decision on whether to build a new generation of nuclear power stations is among the most sensitive Tony Blair faces at the start of his third term. The Prime Minister is said to be keen to approve the programme but faces opposition from left wing MPs. Mr Johnson, who was responsible for energy during his stint at the old Department of trade, is thought to be a cautious supporter. Ms MacNaughton urges him to reclaim leadership of the issue before the summer. “The case for looking at the nuclear question is that if we want to avoid a very sharp fall in nuclear’s contribution to energy supplies (some fall is certain and has already begun), we should need to act soon given the long lead times (10 years?) in getting a new nuclear station up and running.†Environmentalists said the leaked briefing appeared to be misleading. Tony Juniper, of Friends of the Earth, said: “Nuclear power is unsafe, uneconomic, unpopular and largely irrelevant as a practical answer to tackling climate change. “Even doubling nuclear capacity would only reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at most 8%, while adding to a toxic legacy of nuclear waste which the taxpayer will most likely have to pay for and which will remain dangerously radioactive for tens of thousands of years.†A DPEI spokesman said: “We do not comment on leaks. Government policy is as set out in the White Paper. The new Secretary of State Alan Johnson will been to look at the issues.†***************************************************************** 42 monticello times: NRC meeting draws light crowd www.monticellotimes.com Monday, May 09, 2005 Eric O'Link News Editor Turnout was relatively light at the first federal public meeting in Monticello regarding extension of the operating license at Monticello’s nuclear power plant. About 25 people showed up for the Wednesday, April 20, evening meeting. The majority of those were from either the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), a state agency, Xcel Energy, which owns the plant, or Nuclear Management Company, which operates it. Less than a dozen were members of the public, and though the discussion did have a few livelier moments, it remained civil. The NRC’s Daniel Merzke, project manager with the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation in Washington, D.C., gave a thorough presentation on the NRC’s role in the Monticello plant’s license renewal process. “We find it very important to keep the public informed about what we’re doing,” he said. In March, Xcel Energy filed an application with the NRC to extend Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant’s operating license by 20 years. The current license expires in 2010, and if the license renewal request is not granted, the plant would have to shut down at that time. Merzke explained that the NRC would perform a series of extensive inspections and evaluations of the plant and its systems, including on-site audits. The NRC will verify, during its safety and technical reviews, that the plant and its reactor can continue to operate safely during the license extension period, 20 years in this case. Periods of public comment He also outlined some of the opportunities the public will have to comment on the process. Several public meetings or comment periods will occur between now and the NRC’s decision, expected sometime in 2007. The most imminent public comment opportunity will begin next month, when the NRC dockets Xcel’s application and issues a notice of opportunity for a public hearing. Merzke said that would probably happen during the first two weeks of May. Once the opportunity for public hearing notice is issued, the public has 60 days to file a request for a hearing. A group of administrative law judges reviews hearing requests and grants them provided the person or organization that filed the request could be adversely affected by the plant’s adversely affected by the plant’s continuing to operate until 2030. A schedule of future public meetings is also expected in early May, with the docketing of Xcel’s application. Merzke took questions throughout Wednesday’s meeting, but his presentation turned into more of an open discussion near its end. A few people who attended voiced concerns about access to information throughout the process. But while the discussion was frank, it remained courteous. The subject of spent fuel rod waste in dry cask storage also came up, though Xcel’s request for outdoor waste storage at the Monticello plant is being handled by the state, not the NRC. A unique situation Chief among those who commented was George Crocker, executive director of the North American Water Office, based in Lake Elmo. His organization fought similar waste storage at Xcel’s Prairie Island nuclear plant near Red Wing more than 10 years ago. Crocker said it seemed like there was some confusion over environmental impact statements (EIS) and where the information for each EIS would be available. While the NRC is handling the EIS for license renewal, the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board is overseeing the EIS related to waste storage. Merzke admitted that the process was confusing, at least initially. “I believe there was some confusion over jurisdiction, who has responsibility for what, environmental impact statements, who’s issuing what,” he said. After the meeting, Merzke told the Times that Monticello’s situation is unique because the NRC has never handled a license renewal request at the same time a plant is working on a dry storage facility, known in the industry as an ISFISI. That is further complicated by Minnesota’s requirements for the process, he continued, including the opportunity for the legislature to consider and act on the storage facility during its session. “We’ve haven’t had an application where we’ve had to deal with an applicant submitting a request to build an ISFISI at the same time (as license renewal), plus the fact that Minnesota has some unique state regulations regarding that that we have to deal with at the same time,” Merzke said. “It’s a very unique situation.” Pointed discussion During the meeting, Crocker said he wanted to be pointed. “Here we have these two proceedings coming at us at the same time, and we don’t have anywhere near the resources that the industry has...and we don’t even know where to go to figure out what’s supposed to be in the EIS to deal with the state issue or federal issue,” Crocker said. “Where’s your efficiency in terms the review?” NRC officials at the meeting responded that they were just starting the process. “We’re kind of catching up because the certificate of need was applied for a few weeks back,” Merzke said, “well before the application was submitted.” “If you’re playing catch-up, where does that leave us?” Crocker asked. Merzke said the NRC “bends over backwards” to be open to the public. “And we appreciate that,” Crocker said. “We’re glad you’re here, don’t get us wrong.” The discussion wandered from waste storage to where public information was available about gasses released from the plant. Small amounts of radioactive gasses that have been allowed to decay are sometimes released from the plant’s tower. Kevin Krone, a resident of Monticello Township, is the plant’s closest neighbor. He lives about a half-mile from the reactor building and, with his wife Jonay, was at Wednesday’s meeting. “This whole business about them releasing gasses into the air, I don’t care if it’s in a different form or not, now, to say it’s all right, they don’t live next to the plant,” he said. “I’m just really concerned. I try to ask a simple question about where I can review this information, it took half an hour to get a simple answer. I’m not real comfortable with the storage facility.” After the meeting, Merzke reiterated that the federal license renewal process and the state waste storage approval were separate things. “The ISFISI is actually outside the scope of what license renewal is all about,” he said. “People are trying to tie the two together, but they’re not, they’re separate issues. We can go ahead and issue a renewed license if it comes to that, and they might not get approval to build the ISFISI.” If that’s the case, he added, Xcel and Nuclear Management Co. would have to come up with a new solution for dealing with the spent fuel rods–or shut down the plant. Merzke also said the NRC’s Web site, www.nrc.gov, was a good source of information about the process. Public documents are available for review on the Web site and meeting dates will be posted there. He said the government’s computerized filing system for public documents is “good if you know exactly what you’re looking for.” But if a user does not have that exact information, “it can be a little frustrating.” “The information is out there,” he said. “If they search hard enough, they’ll find it. We’re not trying to hide it, it just sometimes presents a challenge, even for me, to find a document.” He emphasized that the NRC is trying to be as open about the license renewal process. “License renewal is one of the most open topics out there,” he said. “We don’t want any surprises; we want everybody to know what’s going on.” Copyright 2005, Monticello Times Software © 1998-2005 ***************************************************************** 43 Orlando Sentinel: Powerful, brave voices tell story of Chernobyl OrlandoSentinel.com: BOOK REVIEW By John Freeman | Special to the Sentinel Posted May 8, 2005 Chernobyl caused the worst nuclear accident in history. The immediate death toll was 31 people, but thanks to the Soviet Union's policy of secrecy we will never know the true cost. Unknown thousands later died or were gravely sickened by radiation-related illnesses, and many from the tiny country of Belarus remain haunted by memories of that day. Svetlana Alexievich's Voices from Chernobyl: The Oral History of a Nuclear Disaster is the first book to chronicle their stories. As Haruki Murakami did in Underground, his oral history of the gas attack on Tokyo's subway, Alexievich puts full faith in the power of people's testimony, constructing a narrative from them alone. "I don't know what I should talk about," says the first voice, belonging to Lyudmilla Ignatenko. Her husband was a first-responder, as they are called today. He rushed to the scene with other firefighters and died 14 days later, choking on his internal organs. The title of this book suggests a mosaic of gruesome description. It's not. With the exception of those who received the heaviest exposure, radiation is an invisible killer. "People have covered up," remembers one woman, "they're hiding. Livestock is moaning, the kids are crying. It's war! And the sun is out." All of this made the rush to leave surreal. A soldier recalls seeing an old man crying. "I'll just get up, and walk to the cemetery," the man said, resigned to his fate. "I'll do it myself." Authorities hit the airwaves ordering people to evacuate, to leave their cats. Belongings were forbidden. One man recalls stealing the door from his own home -- it was how he carried his father to his coffin years before. A few years later, he used the same door to carry his poisoned daughter to her grave. The trauma of the experience gouges out memories from other traumas. Men and women remember brutalities they witnessed fleeing civil war in Tajikistan. They come to Chernobyl even though it is contaminated because no one will bother them there. The land and its poisoned fruit are theirs. "Don't worry," says one woman about her apples. "They buy them anyway. Some need them for their mother-in-law, some for their boss." One of the fascinating things about Voices From Chernobyl is the awful beauty one encounters in testimonies of pain and suffering. It's worth recalling that these are not writers or singers, but ordinary people who have forged language into a crutch, a sword, a shield, a shelter. There is nothing extraneous in their stories, as in this devastating passage: "I go to the cemetery. My mom's there. My little daughter. She burned up with typhus during the war. Right after we took her to the cemetery, buried her, the sun came out of the clouds. And shone and shone. Like: you should go and dig her up. My husband is there. Fedya. I sit with them all. I sigh a little. You can talk to the dead just like you can talk to the living. Makes no difference to me. I can hear the one and the other. When you're alone. And when you're sad. When you're very sad." With comments such as these, one would be a fool to ask why Alexievich chose to present this book as an oral history, rather than a conventional narrative. These voices are essential, powerful and brave. John Freeman is a writer in New York. Copyright © 2005, Orlando Sentinel| ***************************************************************** 44 PRN: Perry Nuclear Power Plant Returns to Service [PR Newswire - A United Business Media Company] AKRON, Ohio, May 6 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC) announced today that the Perry Nuclear Power Plant returned to service on May 6 following a scheduled refueling. At 9:43 p.m. today, the unit was operating at approximately 18 percent power. Power levels will vary over the next several days as part of routine testing until full operating power of 1,260 megawatts is achieved. Significant accomplishments during the outage include replacing 288 of the 748 fuel assemblies in the reactor core and improving several plant operating systems, including new, digital controls for the reactor feedwater system; rebuilt pumps with upgraded parts and materials and design modifications to enhance fuel reliability. In addition, total work scope for the outage was increased nearly 30 percent to enhance plant reliability. Added projects included repairs to the plant's main generator, refurbishing dozens of high-voltage breakers throughout the plant and modifying the emergency diesel generators' exhaust system. Perry is owned by the Akron, Ohio-based FirstEnergy Corp. (NYSE: ), and is operated by FirstEnergy's FENOC subsidiary. SOURCE FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Web Site: Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights ***************************************************************** 45 Independent: Plans for nuclear energy set to spark cabinet row www.independent.co.uk Nuclear advisers under pressure to quit after conflicts revealed By Tim Webb 08 May 2005 A third of the members of an important government nuclear committee have serious conflicts of interests, an Independent on Sunday investigation reveals today. Four of the committee's 12 members work for its largest suppliers, The IoS has learnt. One former government minister said this breached the code of conduct on public committees and urged them to resign. The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) has a £4.9m budget and a brief to advise the Government on the best way to store Britain's 470,000 cubic metres of nuclear waste; it is due to report by summer 2006. The publicly funded committee will play a central role in the debate over whether to build new nuclear reactors. Ministers recognise that to gain public support for a pro-nuclear policy, they first have to resolve the problem of what to do with existing nuclear waste. This is currently stored in 30 temporary locations around the country. But the revelations about its members' conflicts of interest will dent public trust. Committee member Mark Dutton is a paid consultant for NNC, which won the £1m contract to project-manage CoRWM's work. The committee disclosed the NNC contract, and Mr Dutton's links to the consultancy, but some members say he should have cut all ties to it. Fred Barker, another member, is an associate consultant for Enviros Consulting, which has a contract worth £50,000 to £100,000 from the committee. He has also been employed by The Environment Council, to which the committee has given over £100,000 of work. Professor Lynda Warren is an associate of the IDM consultancy, as is another member, Pete Wilkinson, a former chairman of Greenpeace UK. IDM has carried out £10,000 to £50,000 of work for CoRWM. Organisations employing Mr Barker, Professor Warren and Mr Wilkinson are understood to have bid for the £1m project won by NNC. None of their links to the committee's suppliers have been publicly declared. Michael Meacher MP, the former environment minister, said: "They should either step down or be asked to leave. I find it disturbing that people who have employment relationships with the industry should sit on an industry committee and then award large contracts to companies they are connected to." But Gordon MacKerron, the committee's chairman, said there would be no resignations. Potential conflicts of interest were "inevitable" on a technical committee, he said, and he denied that they affected decisions. NNC was appointed by the Department for the Environment, he said, and the other three cases were oversights, "but not an attempt to conceal". ©2005 Independent News &Media (UK) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 46 Independent: Blair demands nuclear power to protect high 'living standards' www.independent.co.uk By Marie Woolf, Chief Political Correspondent 09 May 2005 Tony Blair has ruled out making changes to "living standards" to tackle global warming, and is drawing up plans to build a new generation of nuclear power stations to reduce carbon dioxide emissions instead. The Prime Minister has personally endorsed "keeping the nuclear option open" and is planning a government statement on a change of policy before the summer, in the face of opposition from cabinet ministers, including Margaret Beckett, the Secretary of State for the Environment. Mr Blair's decision to revive the nuclear agenda was revealed two weeks ago by The Independent which reported that Mr Blair's own strategy unit was working on it. Yesterday, a leaked government briefing document disclosed that the nuclear option would be looked at soon after Parliament returns. A paper by departmental civil servants for Alan Johnson, the new Secretary of State for Productivity Energy and Industry, proposes that building more nuclear power plants or extending the lives of present ones should be a top priority for the first months of Labour's third term. It stresses the "need to act soon" and says there is a "case for looking at the nuclear question quickly". The paper says: "This formula to 'keep the nuclear option open' was a compromise endorsed by the PM, between ministers for and against. The question is whether we need to decide now (bearing in mind that it is generally easier to push ahead on controversial issues early in a new Parliament). It says nuclear should be looked at as an option for tackling climate change and protecting the energy supply. But it adds: "CO2 emissions have been rising in recent years. We look to be falling well short of the goal to cut them by 20 per cent by 2010." The revival of nuclear power is bolstered by the Prime Minister's admission that he is opposed to asking people to make changes to their lifestyle - such as buying energy-efficient refrigerators or taking the Eurostar instead of flights to Europe - to reduce global warming. Mr Blair has said publicly there is no political will to force people to make lifestyle changes to less fuel-hungry cars or energy-efficient lightbulbs. His remarks infuriated the Green movement: Stephen Tindale, director of Greenpeace, said: "He is implying that anyone who is against nuclear is in favour of making people go back and live in caves. It's absolutely ridiculous. He is saying he is not asking anyone to make any choices to protect the living standards of children in the future." The move to build more nuclear power stations while discounting lifestyle changes is also opposed by Labour MPs and Whitehall officials. Civil servants say it could weaken the Government's case against nuclear proliferation involving states such as Iran and North Korea. They criticised Mr Blair for ruling out "lifestyle changes". One said: "Getting an energy-efficient fridge is not going to change lifestyle. The push for nuclear is coming from the nuclear companies and their fellow-travellers in Government. There is no real urgency to take this particular decision, especially if it spreads yet more confusion. It could destroy UK credibility on climate change during the G8 and EU presidency." ©2005 Independent News &Media (UK) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 47 Scotsman.com: Government urged to set up nuclear build plan Monday, 9th May 2005 ARTHUR MACMILLAN THE government is planning to trigger a huge new building programme for nuclear power, it emerged last night. Joan MacNaughton, the director general of energy policy at the government’s new Department of Productivity, has warned that policy targets to reduce climate changing greenhouse gases by boosting renewable energies are set to fail. She says in a memorandum that ministers must take swift decisions on building nuclear power stations. A briefing note for incoming ministers, written by MacNaughton, advises that "it is generally easier to push ahead on controversial issues early in a new parliament". The document warns that while the UK now has 12 nuclear power stations providing 20% of electricity needs, without emitting greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, this number will fall in the next 15 years to just three. It also warns that power cuts may disrupt supplies after 2008, when many of the current nuclear plants will close. In addition, the report says Britain is to become increasingly reliant on imported gas to fulfil the nation’s energy needs. The briefing note adds: "Extending the lives of nuclear stations and/or new build could strengthen the generating sector’s contribution to CO2 reductions by 2020 and beyond." Ministers need to decide quickly to build new stations because it takes 10 years to get them on line, the note says, adding that unless decisions are taken now there will be a steep drop in nuclear output. The paper has come to light as the nuclear industry is gearing up for a major lobbying campaign for new stations. The Nuclear Industry Association believes the UK needs 10 new nuclear stations to fulfil obligations on cutting greenhouse gases. In Scotland, the most likely sites for new build are at Chapelcross, the site of a recently-closed nuclear power station on the Solway Firth and at Hunterston in Ayrshire, where the ageing nuclear plant is due to be phased out. In her briefing note MacNaughton has warned that carbon dioxide emissions have been rising in recent years. ©2005 Scotsman.com ***************************************************************** 48 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria Launches New N-Plant Contractor Tender [Sofia News Agency] Business: 7 May 2005, Saturday. Bulgaria will launch next week an international tender for equipment supplier and construction contractor of a nuclear power plant at the Danube river town of Belene. The conditions and procedures of the tender will be fully in line with Bulgaria's legislation, Energy Minister Miroslav Sevlievski assured Saturday. The price and economic sustainability of the offer will be the main criteria in selecting a preferred bidder. Bulgaria has decided against a CANDU heavy water reactor, proposed by the Atomic Energy of Canada. The other two contenders are a group between France's Framatome, Russia's Atomexportstroy and, in a separate group, Czech Skoda, Citibank, Italy's Unicredito and Czech Komercni Banka. The government gave the final go-ahead for Belene construction at the beginning of April, reviving the controversial plan after it was shelved amid environmentalists' protests. In the late 1980s Bulgaria spent USD 1.3 B on infrastructure and foundations at the Danube-located Belene for a 1,000- MW reactor, supplied by then Czechoslovakia. It would cost another USD 3 B to complete the project a capacity of 2,000 megawatts. Sevlievski, who took over the ministry in February after a government reshuffle, favours the establishment of a new company to own and run the plant.[ width=] novinite.com Forum Google Tourism Business MobileBulgaria All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2005 - Copyright ***************************************************************** 49 KUAM: Repairs made to USS San Francisco's bow KUAM.COM by Mindy Fothergill, KUAM News Saturday, May 07, 2005 $11 million in repairs and costs are still adding up. Repairs have been made to the USS San Francisco's bow. Navy spokesperson Lieutenant Arwen Consaul says a new large steel dome about 20 feet high was put in place of the damaged one. The submarine remains at the dry dock for more repairs. The nuclear-powered fast attack submarine ran aground 350 miles south of Guam back in January, killing one crewmember and injuring 23. Lt. Consaul says the repair and damage assessment has been completed and temporary repairs to the bow provide adequate structural integrity and proper buoyancy for transit under her own power to a shipyard. That location has yet to be determined. The Navy has yet to make any decisions about when the submarine will depart, where it will go, or what the final disposition will be. Lt. Consaul says the Navy is still trying to determine the next course of action for the Los Angeles-class submarine and her crew. Total costs so far are about $11 million, with more work estimated at $7.5 million. While officials haven't determined where repairs to the rest of the submarine will be made, officials confirm the work will not happen at the Guam Shipyard because the repairs needed for the ship are more extensive than the shipyard's capabilities. Copyright © 2000-2005 by Pacific Telestations, Inc. ***************************************************************** 50 RIA Novosti: RUSSIA'S UPDATED NUCLEAR SUBMARINE TO BE BACK IN SERVICE SOON MOSCOW, May 5 (RIA Novosti) - An updated nuclear submarine, the Dmitri Donskoi, will very soon enter the Russian fleet inventories, Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said to journalists in Moscow. To quote: "Very soon a new nuclear submarine, the Dmitri Donskoi, will come into service. Choice of the name is symbolical", Sergei Ivanov said. The heavy nuclear missile cruiser of Project 941 Taifun is being updated in Severodvinsk for the new missile systems. Since last year it has been testing the new intercontinental missile systems Bulava. Dmitri Donskoi (1350-1389) was the first of the Moscow princes to lead the popular armed struggle against Mongol-Tatars. In 1380 Dmitri Donskoi, leading the united Russian forces, defeated the invading forces of Khan Mamai in the Battle of Kulikovo. He passed for the first time the throne to his senior son Vasili without the Golden Horde consent. ***************************************************************** 51 BBC: Concern mounts over North Korea Last Updated: Saturday, 7 May, 2005 [TV footage of a previous N Korean missile test] There are reports that N Korea may be about to test a nuclear warhead Asian and European foreign ministers have urged North Korea to rejoin talks on its nuclear programme amid fears it is about to test a nuclear bomb. The ministers expressed "deep concern" about Pyongyang's claim to have developed nuclear weapons. Their statement, from a summit in Japan, came a day after US intelligence reports that a test was being prepared. The UN's atomic watchdog has appealed to world leaders to do their utmost to prevent such a test from happening. 'Denuclearisation' A joint statement issued at the 38-nation Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), called on Pyongyang to rejoin talks on its nuclear programme. "The ministers strongly urged the DPRK [North Korea] to return to the negotiating table of the six-party talks without any further delay and to make a strategic decision so as to achieve the denuclearisation of the peninsula in a peaceful manner through dialogue," it said. Pyongyang has shunned the multilateral discussion of its nuclear activities for almost a year. Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the UN's atomic watchdog, has warned a test would have "disastrous political and environmental consequences". Satellite images inconclusive Recent images taken by US spy satellites reportedly show activity at a suspected North Korean test site at Gilju, in the north-east of the country. The images show excavation and some construction which, a US defence official told the BBC, could be preparations for an underground nuclear test. But the official also warned that the US intelligence community had not concluded that a nuclear test was imminent. Instead, the official said, it could simply be a ruse by North Korea to strengthen its bargaining power with Washington. The BBC's Jonathan Head in Kyoto says China's Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing is likely to come under pressure to show more willingness to try to bring North Korea back to the talks. But he says there is disagreement on how to persuade Pyongyang to return to the six-party negotiations, involving the two Koreas, Russia, China, the US and Japan. Japan, he says, supports the threat of UN Security Council sanctions whereas China and South Korea believe this approach to be too provocative. Complicating these differences, our correspondent adds, is the mistrust and rivalry which surfaced recently between Japan and China which is preventing Asia's most powerful countries from presenting a united front against North Korea. ***************************************************************** 52 BBC: Crew blamed for grounding US sub Last Updated: Sunday, 8 May, 2005 [Damage to the submarine] The submarine hit an underwater mountain The crew of a US submarine that ran aground in the Pacific Ocean in January did not adequately review navigation charts, a Navy report says. The grounding could have been avoided if the crew had observed "prudent navigation practices", it says. A sailor died and several were injured in the accident 600km (350 miles) south of the island of Guam, one of the most important US Pacific bases. The nuclear reactor on the USS San Francisco was not damaged. Data not transferred The vessel was on its way to Australia, when it ran aground and suffered severe external damage. The submarine hit a mountain while submerged 157m (525 feet) below the ocean's surface. The mountain did not appear on the chart being used for navigation. But other charts displayed "a navigation hazard in the vicinity of the grounding", the US Navy's 124-page report said. It blamed the team for not reviewing those charts adequately and for not transferring "pertinent data" to the chart being used for navigation. "Even if not wholly avoided, however, the grounding would not have been as severe and loss of life may have been prevented," the report said. The Los Angeles-class submarines are 109.73m (360 ft) long and are classed as attack vessels, designed to counter enemy submarines or surface vessels. They are equipped with a single nuclear reactor. ***************************************************************** 53 BBC: North Korea 'may have six bombs' Last Updated: Monday, 9 May, 2005 [IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei] ElBaradei wants Pyongyang to return to the negotiating table UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohammed ElBaradei has said North Korea could possess several nuclear bombs. Speaking on US television, he said Pyongyang had enough plutonium to make five or six nuclear weapons. The country also has the necessary infrastructure to convert the plutonium into weapons, Mr ElBaradei added. North Korea announced in February that it had nuclear arms - but that claim has not been verified by Mr ElBaradei's International Atomic Energy Agency. When asked by CNN if it was the IAEA's assessment that North Korea already had as many as six bombs, Mr ElBaradei replied: "I think that would be close to our estimation." "We knew they had the plutonium that could be converted into five or six North Korea weapons," he went on to say. "We know that they had the industrial infrastructure to weaponise this plutonium. We have read also that they have the delivery system." IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming told the BBC there was no way the agency could know for sure whether North Korea had six bombs. But she said it would not be surprising if it did. 'Cry for help' The agency's inspectors were kicked out of North Korea at the end of 2002. Pyongyang has shunned multilateral talks on its nuclear programme for almost a year. Recently, reports have suggested it is preparing to test a nuclear bomb. Mr ElBaradei warned that a nuclear test would have disastrous political and environmental consequences. "I do hope that the North Koreans would absolutely reconsider such a reckless, reckless step," he told CNN. He said that whether the activity observed by satellites was real or simply a bluff, "it involves crying for help, frankly." "North Korea, I think, has been seeking a dialogue with the United States, with the rest of the international community... through their usual policy of nuclear blackmail, nuclear brinkmanship, to force the other parties to engage them," he said. Mr ElBaradei has already urged the international community to put pressure on North Korea not to go ahead with the test, and appealed to Pyongyang to return to the negotiating table. ***************************************************************** 54 WorldNetDaily: Nuclear violations SATURDAY MAY 7 2005 Posted: May 7, 2005 In her opening statement to the Sixth Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons held at U.N. headquarters five years ago, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright encouraged conferees to focus on three key issues: how the Treaty is working to (a) prevent nuclear proliferation, (b) advance nuclear disarmament, and (c) enhance cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Secretary of State Condilezza Rice didn't bother to address or even attend the Seventh RevCon being held this month. Instead, she sent some mid-level State Department weenie you probably never heard of named Stephen Rademaker to instruct the conferees. Before revealing what Rademaker directed the conferees to focus on, it might be useful to provide some excerpts from the Sixth RevCon Final Report. The Conference recalls that the overwhelming majority of States entered into legally binding commitments not to receive, manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices in the context – inter alia – of the corresponding legally binding commitments by the nuclear-weapon States to nuclear disarmament in accordance with the Treaty. In other words, the overwhelming majority of NPT signatories thought they had obtained – among other things – a legally binding commitment by the United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom to get rid of their nuke stockpiles. The Conference emphasizes that measures should be taken to ensure that the rights of all States Parties under the provisions of the preamble and the articles of the Treaty are fully protected and that no State Party is limited in the exercise of these rights in accordance with the Treaty. In other words, President Clinton violated Iran's NPT rights when he – among other things – strong-armed President Yeltsin into canceling the sale of a Russian gas-centrifuge uranium-enrichment plant to Iran. The Conference reaffirms that the IAEA is the competent authority responsible to verify and assure, in accordance with the Statute of the IAEA and the IAEA's safeguards system, compliance with its safeguards agreements with States Parties, undertaken in fulfillment of their obligations under Article III, paragraph 1 of the Treaty, with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. It is the conviction of the Conference that nothing should be done to undermine the authority of the IAEA in this regard. States Parties that have concerns regarding non-compliance with the safeguards agreements of the Treaty by the States Parties should direct such concerns, along with supporting evidence and information, to the IAEA to consider, investigate, draw conclusions and decide on necessary actions in accordance with its mandate. In other words, the IAEA is solely responsible for deciding whether "source and special fissionable materials" are being used by Iran "in furtherance of any military purpose." So, as Rademaker addresses the 2005 RevCon, keep in mind that the United States has unquestionably violated the NPT by denying Iran's "inalienable" rights under the Treaty – but as best IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei can determine, Iran has not. Quoth Rademaker: Today, the Treaty is facing the most serious challenge in its history due to instances of noncompliance. Although the vast majority of member states have lived up to their NPT nonproliferation obligations that constitute the Treaty's most important contribution to international peace and security, some have not. Indeed, Mr. President, some continue to use the pretext of a peaceful nuclear program to pursue the goal of developing nuclear weapons. We must confront this challenge in order to ensure that the Treaty remains relevant. This Review Conference provides an opportunity for us to demonstrate our resolve by reaffirming our collective determination that noncompliance with the Treaty's core nonproliferation norms is a clear threat to international peace and security. For almost two decades, Iran has conducted a clandestine nuclear weapons program, aided by the illicit network of A.Q. Khan. Britain, France and Germany, with our support, are seeking to reach a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear problem, a solution that given the history of clandestine nuclear weapons work in that country, must include permanent cessation of Iran's enrichment and reprocessing efforts, as well as dismantlement of equipment and facilities related to such activity. So what is ElBaradei going to do about Iran's "nuclear weapons" program? Quoth the director general: I have seen no nuclear weapons program in Iran. What I have seen is that Iran is trying to gain access to nuclear enrichment technology, and so far there is no danger from Iran. Physicist James Gordon Prather has served as a policy implementing official for national security-related technical matters in the Federal Energy Agency, the Energy Research and Development Administration, the Department of Energy, the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Department of the Army. Dr. Prather also served as legislative assistant for national security affairs to U.S. Sen. Henry Bellmon, R-Okla. -- ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee and member of the Senate Energy Committee and Appropriations Committee. Dr. Prather had earlier worked as a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and Sandia National Laboratory in New Mexico. [WorldNetDaily.com] ***************************************************************** 55 UCS: Japanese Plutonium Program Threatens Nonproliferation Regime, Warn Nobel Laureates and Other Experts [Union of Concerned Scientists] May 5, 2005 UN Delegates Told Reprocessing Plant Could Produce Plutonium for 1,000 Nuclear Bombs a Year UNITED NATIONS, NEW YORKThe Union of Concerned Scientists released a statement today signed by 27 eminent scientists, former policy makers and analysts calling on the Japanese government to indefinitely postpone operating a controversial plutonium reprocessing plant at Rokkasho-mura. The declaration warns that Japan's plan to separate and stockpile up to 8 metric tons of plutonium annuallythe equivalent of 1,000 nuclear bombs each yearcalls into question Japan's commitment to strengthening the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Furthermore, the signatories state the facility would undermine international efforts to discourage other countrieslike Iran and North Koreafrom pursuing nuclear fuel cycle facilities that could be used for nuclear weapons programs. The statement was released today in a briefing to delegates attending the NPT Review Conference at the United Nations. The pronouncement, "A Call on Japan to Strengthen the NPT by Indefinitely Postponing Operation of the Rokkasho Spent Fuel Reprocessing Plant," is signed by several Nobel prize-winning physicists, a National Medal of Science recipient, and other eminent scientists from major academic institutions. Also signing are former Defense Secretary William Perry, former Nuclear Regulatory Commissioner Peter Bradford, and several former government officials who served in the Departments of Energy, Defense, and State under both Republican and Democratic administrations. Former directors of both Sandia and Lawrence Livermore labswhere US nuclear weapons research is conductedalso signed the appeal. "We are calling on the Japanese government to breathe new life into the NPT by suspending its provocative plan to open the Rokkasho reprocessing plant," said signatory Dr. Kurt Gottfried, Chairman of the Union of Concerned Scientists and physics professor at Cornell University. "If Japan forges ahead with separating and stockpiling weapons-usable plutonium, it will only encourage countries like North Korea and Iran to do likewise." The $20 billion Rokkasho facility is the first industrial-scale reprocessing plant in a country not possessing nuclear weapons. Initial tests using irradiated nuclear fuel are scheduled for December 2005, with full-scale operations slated for 2007. Despite the fact that Japan has a stated policy of having "no surplus plutonium," at the end of 2003 its plutonium stockpile stood at 40.6 metric tonsenough to construct some 5,000 nuclear weapons. "With Rokkasho operational, by 2020 Japan's domestic stock of plutonium could equal the U.S. stockpile of plutonium for weapons," said Frank von Hippel, physicist and professor at the Science and Global Security Program at Princeton. "Separated plutonium poses a risk of theft, and such large stocks would be destabilizing." DAMON MOGLEN Outreach Coordinator, Global Security 202-331-5420 rhayes@ucsusa.org LUKE WARREN Press Secretary 202-331-5420 © Union of Concerned Scientists Page Last Revised: 05.05.2005 ***************************************************************** 56 The unsecured and unsafe storage of nuclear hazards capable of Date: Sun, 08 May 2005 19:26:08 -0700 ===================================== Subject: The unsecured and unsafe storage of nuclear hazards capable of mass destruction that already exist TO: THOSE LISTED GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS and UNDISCLOSED RECIPIENTS ============================================================ Dear Those Listed: What about the "here and now" that discloses real nuclear exposure threats to humanity! I'm a mom/grandmother/great grandmother who cares. Surely, the US Department of Energy's fiscal year 2006 - 2007 budget should include the necessary security funds that would at least represent an attempt to protect whole families from being annihilated. A program was aired May 5, 2005, on the Sci-Fi channel at 9:00 pm. The scenario: What could happen while earthquake events were ongoing near a nuclear power plant that was not capable of sustaining earthquake damage. The potential should have caused Americans to at least think about the deadly consequences. Only one nuclear site, Hanford, reports the development of the vitrification project is "slowed" because the earthquake construction plan was determined to be inadequate. Many layoffs have been implemented until further earthquake protection plans are reviewed and in-place. Neither did the USDOE meet their milestone to clean up the contaminated Hanford K-basins that are leaking and near the Columbia River. The agency was fined. Hanford is just one nuclear site among 14 others across the Nation in the same condition. Many of the old nuclear power plants only provide about 20 percent of our Nation's power. The problem I encounter on my journey as a National Independent Advocate and wounded worker-downwinder is the fact that too many Americans are simply unaware. All these unaware Americans that includes members of Congress, seem to expect is to be able to hold a job that provides enough money to meet most of their daily needs. Yet, many of them know that their neighbors or family members died from the causal connection to a single and/or multiple related nuclear disease. I suppose that "ignorance of the facts before them" happens because Americans cannot smell the lethal toxins; taste the lethal toxins; or hear the lethal toxins. Oh, but WE can taste the lethal toxins and feel the lethal toxins as body burdens. But, millions of Americans did observe the consequences of the lethal health effects caused by a toxin -- the highly explosive airplane fuel bombs that blew up the World Trade Centers on "September 11, 2001" aka 9/11 that killed only about 3,000 Americans. By comparison, nuclear incidents have killed or maimed thousands of victims including our children. The President and the members of Congress admitted liability for their negligent and abusive nuclear facility "caretakers" who caused death, disease, and suffering of untold numbers of victims and their families by July 1999, mid-April 2000, by October 30, 2000, and by October 2004; and to present day. At Hanford 1,920 cesium and strontium capsules contain deadly dose budget inventory that are stored in decaying pool cells. Hydrogen buildup is an explosive factor that must be reported to the USDOE oversight. The question ?What if the pool cells were drained". . .has now been addressed by the National Academy of Science in a most graphic manner that is chilling to state the very least of it. Hanford guards are not trained to protect the old, deteriorated Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility that houses the cesium and strontium capsules that are stored in pool cells. One capsule would light all of New York. One damaged capsule could kill hundreds of nearby victims. The Hanford Tank Farms, also, stores a large quantity of potentially explosive and lethal dose budget inventory in above and underground storage tanks -- a mix of about 1,600 to 1,800 chemicals that are laced with radiation. Only about 52 chemicals are monitored. The "caretakers" have not found a ways or means to protect the workers or the public from the release of the tanks' toxic vapors that migrate to unknown regions to contaminate other victims. Consequently, the workers are sickened and debilitated. There have been no health studies conducted to investigate causal connection to the workers' family members. Tank farm workers have died waiting for any kind of aid from their government officials. The workers' protests; their State workers' compensation claims; and their qualified "Energy Employees Occupational Illness Program Act of 2000" (EEOICPA) claims have been denied recognition by the government "caretakers." For instance, the 200E area 272AW building breathing air ventilation system is posted as a hazardous waste threat to the workers who are likely transporting the toxins off-site to contaminate the citizens. The workers are expected to ignore the posting. The Tank Farms' dose bud! get inventory includes beryllium, strontium, asbestos, et.al. Strontium is a lethal element that only evolves from radiation in containments. All a domestic or foreign terrorist would have to do is to release this type of dose budget inventory to the atmosphere. By 1944, the willful Hanford nuclear facility "caretakers" admittedly and deliberately released significant amounts of Iodine 131 to the atmosphere that migrated upwind and downwind of Hanford that came to be known as the "Sea of Green" aka the "Green Runs." After over 14 years in litigation since 1991, the Federal Court trial has just begun; and only 6 Bellwether litigants out of about 2,300 Hanford downwinder litigants are allowed to appear before a Federal Judge Fremming Nielson who has admitted his serious conflicts of interest -- a very long story by now. Hanford workers are included among the Plaintiffs. Many of these litigants have already died. Tons of nuclear dose budget inventory cause Hanford to be cited as the most dangerous nuclear site in America according to the Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board -- a direct report to the members of Congress. In five years since October 30, 2000, only 233 survivor and beryllium exposed Hanford workers have received the EEOICPA compensation award. Only two qualified cancer victims have been awarded the EEOICPA compensation. Over a thousand claims were denied out of over 2,900 claims filed. Reportedly, at the time of his compensation award, one of the cancer claimants admitted he was a heavy smoker and indicated he was "cancer free." While other cancer claimants had already died whose entitlement claims were/are still denied by the USDOL. Still another contractor has been awarded a contract by the USDOL to quesstimate the damage caused by chemical exposures -- an EEOICPA Subtitle E mandate that was approved by the members of Congress and signed by President George W. Bush in October 2004 before the Presidential elections. Yet, the USDOE admits they have no authority or ways and means to fine the contractor for violations of the "worker safety standards" that involves chemicals. After six decades of the agency "caretakers" redundant denials of any harm done, all of a sudden the government scientists / regular employees claim they are capable of estimating the dose of nuclear workers. Yet, the "caretakers" admit on record the historical dose records are destroyed, missing, or altered. Whereas, for decades, to date the negligent and abusive government agency "caretakers" proclaim "no harm done to the environment, the on-site personnel, or the off-site populous." This advertisement is reflected in thousands o! f investigative reports such as: public record occurrence reports; public record radiation problem reports; tiger team reports; agency health survey reports structured by government scientists; anomaly incident reports; status of any nuclear site report entered on record by the government officials (US Federal Registry); et.al. Discrimination is only one tort among many other torts that are affirmed using he USDOL's own public record exhibits. Gai Oglesbee, National Independent Advocate Retired Injured Hanford worker National Nuclear Victims for Justice Manager ============================================================ EXCERPTS: "Prompted by nongovernmental scientists' claims that terrorist ground or air assaults could drain the pools and ignite the highly radioactive spent fuel assemblies resulting in consequences exceeding Chernobyl, Congress asked the academy for an evaluation. The NAS conclusion: 'A terrorist attack that partially or completed drained a spent fuel pool could lead to ... the release large quantities of radioactive material to the environment.' The academy added that NRC's efforts to belittle the risk are 'not prudent. . .' Guards repeatedly have complained they neither have the training, armament or sufficient personnel to foil a sophisticated ground assault. . . The FBI's conclusion begs the question: Has the United States done all it can to prevent or reduce the consequences of nuclear sabotage since Sept. 11, 2001. . .?" ============================================================ EXHIBIT 2: Coming to a Reactor Near You - The Future of Nuclear Terror CounterPunch May 5, 2005 http://www.counterpunch.org/ramberg05052005.html By BENNETT RAMBERG This month marks Chernobyl's 19th anniversary. It comes at a time of continuing concern about the motivation and ability of terrorists to inflict an intentional Chernobyl upon the United States. Despite Washington's recognition of the risk, 31/2 years after the attack on the World Trade Center, it is still attempting to sort out what to do. The dithering ill serves national security. Testifying before the Senate Senate's Select Committee on Intelligence on Feb. 16, FBI Director Robert Mueller succinctly laid out problem. Commenting that 9/11 "al-Qaida planner Khalid Sheik Mohamed had nuclear power plants as part of his target set," Mueller ominously warned, "... (W)e have no reason to believe that al-Qaida has reconsidered." Indeed, the director placed nuclear power plants at the top of the hit list of infrastructure targets that terrorists would be tempted to attack. The FBI's conclusion begs the question: Has the United States done all it can to prevent or reduce the consequences of nuclear sabotage since Sept. 11, 2001? The answer: Not really. In fairness, the country's nuclear infrastructure is more secure today. Utilities have bolstered defenses against ground assaults. Intelligence is more focused. Airport security better protects against airplane hijacking. Yet, the National Academy of Science's April 6 report on the vulnerability of nuclear spent fuel pools belies the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's persistent mantra that our nuclear plants are effectively immune. Prompted by nongovernmental scientists' claims that terrorist ground or air assaults could drain the pools and ignite the highly radioactive spent fuel assemblies resulting in consequences exceeding Chernobyl, Congress asked the academy for an evaluation. The NAS conclusion: "A terrorist attack that partially or completed drained a spent fuel pool could lead to ... the release large quantities of radioactive material to the environment." The academy added that NRC's efforts to belittle the risk are "not prudent." As an immediate remedy, the NAS called upon utilities to modify the spent fuel configuration and density to allow better cooling and water-spray systems to douse any terrorist ignition. It further recommended a plant-by-plant survey of unique vulnerabilities. The NRC will require further political prodding to implement recommendations since the academy is only an advisory group. Unfortunately, the terrorists' calendar to do us harm may not comply with the commission's labored pace. The commission must also do a better job in protecting power reactors, a matter the academy addressed marginally. It remains unclear whether the NCR's post-9/11 "Orders" requiring beefed up plant security meets the challenge. Guards repeatedly have complained they neither have the training, armament or sufficient personnel to foil a sophisticated ground assault. The commission has not provided the public with ample information to judge the results of mock attack exercises intended to test defenses. Furthermore, the NRC still clings to the mistaken belief that intelligence will provide timely warning of an increasing attack risk environment to bolster security. However, one fact remains clear: nuclear power plants are naked against a Sept. 11, 2001-like air attack. Plaintively, the commission argues that the "defense in depth" engineering built into reactors to prevent serious accidents should suffice although it continues to "study" the matter. It contends that the first line of defense ought to be airport security; if that fails, military aircraft could intercept suspicious airplanes. Unfortunately, this "action plan" is flawed. Engineers did not design reactor containments to withstand an intentional, high-speed impact by a large commercial airliner. Then there is the risk that such an attack could disrupt "soft" vital lifelines outside the containment that could prompt a meltdown. Airport security already has failed to prevent general aviation "buzzing" of reactors. Other defensive measures could be deployed. However, the commission opposes antiaircraft guns or missiles at reactor sites fearing that they could shoot down innocent planes. The fact that other countries pursued this path without mishap has not made an impression. There yet remains passive defenses. Utilities could put in place large World War II-like barrage balloons to entwine light aircraft in their tether. Another option, heavy steel I-beams can be placed over reactor sites to fragment incoming aircraft dramatically reducing their ability to penetrate sensitive structures. The beams also could anchor defensive steel cabling and netting to further deflect impact. The NRC has before it a formal petition for rulemaking to accomplish this option. Unfortunately, the commission is not likely to implement such insurance as long as it clings to the view that attacks are improbable and plants are well protected. This year's Chernobyl commemoration should serve as a useful reminder of what can happen if the presumptions prove wrong. Bennett Ramberg is the author of Destruction of nuclear energy facilities in war: The problem and the implications and Global Nuclear Energy Risks. He served in the Department of State's Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs in the administration of President George H.W. Bush. ***************************************************************** 57 Jeff St. Clair: Bush Administration Kills Nuclear Fallout Study Downwinders Be Damned: Frank Godino 2 1 2005-05-07T19:46:00Z 2005-05-07T19:46:00Z 3 1093 6235 Godino Engineering 51 12 7657 9.4402 By Jeffrey St. Clair    Just as the Bush administration contemplates ordering up a new generation of nuclear weapons, which may in turn spark a new round of nuclear testing in the high deserts of Nevada, the Center for Disease Control, a federal outpost in Atlanta charged with supervising the nation's physical well-being, pulled the plug on a long-term study into the dire health consequences from nuclear testing in the 1950s and 1960s on people living in the American southwest.    The study, which has been underway for seven years, has been tracking the thyroid conditions of 4,000 former students who lived in southwestern Utah and eastern Nevada in 1965, at the height of testing of nuclear weapons at the Nevada Test Site. The lead researcher, Dr. Joseph L. Lyons, a professor at the University of Utah, was informed via a curtly worded letter on March 21 that funding for the study had been inexplicably yanked.    The letter terminating the research in midstream was written by Michael A. McGeehin, director of the CDC's Division of Environmental Hazards and Health Effects. McGeehin claimed the study was killed because of financial considerations. "The CDC does not have the resources to extend funding for this study beyond the current budget period," McGeehin wrote. "We recommend that you take measures to close out this study by the end of the current budget period, which will occur on August 31, 2005."    The Utah Thyroid Disease Study hardly seems like a financial burden on the federal purse. In seven years, the investigation into thyroid cancers linked to radioactive fallout has cost the federal treasury only $8,049,988, roughly the amount the Pentagon spends every two hours in Iraq. Or consider this: from 1990 to 1995, the federal government spent more than $90 million in legal fees to fight off claims from downwinders and workers at nuclear weapons plants over the health consequences of bomb-making and testing.     Lyons believes, with good reason, that the study was axed for political reasons. "The only interpretation I can put on it is that the Bush administration doesn't want to know the health effects of fallout on American citizens," Lyons told the Desert News.     The scientist also said it was an extremely rare occurrence for the CDC to pull funding in the middle of a major study. "I've never know it to happen before," says Lyons, who has been researching the links between cancer and fallout since 1977.     Located 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, the Nevada Test Site, established in 1951, sprawls over 1,500 square miles of desert basin and range country. Between 1951 and 1992, the Pentagon and Department of Energy conducted at least 925 nuclear blasts at the site, more than 100 of the explosions were above ground, open-air tests, which cast a radioactive pall over much of the American West. Even the underground tests vented plumes of radiation.     A 1997 study by the National Cancer Institute reported that the fallout from the blasts deposited large amounts of radioactive iodine across the lower-48 states. The report concluded that the contamination was so severe that it may cause as many as 70,000 cases of thyroid cancer alone. By way of comparison, that's 65,000 more casualties than Saddam Hussein is alleged to have caused in his poison gas attack on the Kurdish village of Halabja in 1988.    It was Lyons' groundbreaking study in 1979 for the New England Journal of Medicine which proved that radioactive fallout from the open-air nuclear tests in Nevada had lead to increased incidents of cancer in communities downwind of the blasts. A subsequent study demonstrated that those same downwind communities faced an increased likelihood of leukemia deaths. These two reports prompted Congress to finally enact a fallout compensation measure for downwinders.    In 1993, Lyons and his colleagues began studying the thyroid conditions of former school children who lived downwind of the blasts. That research, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that the schoolchildren exposed to the highest levels of radiation were 3.4 times more likely to suffer from thyroid tumors than would be expected.    These same students had been monitored by federal researchers until 1970, who, unsurprisingly, claimed not to have found any link between exposure to fallout and thyroid tumors. But Lyons and his colleagues began examining those students as adults and found that 58 of the former downwinders had nodules on their thyroids. Of those, 8 were malignant tumors and 11 were benign tumors.    This initial study buttressed the theory held by Lyons and many other scientists that there is a lifetime risk to fallout exposure and that thyroid problems in particular develop very slowly across a span of decades. These results prompted Lyons to apply for funding from the CDC for a larger study that would examine the thyroid conditions of all 4,000 former schoolchildren in southwestern Utah and eastern Nevada, who were originally identified in 1965 as being exposed to the most extreme levels of fallout from the blasts. The incidence of thyroid problems in those students was to be compared to a control group in Safford, Arizona.    One of the initial problems Lyons ran into was the realization that the radioactive fallout extended farther than he anticipated, meaning that most of the population of Safford had also been exposed to radiation, though in much smaller doses. Fallout has gone global. When it comes to thermonuclear weapons, we all live downwind.    By the end of last year, the researchers had tracked down more than 90 percent of the former students, most of whom agreed to be examined for the study. "We've already reported that there's an excess of tumors of the thyroid gland," Lyons said. "And we've got pretty strong indications that there are other disease problems that ought to be looked at."    Originally, Lyons planned to have the study completed within five years. But he encountered continual meddling and roadblocks from the CDC that consumed both time and much of the grant money. "The federal government put all kinds of bureaucratic hurdles in our path that were not part of the original agreement," Lyons contends.    The agreement called for Lyons' research to be overseen by the University of Utah. Then the CDC said that the study needed to be scrutinized by an institutional review board at the CDC, a requirement that delayed the research by two years. Next the CDC informed Lyons that he had to submit the plans for his study to a panel at the National Academy of Sciences, an inquisition that lasted another two years. Then the CDC called for a yet another review of Lyons' methodology by a three-person panel at the Department of Energy.     When Lyons and his colleagues finally got out into the field and began to get results, the CDC pulled the plug. "Essentially, they said, 'Tough luck, we don't want your study'," said Lyons. "I've been working on this now since 1977. I'm about to retire and I'd really like to finish up this thyroid study and get some definitive answers."    Those answers might prove to be unsettling for the Bush administration as it pursues a new generation of nuclear weapons and grooms the killing grounds of the Nevada Test Site for another go-round of nuclear blasts.    People are getting sick and dying in the American Southwest and the Bush administration doesn't want them to learn why.    Downwinders be damned. ***************************************************************** 58 Independent: Navajos take part in global forum May 6, 2005 Navajos take part in global forum By Kathy Helms Diné Bureau FORT DEFIANCE — The Navajo Nation was among desert cultures from throughout the world represented at the week-long Second Festival of Cultures and Civilizations of World Deserts in Dubai -United Arab Emirates, north of Saudi Arabia near the Persian Gulf. From distant sand dunes shimmering in the sun to veiled women noticeably absent in university classrooms, the trip was an educational experience for Cora Maxx-Phillips of the Office of the President and Vice President, and Lillie Lane, public information officer with Navajo Environmental Protection Agency. Likewise, those in Dubai International Endurance City were fascinated with the "famous Navajo Indians." It was Navajos' first participation in the Middle East. The tribal delegation was joined by the Inuits of Alaska and representatives from Africa, Saudi Arabia, China, Australia, and Mongolia. The event was organized by the Zayed International Prize for the Environment, World Deserts Foundation and the Dubai Department of Tourism and Commerce Marketing. The World Deserts Foundation works with desert communities to develop their lands. "The Navajo Nation continues to forge ahead in its goal to attain economic self-sufficiency, and our DIné still adhere to the cultural, social and traditional values that have made the Navajo Nation unique and fascinating throughout its history," said Maxx-Phillips, speaking at an Endurance City seminar. She also gave a presentation on the U.S. Forest Service's recent decision to proceed with the Arizona Snowbowl expansion and how that decision impacts the DIné and their culture. She further told the group of the plight of Navajos suffering from the "American government's nuclear exploitation." Maxx-Phillips also told conference participants that Navajos have been "stereotyped by Hollywood filmmakers for decades and treated disrespectfully for so many centuries that it is sometimes hard to recognize when our people are being demeaned. Until lately, even educational books portrayed our people in a bad light, often promoting stereotypes without realizing it." Not only are stereotypes harmful, she told the group, they also foster prejudice and discrimination, resulting in disorder and illness. Those types of ailments generally are characterized by a diagnostician such as a crystal gazer, and treated traditionally by medicine people through prayers, songs and ceremonies focused on healing. Sacrifice zone Phillips said it is well documented that indigenous people were among the first to be targeted for secret government projects and experiments in the 1940s and '50s, and were sent underground to mine the uranium that fueled the first atomic bombs used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. "Though the toxic effects of radiation were known to government officials, no one did anything to protect the Navajo miners," she said. "Our people toiled day and night in the mines without face masks, ventilation or clean drinking water. They breathed the radioactive dust and drank contaminated water, and later paid with their lives and their land." Recent studies on environmental racism show that Native people are disproportionately impacted by the toxic effects of the nuclear fuels cycle. Thousands of Native people have died or suffered health problems from the mining, milling, enrichment, testing and disposal of nuclear fuels and weapons, Phillips said. Representatives of the various countries were housed in their new home of makeshift trailers arranged in a small area. Many countries sent delegations which performed tribal dances and music. Navajo participants including Jimmie Harrison, Jerry Blacksheep, Lorenza Garcia and Curtis Ray shared songs, dances, crafts, knowledge of healing practices and medicinal plants. The biggest challenges of the event were overcoming last-minute schedule changes and having to be in two places at once, according to the delegation. Navajo EPA's Lane said the theme of the festival was the need to recognize, share and celebrate the many significant contributions that desert cultures have contributed toward the world's civilizations. She said discussions centered around global warming and how desert cultures could best preserve and perpetuate themselves without having a negative impact on the world. The 2005 festival opened with an elaborate ceremony, followed by a conference in Dubai focused on discussions of desertification, economic development, and preservation of desert resources, including water and plants. Maxx-Phillips said information was exchanged regarding the Navajo Nation becoming a charter member of World Desert Foundation so it could reap the benefits of research in science and technology as well as being part of the strategic alliance of world desert cultures. Some countries showcased their efforts toward economic development, focusing on desert tourist ventures and the need to market tribal arts and crafts a viable means of support, Lane said. Friday May 6, 2005 Selected Stories: Murder suspect hangs himself; Jail guards unable to revive man accused of killing brother-in-law Navajos take part in global forum Police to saturate streets Store opening, Cinco de Mayo, Arts Crawl highlight weekend the Gallup Independent. ***************************************************************** 59 Salt Lake Tribune: Facing the consequences Opinion Article Last Updated: 05/07/2005 01:25:42 AM Utah proved itself the reddest of red states in the 2004 election. Now we face a few of the consequences. The resumption of nuclear testing in Nevada is virtually a done deal, and the construction of more nuclear power plants looms on the horizon. Thanks to President Bush, we are at risk of becoming downwinders again as well as watching our state turn into a perpetual nuclear waste dump site. We ought to be raising an uproar. Underground nuclear tests are not safe. The Baneberry underground test of Dec. 18, 1970, produced a huge plume of radioactive material that blew our way. It could happen again, renewing Utah's downwinder harvest of cancer deaths and birth defects. Nuclear power plants do not reduce our dependence on oil, but they do produce radioactive waste. Utah and other Western states could be forced into storing that waste. Furthermore, the plants are dangerous. Remember Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Think of terrorists targeting unsecured plants and shipments of radioactive waste. Utah is a beautiful state with good people. Why should we be treated as glow-in-the-dark sacrifices to bad ideas? If we want a future, we'd better raise our voices now against nuclear testing and nuclear power plants. Patricia Samul Salt Lake City © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 60 Swans Commentary: IS DEPLETED URANIUM (DU) DANGEROUSLY RADIOACTIVE? Blips #18, by Gilles d'Aymery - desk018 Swans Commentary » swans.com May 9, 2005 "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know." Ralph Waldo Emerson It's a good question; one that "open intelligence" has answered by the affirmative for over a decade. US "authorities" and Pentagon geeks and gooks, have, however, continually denied the lethality of DU. Nope, they say, DU is safe for Suburbia. Enjoy your DU, Viagra-cum-Prozac-loaded, in your backyards. It will keep you and your family safe and warm, as the almighty, thanks to the diamond US army, whose business it is to defeat the terroooorists and all the enemies out there (definition of enemy? Anyone who's not us and white, and doesn't own an SUV or love NASCAR, and dresses in red, white and blue.), goes on securing our non-negotiable American way of life so that it may continue in perpetuity, as the cemeteries of Empire fill to the hilt. BUT, SURPRISE, SURPRISE, here is what one of our proud men who's gone to Iraq, and Kuwait, and Afghanistan, and Egypt, and Israel, and Jordan, and beyond, to keep us free and safe, a middle officer in the American Armed Forces, a Captain of the US Army, praise his soul and stamina, had to say in an e-mail on the subject: Please read through page 6, an article on uranium. Note the date at the top. In the Army, since 2000, we have received yearly training and refreshers on the dangers of depleted uranium and other sources of radioactive contamination. If you saw how much the Army spends and how much it pushes for safety in relation to radioactive dangers, you would be surprised. This article by Sara Flounders and John Catalinotto is a farce [ed. "Depleted Uranium: The Pentagon Betrayal Of GIs And Iraqis," By Sara Flounders and John Catalinotto, in Swans Special issue on Iraq, "RESISTANCE: In The Eye Of The American Hegemon," February 2, 2004.]. The military is very focused on this issue. As a matter of fact, all tank hulks from Desert Storm are in specially marked fields and marked off limits to everyone (signs in English and Arabic). Having been to Kuwait and Iraq, I know this to be true. EXCUSE ME, "the dangers of depleted uranium and other sources of radioactive contamination . . . . all tank hulks from Desert Storm are in specially marked fields and marked off limits to everyone..."? Oh Captain, my Captain, it cannot be true, it cannot... I, and all my low-life fellows, have been told that, no, certainly not, DU was not radioactive -- with a shelf life (no refrigeration necessary) of a few tens of thousand of years to a few billion years (it varies depending on the expert, of which this land is blessed with many) -- and that all those alarming reports were just hogwash...invented by no-good American haters. So what gives, Sir? Where's the beef? THE CAPTAIN, a serious man -- not a distiller of unpatriotic, un-American, un-SUV, un-McMall, un-be-all-you-can-be, un-Abu Ghraib, un-shoot-first-and-then-ask, babbling perfidies -- knows what he is talking about, and is ready to show us the beef. THE BEEF, freely delivered by our U(P)S hero, one of the gazillion brown shirts navigating daily the enchanted "free"ways of our blessed land, came in the form of an Adobe Acrobat PDF file attached to his e-mail: Countermeasure, the US "Army Ground Risk-Management Publication," Vol 21 No 1, January 2000, http://safety.army.mil/. YES, ON PAGE 6, one can read, in "Radioactive Material... Common, but DEADLY!": The Army uses many items that contain radioactive material. Examples include the M43 chemical agent detector (americium-241); lensatic compasses, gunner's quadrants, aiming post lights, and collimators (tritium); Abrams armor packages (uranium-238, also called "depleted uranium"), lens coatings in thermaloptics (thorium-232), and radiation, detection, indication, and computation (RADIAC) check sources (krypton-85 among others). It is a long list. The Army designs these items so that they do not expose soldiers to significant amounts of radiation even under tough conditions. The Army and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) have many regulations that keep them under tight control from the time they enter our inventory until they leave it. The article then moves on to "foreign military equipment [which] also contains radioactive material, and explains what military personnel should do in presence of such material, concluding, If you want to keep the radioactive material, you will probably have to have a NRC license or an Army radiation authorization to assure that everything is legal and that the radioactive material is under proper control. See AR 11-9 for application instructions. In summary, you have a problem once you discover that the foreign equipment you possess contains radioactive material. What you must do next is keep it from becoming a major problem for you and for the Army. Your installation and MACOM radiation safety officers are there to help you. Be sure to contact them. BUT NO PROBLEM with our radioactive materials... They are designed "so that they do not expose soldiers to significant amounts of radiation even under tough conditions. . . . from the time they enter our inventory until they leave it." NOW, I DON'T KNOW about you, but I am slightly confused. Have not the US military and government consistently denied the dangers of DU? Befuddling, no? BUT I WILL TAKE the Captain at his word. Depleted Uranium is radioactive; the army spends mucho buckados and "pushes for safety in relation to radioactive dangers"; ordnances are designed accordingly; and once they leave the inventory the resultant is kept in "specially marked fields and marked off limits to everyone..." My thanks to the Captain for telling us as it is. Perhaps the New York Times will pick it up from here...and run a story... (want to bet?) MEANWHILE, dear readers -- and Captain -- and The Times editors -- you may wish to look again at the special report by scientist Leuren Moret, which shows that Gulf War Syndrome is overwhelmingly caused by depleted uranium (see my Blips #14 for more details). As to the off-limits-marked fields, I highly recommend Stephen Marshall's acclaimed documentary, Battleground: 21 days on the Empire's Edge,produced by the Guerrilla News Network,and winner of the 2004 Silver Hugo Award for documentaries at the Chicago International Film Festival. An unorthodox and evenhanded documentary, profoundly humanistic, Battleground depicts the various sides of the conflict through American soldiers and Iraqis of all walks of life. Of particular interest in regards to the fields marked off limits, in which destroyed tanks and military hardware are stored, are images of Iraqis strolling through these fields with cutting saws to salvage steel that can be resold, while a radiation detector records the fast ricocheting of the tic-tic-tic-tic pitching sounds indicating the high level of radioactivity... I really wish the good Captain would get hold of that DVD (I'm sure the US Army can afford a copy). It's not an "anti-American, anti-military" documentary, but it does provide a sincere reflection on the senselessness of the conflict and the dire conditions it has bred. OTHERWISE, on Swans, besides the "farcical" piece by Sara Flounders and John Catalinotto, please have a look at "Apocalypse Now," by Aleksandra Priestfield (January 22, 2001), "Depleted Uranium: The Balkans Syndrome" (by this author, January 8, 2001 -- lots of news excerpts). You can also visit the International Depleted Uranium Study Team(IDUST) and the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons(ICBUW), to learn more about the "safety" of DU. Finally, you all, including the Captain, may enjoy finding out how this horror is being covered up and spun out, not only by the US military and government, but also by the US media. For the latter, please see "Depleted Uranium and Depleted Public Opinion" (January 22, 2001). PEOPLE, THE USE OF DU IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY. ON THE LIGHTER SIDE: We are grieving for Mary, the virgin one, who has been defaced (see my Blips #17). According to Yahoo News,"A man was arrested for allegedly scrawling 'Big Lie' over a stain on an expressway underpass that some believed was an image of the Virgin Mary. Authorities then painted over the stain because it had been defaced." Mary, we understand, has moved to greener pastures (Jan tells me she believes she saw her on our dog Priam's tender parts...) POPE RAT'S CAR joins the grilled cheese Virgin Mary: You surely recall Golden Palace Casino's successful $28,000 bid for Mary in a sandwich... This time, in an item related to the immaculate pucelle and her successors (through sonny boy), Golden Palace paid $244,000 for a 1999 metallic gray hatchback Volkswagen Golf that once belonged to the new pope, BXVI (though he never drove it -- poppystar does not have a driver's license). The e-bay auction attracted 8.4 million visits in 10 days. Golden Palace, of Austin, Texas, USA, had the highest bid... Golden Palace is now the happy owner of a sandwich and a car -- it also has acquired a roast chicken that looks like old poppystar, PPII. (ref: BBC News). Time to go to church...after a detour to the bank and a quick game of craps. ENLIGHTENMENT REDUX: 70% of Americans believe in Satan, and 12% in evolution. This must explain, besides Golden Palace Casino, why Kansas is trashing Darwinism and adamantly promoting creationism and intelligent design for its public school curriculum... Some 40 US states are moving in that direction... QUOTATION FOR THE AGES: "We pray for help in defending the gift of freedom from those who seek to destroy it," "We pray to acknowledge our dependence on the Almighty." --Mr. Bush during the East Room ceremony marking the 54th annual National Day of Prayer. PHILIP GREENSPAN writes: May 3, 2005. My submission for the next issue follows. Once again Fran and I are doing well -- with a full calendar of events to keep us busy. Our weekly Saturday afternoon anti-war protests bring out a core group of twenty-five to thirty each week rain or shine. Our pro-war opposition across the street numbers two or three. The increasing number of passing cars that honk their horns in support of us is very encouraging. Tuesday night at Manhattanville College we attended a lecture by Howard Zinn. Wednesday night we had dinner at a restaurant where our jazz musicians play. On Friday it was a fund-raising event for friends -- the West Point Eight -- who are suing the government. They attended the Army-Navy basketball game and at an appropriate moment they stood up, opened their jackets to display T-shirts whose letters spelled "U.S. Out of Iraq." The background noise in the stadium immediately stopped as eyes turned towards the eight. They were promptly arrested and charged with "Trespassing" and "Disorderly Conduct." The charges were later dropped, and they are now suing the government. Saturday night, we saw Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land, a film about the biased media towards Israel. I had shown the film at a local library several weeks ago. It generated such heated comments that I attended again waiting for the discussion afterwards. Since all the viewers were generally in agreement with the film, the afterward discussion was tame. Sunday was a local Tikkun meeting, and Sunday night was another meeting where Mexico was the topic. This is typical of a usual week... Tonight we will attend a meeting where three Japanese survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are the speakers. Kindest regards to you and Jan from Fran and Phil And people tell me that there's no activist on Swans! ON THE "OWNERSHIP SOCIETY" and the best health care in the world, Richard Macintosh had this to say: My wife and I go to Canada frequently and watch the value of goods we bring back -- if any. I save about 50% on my heart medications that way. As it is, I spend about $500 (US) per month. If I had to buy them in the U.S., we would have to get a new mortgage, sell our home, or perhaps just go broke. That's what the elderly face in America these days. Mr. Bush also said during the East Room Ceremony (cf. supra), "Every day, millions of us turn to the Almighty in reverence and humility." "And almost every day, I am given a special reminder of this great generosity of spirit when someone comes up and says: 'Mr. President, I'm praying for you.'" I suppose that soon enough Mr. Bush will assert that praying to the almighty will advantageously replace heart medications... (From, "The Onion Eater," by Joe Bageant, here and there on the Web,circa April 28, 2005 (Note: not much is said in this litany about the "other"; those in the netherworld, the world that does not belong to us -- us meaning white, middle (you are middle, aren't you, Joe?) -- the world where kids don't have a life, but resources are pilfered out of their dead bodies courtesy of "liberals, [and] men and women of good will" as well as the usual faith-based crowds.) I'm sure the Captain will enjoy the veterans' benefits and keep praying to the almighty in the name of "truth"... Richard will know better and keep visiting his Northern neighbors... CONTROVERSY GALORE: The British Association of University Teachers has voted to boycott the Israeli universities of Haifa and Bar-Ilan. Only academics who declare their clear opposition to the policies of the state of Israel in the Occupied Territories will be excluded from the boycott. A similar resolution was defeated about two years ago. The pro-Israel camp is up in arms. As usual, the sponsors and organizers of the boycott are accused of anti-Semitism (Judeophobia). Professor Sue Blackwellof Birmingham University, one of the main sponsors, is under persistent attacks for her actions and writings on Palestine and Israelon her Web site. Abraham H. Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, has called for a counterboycott of British Universities. A Special Council has been formed to reverse the decision. It will meet in London on May 26. Expect all hell to break loose between now and then, with analogies to Nazi Germany and headlines like "Jews are Targetted Again" and the more subtle "Defend Academic Freedom" in the Op-Ed sections of your favorite newspapers. Funny, I don't recall boycotters of anything French, two years ago, being accused of anti-Catholicism... BOONVILLE NEWS: I had a telling conversation with a local utility person who came to perform some maintenance work where we live; you know the small social and customary chitchat of the kind "how are things?" "Things are not so good," he answered. "And why is that?" I inquired. "Well," he said, "prices don't stop going up...everything goes up but our wages." "Did you see the price of gas at the pumps, lately?" he asked, adding, "why did we go to Iraq if we can't even have the oil?" "Hmm," I suggested carefully, "didn't we go to Iraq to spread democracy and take care of a threat to our security?" His eyes lightened up; he looked at me with a bemused smile, and said, "you want to be kidding, no one gives a shit about Iraq and all the bullshit why we went there. We need oil. They have oil. We went there to get what we need." "You know thaaat..." he added with a trailing sound in his voice, as though he meant, "come on, man, get serious..." "So you believe that's why Bush got us in there," I asked. "Hell, yes," he answered, "that's why...but he fucked up...we're there but we don't have the oil...look at the gas prices...what a mess!" "But, but," I ventured, "you believe it was right to invade Iraq to get their oil? It's not ours, after all..." He interrupted me, this time with a look of impatience on his face. "What do you mean, 'it's not ours?' And do you think the land where you are was ours? Look, where you are used to belong to the Indians. We wanted the land. We took it. That's how it works. That's how it's always worked..." "Bush better gets his act straight...we need the oil," he added. There's nothing more refreshing than a little candid expression of reality... "Yeah," I said, "he'd better." Incidentally, Caltrans,the California transportation department in charge of state and county highways, is performing some road repairs a few miles east of Boonville. Since one lane of the two-lane road is closed, Caltrans uses a pilot vehicle to drive back and forth along that portion of the road with its contingent of motorists in tail. Once it has reached the end of the repair section -- about half a mile -- it turns around and journeys to the other end with another set of motorists. Back and forth, all working day long, Monday through Friday... And what vehicle is being used for this simple endeavor? You'd think they'd operate a small 4-cylinder truck, a hybrid or even an EV... Nope, they use what looks like a Navistar International truck model 4200,which everybody knows epitomizes environmental concerns and fuel economy! No wonder we need Iraq oil... Coincidentally, being the last vehicle in the caravan lead by the Caltrans' truck, once passed the repair zone, we followed the cars in front of us which were driving at a snail's pace of about 35 mph, when suddenly the sound of a shooting firearm drew out attention. Right there, on the left side of the road going west toward Boonville, at just about 100 feet from the road was a man shooting his pistol on whatever target placed on the hillside. Pah, pah, pah, pah, pah, pah... Always a pleasant feeling... Remember, Boonville is located in Northern California, a bastion of American Liberal vanguardism... One of these days, I should tell old Joe Bageant about the huge "god bless America," jesus saves," "support our troops," and "get-rich casinos" signs that line our blue state's roadways...and inform him on our own "chosen ones" advocating "Triple Bottom Line" and "sustainable development"... Right down the road, a fine representative of the sustainability crowd is applying for a Alcoholic Beverage Control permit. Another vineyard in our bucolic valley is on its way. Right across the road, an old apple orchard has been completely uprooted. ***************************************************************** 61 Japan Times: Nagasaki A-bomb survivors express anger at Bockscar exhibition in U.S. Saturday, May 7, 2005 DAYTON, Ohio (Kyodo) Atomic-bomb survivors from Nagasaki expressed anger Thursday after viewing the Bockscar, the B-29 bomber that dropped the atomic bomb on them in August 1945, at the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force here. [News photo] A survivor of the 1945 atomic bombing of Nagasaki points up at the U.S. bomber Bockscar, which dropped the bomb on the city, at the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force in Dayton, Ohio, on Thursday. "I quiver with anger thinking how many lives were lost," said Mitsugi Moriguchi, 68, one of the 10 members of a Nagasaki-based nongovernmental organization calling for the elimination of nuclear weapons. Moriguchi, who was 8 when the bomb was dropped and later lost his sister to radiation disease, made the comments as he looked up through the plane's open bomb bay doors. The group is visiting the United States on the sidelines of a review conference of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that opened Monday in New York. Isao Yoshida, 64, who actually glimpsed the plane just before it dropped "Fat Man," as the bomb was named, said, "That was the first time I had seen the bomber in 60 years, and it was huge. I have mixed emotions when thinking that this bomber dropped (the atomic bomb)." The members asked the museum's director, Charles Metcalf, to display documents explaining how the atomic bomb damaged the city and its people, because the photos are exhibited together with the bomber without explaining about how many people died. The director said that while he understood their feelings, there is no doubt the bomber contributed to ending World War II and saving several millions of lives, and that he could not grant their request. The atomic bombing of the city had killed an estimated 74,000 people and injured 75,000 more as of the end of 1945. Bush visit sought WASHINGTON (Kyodo) Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba visited the U.S. State Department on Thursday and presented a letter requesting President George W. Bush visit his city this year. After handing over the letter during a meeting with David Straub, director of the Japanese affairs office, Akiba told reporters he called on the United States to make efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons. "Nuclear abolishment, which is the wish of Hiroshima, is also (the wish) of the majority of voices in the world," Akiba said in repeating what he told Straub. "The United States is the champion of democracy so we hope that it would respect the majority of voices and work toward nuclear abolishment." Akiba said Straub promised to swiftly pass on his letter and comments to the president in which he expressed his wish for Bush to visit Hiroshima in this "significant" year, the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II. The United States dropped its first atomic bomb on Hiroshima just before the end of the war. The Japan Times: May 7, 2005 ***************************************************************** 62 Portland Press Herald: Tainted soil near homes to be moved Maine Yankee says there's no danger, but it will find a new place for low-level radioactive soil in rail cars. --> /Maine Sunday Telegram] Home " News " Saturday, May 7, 2005 By JOHN RICHARDSON, Portland Press Herald Writer Staff photo by John Ewing Rusty Robertson, left, Sagadahoc County's director of emergency management, and Mike Labbe walk along the line of rail cars that Maine Yankee is keeping behind some Topsham homes. Mike Labbe, Topsham's emergency management coordinator, checks the rail cars with a radioactivity measuring device Friday afternoon. He found no radiation. MAINE YANKEE SOIL REMOVAL MAINE YANKEE has removed 380 million pounds of waste from the site of the former nuclear power plant in Wiscasset during the past seven years. The $500 million cleanup is now focusing on soils buried on the site that contain low levels of radioactivity. SOIL AND OTHER low-level waste must go to a secure landfill, one of which is in Utah. It is not considered dangerous enough, however, to be regulated by the Department of Transportation as hazardous cargo. MAINE YANKEE officials, as well as state and federal nuclear inspectors, say the rail cars used to transport the soil do not have to be marked as hazardous and that water leaking from the rail cars contains far less radioactivity than regulations allow. Maine Yankee said Friday that it plans to move 26 rail cars loaded with low-level radioactive soil after residents of a Topsham neighborhood said they didn't want them parked behind their homes. The rail cars arrived a couple of days ago on their way back to the former nuclear power plant in Wiscasset. "When it pulled up, the kids were excited and said, 'Oh, look, a train,' "said Dorothy Simpson, who lives on Madelyn Avenue. Simpson had heard about rail cars returning to Maine Yankee with contaminated soil, but said she didn't think these could be the same ones - until she and neighbors took a closer look. "I just figured they would ship it out in the middle of nowhere until they figured out what to do with it, and here it is sitting in my backyard," she said. Neighborhood concern led Topsham's emergency management coordinator to take a radioactivity measuring device to the tracks Friday afternoon. Mike Labbe said his measurements confirmed what Maine Yankee and state officials had said: The rail cars do not contain enough radiation to pose a public hazard. "There was no increase" in radiation measured around the cars, Labbe said. "I wanted to be 100 percent sure." Maine Yankee, meanwhile, told Labbe and neighborhood residents Friday that the 26 cars would be removed sooner than planned - within days instead of weeks. Another 32 empty cars will probably take longer to remove. "We're going to work with the rail company to try to get at least the 26 loaded cars to Maine Yankee by early next week," said company spokesman Eric Howes, who inspected the stretch of rail Friday with Labbe. While still confident there is no danger, Howes acknowledged the rail line is "pretty close" to the homes. "In retrospect, if we were going to park cars out there, we should have provided information to the neighbors," he said. The 26 rail cars are among 48 that Maine Yankee has called back from various parts of the country. The loads of soil were removed from the Maine Yankee site and bound for a secure landfill in Utah. They were turned around last month, however, after the landfill operator said previous shipments from Maine Yankee were too wet to bury. At least a couple of the rail cars also leaked water along rail beds. Officials said the soil was frozen when it left Maine and thawed during the journey across country. Maine Yankee has since resumed shipments of contaminated soil to Utah. And it is bringing the 48 cars back to the plant site in Wiscasset, a small number at a time, to inspect them and, if necessary, empty and reload them with dry soil. The 26 cars were being stored on a side rail in Topsham until Maine Yankee had room to bring them to Wiscasset. The health officer in Woolwich, John Albis, also did some checking around a rail siding in his town after residents raised concerns about empty rail cars from Maine Yankee sitting behind the Taste of Maine Restaurant on Route 1. Albis said he found no evidence of elevated radiation and was reassured after talking to Maine Yankee officials. "Even if one of those cars were to dump over, and it probably would never happen, you could be standing right next to it and it wouldn't affect you," Albis said. "But when they start to park the cars out there and people start to get concerns, you got to check 'em." Town officials in Topsham are planning a meeting at 7 p.m. Monday in the Topsham Public Library to answer questions and ease any fears about the rail cars, Labbe said. Simpson said officials immediately tried to reassure her and her neighbors that there was no reason to worry. The cars, however, are too close, she said. They sit on rarely used side tracks about 50 yards behind her home, on the other side of a narrow wooded area where her 7-year-old son plays, she said. "To me, anything, whether it's low radioactivity or high, it's radioactivity, and it's a danger to the community," she said. "Town officials and Maine Yankee are saying it's completely safe and it's nothing to worry about. Of course they're saying that - it's not in their backyard." Staff Writer John Richardson can be contacted at 791-6324 or at: © Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc. ***************************************************************** 63 Sunday Times: Radioactive leak closes £2bn nuclear reprocessing plant May 09, 2005 By Ben Hoyle PART of the huge Sellafield nuclear site has been closed after a leak of highly radioactive nuclear fuel. About 20 tonnes of uranium and plutonium dissolved in concentrated nitric acid escaped through a cracked pipe into a huge stainless steel chamber which is too dangerous for humans to enter. The leak, at the Thorp reprocessing plant, was discovered last month during an automated inspection. Repairing the pipes and recovering the spilled liquids is expected to take months and may need special robots, which will have to be built. The British Nuclear Group, which runs the site, said last night that the leak posed no danger to the public, the environment or to Sellafield’s employees. The closure of the £2.1 billion plan will have serious financial implications for the taxpayer. The Thorp plant generates about £1 million a day which is used to finance the cleanup of redundant nuclear facilities. Most of the leaked material is uranium but it also contains about 440lb (200kg) of plutonium, enough to make 20 nuclear weapons. That must be recovered and accounted for to conform to international safeguards aimed at preventing nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands. Once the liquid has been siphoned off it will have to be stored until the plant can be repaired, but a method of doing this has yet to be devised. The future of the nuclear industry is a sensitive issue, with Tony Blair having to decide whether to build a new generation of nuclear power stations. Despite a programme of wind farm construction, Britain is struggling to meet its target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 20 per cent of 1990 levels by 2010, while generating capacity will also be hit by the rundown of some of Britain’s coal-fired power stations. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) took over ownership of Sellafield from British Nuclear Fuels on April 1 and has a £2.2 billon cleanup budget for its first year. In 12 years Thorp has reprocessed 5,644 tonnes of fuel, missing its first ten-year target, of 7,000 tonnes. Last year it managed 590 tonnes, again missing a target, of 725 tonnes. But Martin Forwood, of Cumbrians Opposed to Radioactive Environment, said that the NDA had been “naive” in placing trust on income from Thorp, given its track record. “Reprocessing is blatantly incompatible with the official cleanup remit of the NDA, which will now find itself out of pocket as a result of the latest Thorp accident. The new owners would do the taxpayer the greatest service by putting Thorp out of its misery and closing it once and for all.” Times Newspapers Ltd. ***************************************************************** 64 Las Vegas RJ: Lawmakers cut funding for Yucca Mountain fight Saturday, May 07, 2005 Committees say repository project appears on verge of collapse By SEAN WHALEY REVIEW-JOURNAL CAPITAL BUREAU CARSON CITY -- Members of the Legislature's two money committees agreed Friday to cut funding for the fight against Yucca Mountain by half to $1 million for the coming two years. Lawmakers cut funding not because they fear the nuclear repository project is inevitable, but because it appears to be on the verge of collapse. The head of the state agency directing the fight against Yucca Mountain said the reduced funding will do no serious harm to the effort to keep the dump out of Nevada. "I don't think it's critical," said Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. "If we get into a pinch, we can always go to the (Interim Finance Committee). They have been sympathetic to our needs in the past." The Legislature's Interim Finance Committee, comprised of the same two money committees, handles funding requests in-between legislative sessions. Loux said the funding is needed primarily to prepare an opposition response if the U.S. Energy Department goes forward with an application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to license Yucca Mountain to house nuclear waste. But that can't happen until the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency establishes a new radiation standard for the site, he said. The new standard was made necessary when a federal court in July voided the previous standard. A draft proposal for a new standard could come out this summer, but there is no time line for when it would be made final, Loux said. Gov. Kenny Guinn recommended $2 million for the fight in his 2005-07 budget. But the Senate Finance Committee voted to reduce that amount to $1 million. In a meeting with the Assembly Ways and Means Committee on Friday to resolve budget differences, the Assembly panel agreed with the Senate to lower the funding to $1 million. Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, said she opposed the reduction in funding. The view in committee was that since the state won the lawsuit on the radiation standard, that the project is on the verge of collapse, she said. "But you don't want to send any kind of message that you are wavering on Yucca Mountain," Titus said. If the money wasn't needed by the agency in the coming two years, it would just roll over to the next budget, she said. But Sen. Bob Beers, R-Las Vegas, said the recent allegations about falsified data for the project seem to have sent Yucca Mountain into a tailspin. "They've shot themselves in the foot," he said. Members of Nevada's congressional delegation contend the Yucca project is staggering after the disclosure of e-mails from 1998 to 2000 in which geologists wrote of "fudging" documentation of water flow research to satisfy quality assurance requirements. The Energy Department and inspectors general from DOE and the Interior Department are investigating. While Loux agreed that it might take awhile before the licensing process gets under way, the state must be ready to respond whenever that happens. Fighting the licensing request "will require a lot of upfront work," he said. "We have to be prepared." Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 65 Salt Lake Tribune: Don't move it, solve it Opinion Article Last Updated: 05/07/2005 02:54:34 PM Inside every household of our nation are cleaners and chemicals that make our lives easier. While potentially hazardous to our health, we accept the risk because of the added benefits we receive. In the long run, we do not store these items forever under our kitchen sinks. Eventually we recycle or properly dispose of these agents to protect ourselves and our families. If we are unwilling to risk our lives over household chemicals, why should our attitude be any different toward nuclear fuel? Why are we willing to risk storing thousands of pounds of depleted nuclear fuel rods in our back yard when they can be recycled and reused, removing the threat from our neighborhoods. The benefits of having adequate electrical power for our economy is critical, but the hazards of storing exhausted fuel rods on-site is unacceptable. Our nation seems to be focused on the solution of shipping the material to Utah or Yucca Mountain and letting someone else worry about it. Both options only move the problem, not solve it. The technology for breeder reactors has existed since the 1960s. Why don't we use technology and recycle these depleted fuel rods, eliminating the hazard altogether, while producing more electrical power? Mark C. Foote Sandy © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 66 MaineToday: Tainted soil near homes to be moved - John Richardson PORTLAND, Maine Maine Yankee has vowed to act swiftly to move 26 rail cars carrying low-level radioactive waste after Topsham residents said they didn´t want them parked near their homes. The rail cars arrived recently, en route to the former nuclear power plant in Wiscasset. "When it pulled up, the kids were excited and said, ´oh, look a train,´" said Dorothy Simpson. Simpson had heard about rail cars returning to Maine Yankee with contaminated soil but said she didn´t think these could be the same ones at first. "I just figured they would ship it out in the middle of nowhere until they figured out what to do with it, and here it is sitting in my backyard," she said. Topsham´s emergency management coordinator, Mike Labbe, took a radioactivity measuring device to the tracks and said his measurements confirmed what Maine Yankee and state officials had said _ the rail cars did not contain enough radiation to pose a public hazard. "There was no increase" in radiation around the cars, Labbe said. "I wanted to be 100 percent sure." Maine Yankee told Labbe and residents of the neighborhood on Friday that the 26 cars loaded with soil would be removed within days. The 26 rail cars are among 48 that Maine Yankee has called back from various parts of the country. The loads of soil were removed from the former reactor site and bound for a secure landfill in Utah. They were turned around last month after the landfill operator said previous shipments from Maine Yankee were too wet to bury. The 26 cars were being stored on a side rail in Topsham until Maine Yankee had room to bring them to Wiscasset. Town officials in Topsham are planning to hold a meeting at 7 p.m. Monday in the Topsham Public Library to answer questions and ease any fears about the rail cars, Labbe said. ___ Information from: Portland Press Herald, To top of page Last updated 1:15 am + + [ width=] Copyright © Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc. ***************************************************************** 67 Japan Times: NPT group urges halt to Rokkasho plant Saturday, May 7, 2005 NEW YORK (Kyodo) Twenty-seven U.S. scientists and former policymakers on atomic energy on Thursday called on Japan to indefinitely postpone the start of operations at the plutonium-reprocessing plant in Rokkasho, Aomori Prefecture. "At a time when the nonproliferation regime is facing its greatest challenge, Japan should not proceed with its current plans," says a joint statement issued during the Review Conference of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which opened Monday in New York. The Union of Concerned Scientists issued the statement and sent it to the Japanese government. Among those who signed the statement were four Nobel physics prize winners, Jerome Friedman, Sheldon Glashow, Leon Lederman and Steven Weinberg, as well as William Perry, a former U.S. secretary of defense. The plant can separate about 8 tons of plutonium a year or enough to make 1,000 atomic bombs, the statement says, and its operation "would raise serious concerns about Japan's commitment to strengthening the NPT" The statement says the plant's operation might also have ramifications for North Korea and Iran, suspected of nuclear development under the right of peaceful use of atomic energy. The Rokkasho plant, which is the first industrial-scale reprocessing plant in a country not possessing nuclear weapons, is to begin operations in 2007 after a test run begins in December. Tokyo considers the Rokkasho plant, as well as the Monju prototype fast-breeder reactor in Fukui Prefecture, as key components of its nuclear fuel-cycle policy. Monju has remained shut since coverup of a sodium leak accident was discovered in 1995. Construction of the Rokkasho plant began in 1993, nine years after a federation of power companies asked Aomori Prefecture to host the facility. The Japan Times: May 7, 2005 ***************************************************************** 68 Las Vegas SUN: State lawmakers cut funding for Yucca Mountain fight ASSOCIATED PRESS CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - Members of two legislative committees have agreed to cut in half funding for the state's fight against Yucca Mountain, saying the federal plan to bring a nuclear waste dump to Nevada appears on the verge of collapse. The head of the state agency directing the fight against Yucca Mountain said Friday the reduced funding will not harm their efforts. "I don't think it's critical," said Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. "If we get into a pinch, we can always go to the (Interim Finance Committee). They have been sympathetic to our needs in the past." That committee handles funding requests between legislative sessions. Loux said the funding is needed primarily to prepare a response if the Energy Department moves forward with a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to open Yucca Mountain. But that can't happen until the Environmental Protection Agency establishes a new radiation standard for the site. A federal court in July tossed out the previous standard. Gov. Kenny Guinn recommended $2 million for the state's Yucca effort in his 2005-07 budget. But the Senate Finance Committee voted to reduce that amount to $1 million. In a meeting Friday to resolve budget differences, the Assembly Ways and Means Committee agreed with the Senate panel to lower the funding to $1 million. Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, had opposed the reduction, saying "you don't want to send any kind of message that you are wavering on Yucca Mountain." But Sen. Bob Beers, R-Las Vegas, said the recent allegations that workers may have falsified data regarding Yucca Mountain seem to have sent the project into a tailspin. "They've shot themselves in the foot," he said. --- Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal, http://www.lvrj.com -- ***************************************************************** 69 Deseret news: Yucca might not accept waste from Goshute site [deseretnews.com] Sunday, May 8, 2005 Associated Press A U.S. Department of Energy official said the federal waste repository proposed for Yucca Mountain, Nev., would not accept waste from the temporary storage facility proposed in western Utah — not as long as the waste was in welded containers. David Zabransky of the Energy Department's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, speaking in Salt Lake City to representatives of the Western Interstate Energy Board, said federal contract requirements forbid acceptance of spent nuclear fuel welded into any type of canister. That would include the 44,000 tons of waste that Private Fuel Storage proposes to transport to Utah and store on the Goshutes' Skull Valley reservation until it can be moved to Yucca. Zabransky said it might be possible to set up a facility at Yucca where the PFS canisters — or canisters from any nuclear utility that stores spent fuel rods in casks — could be cut open and repackaged. But that would be a "burden to the system," he said. It also would be possible to renegotiate the contract, he said. Dianne Nielson, executive director of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, said after Zabransky's presentation that the Energy Department and the NRC, by not dealing with the contract issue, have abdicated responsibility for PFS and whether it would indeed be a temporary facility. "This is not just a PFS issue," said company spokeswoman Sue Martin. She said there is "an awful lot of fuel" stored in containers nationwide because the DOE defaulted on the contract by not building the depository. "The utilities had no choice" but to store the waste, she said. "The DOE has a legal obligation to take spent fuel." © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 70 Herald and News: Old uranium mines to be cleaned up Klamath Falls, Oregon Sunday, May 08, 2005 A pair of 50-year-old uranium mines in Lake County will finally be cleaned up. A group of observers checks out the White King uranium mine in Lake County. Not much is known about the photo, from reporter Lee Juillerat's files. It is dated in 1957, and the group may be students. The White King and Lucky Lass mines are contaminated by heavy metals and radioactive components. Both have been closed more than 40 years. Negotiations with three corporations took 15 years. "It's been a long time coming. We're really anxious to get under way," said Bill Adams, project manager for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Work begins this summer and is expected to take two summer seasons. The mines are 17 miles northwest of Lakeview on the Fremont-Winema National Forest. Adams said Kerr-McGee Chemical Worldwide, Fremont Lumber Co. and Western Nuclear will pay the $8 million cleanup cost. Mining at White King and Lucky Lass began in 1955 to build the U.S. nuclear arsenal. The Atomic Energy Commission, the U.S. Department of Energy's predecessor, was responsible for production, ownership and use of uranium on federal and private lands. Kerr-McGee is the successor to the Lakeview Mining Co., which was formed by Lakeview-area people whom the energy commission recruited to conduct mining activities from 1955 to 1959. Adams said the mining contaminated the soil and ground water, and left waste rock. At White King excavation pond, both the surface water and the ground water are contaminated, as are sediments. The pond covers about three acres and is 70 feet deep. The most contaminated soil from both mines is to be combined and covered. The acidic water in the White King pond is to be neutralized. About 430,000 cubic yards, from the White King overburden stockpile, 35,000 cubic yards of off-pile material and 15,000 cubic yards of haul road material will be excavated, consolidated and relocated atop a 138,000-cubic-yard stockpile. The materials will be covered with "clay-like" material. A 2-foot soil cover will be placed over the 25-acre repository. Vegetation will be re-established atop the cover. The pond will be fenced to discourage use. After excavation, the disturbed areas, which are expected to cover about 36 acres, will be reclaimed and revegetated. "The cleanup will enhance existing Augur Creek habitat and the White King pond area," according to an EPA fact sheet. "Water from Augur Creek will be rerouted to develop about five acres of wetlands." Although studies on the sites was active in the 1980s, it wasn't until 1995 that the EPA listed the sites on the National Priorities List for long-term cleanup. After a lengthy study, the cleanup decision was issued in late 2001. Copyright © 2005 Herald and News. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 71 PNS: Residents Worry About Rocket Fuel in the Inland Empire's Drinking Supply Pacific News Service News Report, Cheryl Brown, The Black Voice News, May 08, 2005 FONTANA, Calif.-- Residents are suffering from high incidences of thyroid disease, cancer and low learning levels, attention deficit disorders, and learning disabilities because of rocket fuel in the water, charged Penny Newman, Executive Director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice. "Polluters need to provide replacement water and clean up the water," said Newman. Forum host and guest speaker State Senator Nell Soto was strong in her response as she urged the audience of 100 in February to get involved, saying, "They won't pay attention until we start working together. Public pressure is going to be the only thing that will work. Start a revolution!" At the highest risk are pregnant women, infants, children and those whose immune systems have been compromised. "In Norco, there have been clusters of thyroid problems, and other illnesses," said one participant who was asking for help for her community. "The area with the highest number of incidents is the Wiley Labs located just 1500 feet from two schools. The people affected are unrelated to each other and as new people move in they are becoming ill. We have been documenting the cases. In one case the family had a case of thyroid cancer and the next person who moved in the same house also had thyroid problems," said the woman. The community forum, held at the Fontana City Hall, focused on the high incidence of rocket fuel in the entire Inland Empire's drinking water. State Senators Nell Soto and Gloria Negrete McCloud were there to support the grassroots movement to clean up the drinking water. Perchlorate is the primary ingredient in rocket fuel and is emerging as the major contaminate in California and in the nation. Because of the high number of military and aerospace contractors and manufacturers of explosive chemicals in the Inland Empire there is widespread contamination in the water, milk and lettuce of about 16 million Californians. West Valley Water District director Alan Dryer said, "the water companies want to sell clean water but we have no money to clean it up and we are not working together to go after money from the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)." He said that they don't even have the tools to measure the amount of pollution in the water. Supervisor Josie Gonzales took issue with presenters and said her approach is to clean up the problem. "We need to focus on the clean-up, not the money it costs to do it," she said. However she was met with opposition. "It is the responsibility of the polluters not the taxpayers to clean up the water," said Newman. Gonzales said that time was of the essence. Sujatha Jahagirdar Environment California Research &Policy Center representative Sujatha Jahagirdar summed up the problem and said that the Santa Ana Water Quality Board has not issued a fine. "The government agency that is charged with clean water hasn't issued a fine to any of the companies who are the polluters. If the polluters are put into the Superfund the water will be cleaned up," she said. Jahagirdar said that the company Kerr-McGee Industries has almost single handedly polluted the entire Southern California region. "It is paramount no matter where we live," she said. Senator McCloud said her research found that a plume of perchlorate is in her district near Pomona, (where the GE Iron Company used to be) over to the Big Chino Aquifer and is meeting the San Bernardino/Riverside plume at about a rate of 3 feet a day. The issue of the standard of what is the safe level of water was discussed. Jahagirdar said that California doesn't have a safe standard and that setting the standard is political. "The companies that pollute are trying to convince the government to agree on a standard that is dangerously high. Massachusetts, she said, "has the nation's best standard. It is one part per billion." The California Department of Health Services is unofficially moving toward recommending the very high rate at six parts per billion" she said. "In setting the final perchlorate standard, the state should use the weight of scientific evidence, including experiments showing the damage to infant rats when exposed to small amounts of perchlorate in the womb," said Jahagirdar. According to Jahagirdar, the study that was done used grown men and not pregnant women or children. "They gave some grown, healthy men perchlorate laced water for two weeks and another group clean water, they (perchlorate) were not affected," she said. The study done by Environment California Research and Policy Center recommends, in addition, the State of California, local governments and water suppliers should hold responsible parties fully liable for cleanup and for supplying replacement drinking water to affected communities. Congress should not exempt the Department of Defense. Secondly, Congress should reinstate Superfund fees for polluting industries to ensure that contamination caused by now-bankrupt companies will be cleaned up. Federal and State Agencies should require American Pacific, Kerr-McGee Chemical and other responsible parties to accelerate clean-up of perchlorate contamination currently leaking into the Colorado River and local aquifers. Our choice in setting a health standard for perchlorate is a choice between protecting the financial interests of a handful of companies and government agencies, or protecting California children, recommended the report. According to the presenters the water is contaminated and hurting us and the ones who are hurt the most are people who cannot afford bottled water. ”What can the community do? Sign the petitions, get involved, and help save the children. We need to protect all people. Those who can afford bottled water and those who can't," said Penny Newman. For information call (951) 360-8451. This author developed this piece as part of an environmental fellowship program run by NCM with funding from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation's New Constituencies for the Environment initiative. Copyright © 2004 Pacific News Service ***************************************************************** 72 ABQjournal: Nanos: LANL on 'Stronger Footing'; Lab Chief Takes Pentagon Job Albuquerque Journal newspaper. Saturday, May 7, 2005 Albuquerque Journal--> By Adam Rankin Journal Staff Writer George "Pete" Nanos set out two years ago to "drain the swamp" at Los Alamos National Laboratory amid congressional and media scrutiny over financial management and security problems. In the process, he rubbed many scientists the wrong way, once labeling some as "cowboys" and "buttheads" for refusing to follow security protocols. But in an e-mail announcing his departure as lab director to 12,000 LANL employees Friday, Nanos praised lab workers for their efforts to fix financial and property management problems and for improving safety and security procedures. "I believe our science and our national security programs are now on a stronger footing," he wrote. Nanos' tenure as the seventh director of Los Alamos will come to an end effective May 15. Reaction to his long-rumored departure was mixed. Doug Roberts, a lab computer scientist who created a blog highly critical of Nanos, said "beer was flowing freely" at lunch Friday in celebration— but added that the mood "was tempered by the realization that we are still left with a lot of problems." Members of New Mexico's congressional delegation, University of California officials and Department of Energy brass generally praised Nanos. Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., who represents Los Alamos, said he saw Nanos as a transitional figure in LANL's history whose actions upset people but were necessary. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., thanked Nanos for "taking on an extremely difficult task during an especially tumultuous time." Robert W. Kuckuck, 66, will serve as interim laboratory director through the end of the University of California's current contract to manage LANL, which expires at the end of September. Kuckuck is a longtime scientist and manager at LANL's sister nuclear research laboratory in California, Lawrence Livermore. Nanos, lab 'diverge' Rumors predicting Nanos' departure have circulated for months. They finally proved true Friday when the retired Navy vice admiral announced he had accepted a job at the Pentagon after more than two years as chief of the nation's first weapons lab. "I believe it is now time for my path and the Laboratory's path to diverge," Nanos wrote in his e-mail. Named interim laboratory director on Jan. 2, 2003, Nanos was tapped to be permanent director in May of that year by then-University of California president Richard C. Atkinson. From the beginning of his tenure, which began just weeks before UC and LANL officials were to appear before Congress because of financial management problems, Nanos promised he would be aggressive in working to improve administrative controls and public confidence in the nuclear research facility. "Pete has been an agent of change at LANL, and the laboratory is a stronger and safer place as a result of his leadership," UC president Bob Dynes wrote to lab employees in an e-mail Friday. In 2003, then-DOE Secretary Spencer Abraham announced the LANL contract would be put up for competition, after a series of embarrassing financial and security flaps. So far, major defense contractors Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman are the only companies that have announced their intention to bid. UC and the University of Texas system are considering bids. University of California spokesman Chris Harrington said the University of California will likely make a decision after the Department of Energy releases its competition criteria in about a week. Kuckuck is expected to address LANL employees in a meeting on his first day on the job, May 16. "I think the laboratory has been through a lot in the last couple of years," he said in a phone interview Friday. He said he plans to have an open door policy for scientists and workers and hopes to ameliorate the stress of the coming months and contract competition by being approachable and by listening to concerns. "I want to try to connect with the folks and really get out and talk," he said. "It is all about people." From 2001 to 2002, Kuckuck was deputy administrator for DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration and was responsible for internal operations and restructuring the organization. Since December 2002, he has served as a senior adviser for UC's Office of Laboratory Management, working on laboratory oversight issues. Harrington said the school is continuing a nationwide search for potential senior managers in preparation for a possible bid to win the lab's next contract. Tough manager LANL's employees, especially its scientists, often bristled at Nanos' brusque management style. Many felt attacked by some of Nanos' remarks, such as the "cowboy" comment. Shortly after bringing all work at LANL to a halt in July over safety and security concerns— a pair of classified computer disks couldn't be found (DOE and FBI later announced the disks never existed) and a college intern injured her eye in a laser accident— retired scientists and anonymous employees, via the news media and an Internet blog, began calling for Nanos to resign. Estimated costs of the nearly seven-month shutdown range from about $120 million to nearly $370 million. In the last month, anonymous posters on the Internet blog run by a 20-year LANL computer scientist predicted with near-perfect detail the circumstances and timing of Nanos' resignation. "Spot on, actually," said blog creator Roberts. Other reaction to the management change— from Gov. Bill Richardson, Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M. and others— contained praise for Nanos and his efforts to improve lab operations in difficult circumstances, while welcoming Kuckuck and his expertise in nuclear research. "Dr. Pete Nanos has led Los Alamos National Lab during a challenging time," DOE Secretary Samuel Bodman said in a statement, adding that changes Nanos instituted have helped keep LANL a premier laboratory. "Robert Kuckuck clearly has the experience and expertise needed to maintain the level of scientific excellence for which LANL is known," Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., said in a statement. Copyright Albuquerque Journal Steve@abqjournal.com ***************************************************************** 73 SF Chronicle: Nuclear physicist takes over helm of Los Alamos lab / UC braces for competition to run facility [San Francisco Chronicle] Zachary Coile and Keay Davidson, Chronicle Staff Writers Saturday, May 7, 2005 The tough-talking director of the University of California-run Los Alamos National Laboratory is being replaced with a veteran of the nuclear weapons establishment, the university announced Friday. The move to replace George "Pete" Nanos, a former Navy admiral who has run the scandal-haunted lab since January 2003, with nuclear physicist Robert W. Kuckuck comes at a tense time for UC, which faces a national competition to hang onto its six-decade-old contract to run the New Mexico laboratory where the atomic bomb was born. Nanos is moving effective May 16 to a new position at the U.S. Defense Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency in Washington. Kuckuck's title for now at the 13,500-employee Los Alamos lab is interim director, and his salary will be $356,000 a year. Kuckuck's appointment was made by UC President Robert C. Dynes, with the approval of U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman. UC has run the lab since its founding under contract to the federal government. The university chose Kuckuck, educated at Ohio State University and UC Davis, because of a combination of factors: He knows the university from serving in UC's Office of Laboratory Management, but he also has connections to top officials at the National Nuclear Security Administration. UC officials also believe that Kuckuck's 35-year career as a top weapons scientist and senior manager at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory makes him the best person to present what the university thinks is its strongest argument for winning the contract to continue to manage Los Alamos: UC's academic pedigree and long history of producing top-notch science. "Without a doubt, he understands the importance of science and that science is the underpinning of the work at Los Alamos," said UC spokesman Chris Harrington. Even so, Kuckuck may be a short-timer, as he indicated to reporters Friday that he plans to retire later this year. Nanos' departure caps more than two years of tumult inside the lab, where he vowed to "drain the swamp" upon taking power in early 2003. In recent years, the lab has been racked by financial, management, safety and security scandals, including the repeated loss of computer disks containing classified information. The first month on the job, when Nanos was still interim director, he told the UC regents that he would undertake reform measures that would be as painful as "ripping off someone's skin." He kept his promise: Among other acts, he publicly chewed out staffers at meetings; called certain employees "butt-heads'' and "cowboys''; and ordered a shutdown of regular lab operations in order to give staff time to rethink their behavior. In September 2004, he fired four employees and forced another to resign. In the process, Nanos infuriated some Los Alamos staffers. For months, via blogs and e-mails to reporters, Nanos' critics inside the lab have circulated rumors that his days as director were short. The blogs made no difference to Nanos, though: "Anyone who thinks that a decision as important as who is director of Los Alamos National Laboratory is influenced or directed by people anonymously complaining about their boss on the Internet is deluding themselves. It absolutely does not have that kind of clout, nor should it," said Kevin Roark, a Los Alamos spokesman. Dynes, in a statement Friday, said: "Pete (Nanos) has done a remarkable job under extraordinary pressures and circumstances these past two years. He has been a stalwart agent of change." In an e-mail to Los Alamos staffers Friday, Nanos wrote, "Dear colleagues ... I am very proud of how the laboratory has responded" to his direction. "... We have emerged from the suspension as a stronger laboratory -- with our core weapons program deliverables now back on track and on schedule, and a viable business plan for science in place for the future." On Friday, Kuckuck (pronounced "cook-cook") told reporters he plans to serve only until the Energy Department decides who will get the $2.2 billion contract to run the lab in the future. That decision should come toward the end of this year, he said. The Energy Department is preparing to release its request for proposals -- the guidelines for the anticipated intense competition -- within the next two weeks. Already two major defense contractors, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, are lining up academic and other private sector partners to try to break UC's lock on the contract. On Friday, Kuckuck made the simple sales pitch he'll use to urge that UC continue to manage the lab. "I think, No. 1, an academic and scientific basis for these laboratories is critical," he said. "Second, I think UC is the greatest research and scientific university in the world. "The difference between having a for-profit company, a defense contractor run this science lab versus a university will be a clear choice," Kuckuck said. "I hope it escalates into a very intellectual national debate." On Friday, many scientists expressed glee about Nanos' departure and the appointment of a veteran nuclear weapons scientist to head the lab. "Based on some of the calls I've been getting from scientists and researchers, people were really happy about it," said Manuel Trujillo, an electrical engineer and president of the local University Professional and Technical Employees Union. "Basically, Nanos' management style just didn't fit in with research and development aspects of this laboratory," Trujillo said. "... For a person in a management capacity dealing with the situation here, I think he could have been more respectful of these people." If the UC regents formally vote, as expected, to join the competition for the next contract, they face some powerful foes inside the Washington Beltway. UC's adversaries in Congress are holding regular hearings to bash its management of Los Alamos. Members of a House Energy subcommittee on Thursday criticized the lab's long shutdown of normal operations under Nanos, which they claim may have cost taxpayers $120 million to $370 million. Energy Department officials defended the lab, saying the shutdown was needed to improve security and safety. But Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., suggested the possibility of closing the lab and moving its work to other facilities. "We have a lab that is a constant problem. Why do we need this one?" Change at the top Coming: Robert W. Kuckuck, a nuclear physicist, has a 35-year career as a top weapons scientist and senior manager at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. UC officials hope his background will help the university in its quest to keep running the Los Alamos National Lab. His tenure, however, may be short: He said he plans to retire later this year. Going: George "Pete" Nanos took over Los Alamos in January 2003, a time when the lab was beset by problems. Nanos' hard-line approach infuriated some Los Alamos staffers. He will take a new job with the Department of Defense. Page A - 1 San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 74 i-Newswire.com: Energy Secretary's Statement on Los Alamos Lab Leadership Changes WASHINGTON, D.C. - The following is a statement from Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman on leadership changes at the department’s Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The University of California today announced that LANL director Dr. Pete Nanos will be stepping down and that Dr. Robert Kuckuck will serve as interim director. i-Newswire, 2005-05-07 - "Dr. Pete Nanos has led Los Alamos National Lab during a challenging time. He instituted a number of sound business practices that have helped Los Alamos remain one of the premier labs in the world. While serving as director, Dr. Nanos demonstrated vigor and resourcefulness learned during his many years in the U.S. Navy. I thank him for his service to our department and our Nation, and I wish him the best of luck in his new responsibilities at the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Bob Kuckuck brings an enormous wealth of experience to this task, having served at DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and in Washington at the National Nuclear Security Administration. I look forward to working with him in his role as interim director.” Media contact: Anne Womack Kolton, 202/586-4940 Number: R-05-111 2005-05-07 ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************