*****************************************************************
05/20/05 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 13.116
*****************************************************************
   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 [NYTr] US Push Against Iran Will Fail in UN
2 [NYTr] Iran will not give up nuclear program
3 Persian Journal: United States' Policy Toward Iran - 
4 Guardian Unlimited: France Calls Iran Nuclear Talks 'Fragile'
5 AFP: IAEA backs Iran-EU crisis talks, still wants more answers from 
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Said to Be Smuggling Nuclear Matter
7 Hankyoreh: Hoping for a Restoration of Intra-Korean Relations
8 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Outlook for six-party talks   
9 Korea Herald: Seoul to discuss nukes in June talks with N.K.   
10 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Restart of Six-Party Talks Still Possible
11 AFP: South Korea positive, US disappointed over North Korea talks -
12 Asia Times: Pyongyang reveals its hand
13 Newsday.com: N. Korea nukes - a fresh approach
14 US: SF Chronicle: Mothballed weapons depot may become vibrant commun
15 US: KTVB.COM: Idaho nuclear watchdogs wary of uranium consolidation 
16 IPS-English DISARMAMENT: Israeli Arsenal Vexes Nuclear
17 Bellona: Moscow will fight former nuclear chief’s extradition to the
18 BBC: Trident protesters start
19 Xinhua: China to strengthen int'l nuclear cooperation   
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
20 US: [NukeNet] Fwd: nuke coalition picks 6 sites
21 US: [NukeNet] PSEG's Hope Creek Gets Lower Marks From Nuclear
22 US: NRC: NRC Terminates Special Oversight Panel, Begins Augmented Re
23 US: NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Joseph M. Farley 
24 US: MSNBC.com: Six sites finalists for nuclear power plants - Enviro
25 US: Pocatello Idaho State Journal: Crews hold drill at ISU nuclear r
26 US: Newsday.com: Nine Mile nuclear complex considered for fourth rea
27 Kommersant: Ukraine to Diversify Nuclear Vendors 
28 AU ABC: News in Science: Cracks in safety of new reactor? - 
29 US: PRN: Davis-Besse to Return to Standard Regulatory Oversight 
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
30 US: [NYTr] USA's Radiation Victims Seek $3 Bn in Compensation
31 [du-list] New improved  DU from space
32 US: USATODAY.com: Both sides claim victory in nukes suit
33 US: Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Jury awards $545,000 to two Hanford-
34 US: PE.com: Perchlorate forum to advocate controls 
35 US: KLTV 7: Colorado agency to rethink ban on drilling near nuclear 
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
36 US: Daily News: Foes step up heat on nuke waste firm 
37 Bellona: Sweden allocates $30 million to Russia's nuclear waste recy
38 RIA Novosti: PUTIN SUBMITS SPENT FUEL CONVENTION TO PARLIAMENT
39 Las Vegas SUN: State seeks license application draft
40 Las Vegas SUN: Guest columnist Jim Gibbons: Another perspective on Y
41 US: SF Chronicle: Military waste under fire / $1 trillion missing --
42 US: Idaho Statesman: Firm won't take radioactive rubble
43 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Panel approves VY dry cask deal
44 US: Bradenton Herald: Patience wearing thin in Tallevast
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
45 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Up to 1,000 Hanford workers to be laid o
46 Washington Post:: U.S. Weighs Consolidating Bomb Materials
47 SF Chronicle: Industry may have edge on Los Alamos 
48 Daily Bruin: Lab proposals requested
49 SignOnSanDiego.com: Los Alamos nuclear lab suffers fallout from scan
50 Casper Star-Tribune: Idaho site could get nuclear materials
51 Tri-Valley Herald: Feds unveil vision for Los Alamos
52 The New Mexican: Feds sweeten deal for LANL manager       
53 Seattle Times: Hanford likely caused cancer downwind, jury decides
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 [NYTr] US Push Against Iran Will Fail in UN
 
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 14:09:57 -0500 (CDT)

 
Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
USA Today - May 19, 2005
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-05-19-iran-us_x.htm?csp=34

U.S. doesn't have needed support in U.N. to punish Iran, official says

By Barbara Slavin, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON  If Iran ignores U.S. pleas not to make nuclear fuel, the United
States lacks support from China in the U.N. Security Council to punish Iran,
a State Department official said Thursday.

Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Undersecretary for
Political Affairs Nicholas Burns urged Iran to not resume efforts to enrich
uranium but added that "anything could happen" if the matter goes to the
United Nations.

Though the United States and its European allies are united, Burns said,
China has not agreed with their approach. China, which has a veto on the
Security Council, has growing economic ties with Iran.

Burns' comments came days before foreign ministers from Britain, France and
Germany were to meet with Iranian national security adviser Hassan Rowhani.
Iran suspended efforts to make nuclear fuel in November but has been
threatening to resume converting uranium into a gas. That is the first step
toward making fuel for civilian reactors, the purpose Iran has given, or
weapons, which the United States says Iran is developing.

The program has raised concerns particularly in Israel. The United States
recently sold Israel bunker-buster bombs, but Israel wants a diplomatic
solution. Burns said a military strike is "not on the agenda at this time."

Burns appeared to echo concerns that U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan
raised in an interview with USA TODAY last week. Annan said it would be
risky to bring Iran to the Security Council without a consensus. Failure
with Iran, he said, would "set a precedent" that would hurt future
non-proliferation efforts.

European unity is not assured. On Monday, French Ambassador to the United
States Jean David Levitte told the Council on Foreign Relations, a think
tank, that if Iran restarted nuclear activities, the issue would go to the
board of the International Atomic Energy Agency "to decide ... the next
step."

Iran hid much of its program for 18 years. In an interview Thursday with
Reuters, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former president who is running
again in elections June 17, said Iran would never abandon its "legitimate
right" to nuclear technology.

The Bush administration won't join the nuclear talks with Iran or offer new
incentives, Burns said. In March, the administration agreed to stop blocking
Iran from joining the World Trade Organization and to sell Iran spare parts
for civilian airliners.

In its first term, the Bush administration appeared torn between a State
Department that talked occasionally with Iran and a White House and Defense
Department that opposed engaging Iran's Islamic regime. Sen. Chris Dodd,
D-Conn., thanked Burns for presenting a plan combining strong criticism and
a potential willingness to talk. Burns criticized Iran's support for groups
the United States considers terrorists and an "abysmal" human rights record.
He also said it was Iran, not the United States, "that doesn't want to see
change in the relationship" between the two nations.

Burns said the administration would accelerate efforts to reach out to
ordinary Iranians, whom he praised as a "proud people" with a "great
history." Congress has approved $3 million to promote human rights in Iran
and made Iranians eligible for the money for the first time. David Denehy, a
State Department spokesman, said dozens had applied. He wouldn't say whether
any Iranians were among them.

       
                                *
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 2 [NYTr] Iran will not give up nuclear program
 
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 14:09:52 -0500 (CDT)

 
Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
AP via USA Today - May 19, 2005
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-05-19-iran-nuclear_x.htm?csp=34

Iran will not give up nuclear program

TEHRAN, Iran (AP)  Iran will endure U.N. economic sanctions rather than
give up nuclear fuel development, the vice president said Wednesday ahead of
a new round of meetings with European countries trying to rein in its
nuclear program.

Iran is vowing to restart its uranium reprocessing activities, an early
stage in preparing raw uranium for either power reactor fuel or a nuclear
weapon. At the same time, it has agreed to meet with European countries for
one last discussion on the issue next month.  (Related item: U.N. begins
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty talks)

Washington believes Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons under cover
of a peaceful nuclear program. Iran denies this, saying its nuclear program
is geared merely toward generating electricity, not bomb. The European Union
has threatened to take Iran to the U.N. Security Council for possible
sanctions if it resumes nuclear fuel development.

"We don't want to be subject to sanctions. We don't want to go to the U.N.
Security Council," Vice President Gholamreza Aghazadeh told state-run
television. "But if it happens, our leaders and our people will resist as
necessary. They will pay the price of sanctions, but I don't believe they
will give up these activities."

Aghazadeh, who also heads Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, said Iran has
decided to restart work at its Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facility in
central Iran whether or not there is an agreement with the Europeans.

Reprocessing converts raw uranium into gas. In the next stage of the
process, the gas is enriched by being fed into centrifuges. Low enriched
uranium is used in generating electricity, but it also can be turned into
nuclear weapons if enriched further.

Iran suspended all uranium enrichment-related activities six months ago to
build international confidence and avoid being referred to the U.N. Security
Council.

Tehran says it won't give up its right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty to enrich uranium but so far has not said it will restart enrichment,
and is prepared to offer strong guarantees that its nuclear program won't be
diverted toward nuclear weapons.

Aghazadeh said Iran has clearly told Europeans that it won't relinquish the
nuclear technology it has already mastered, and that the technology in
Iran's hands was "irreversible."

Iran's top nuclear negotiator Hasan Rowhani is scheduled to meet foreign
ministers of France, Britain and Germany on May 23. The three countries,
acting on behalf of the 25-nation European Union, want Tehran to abandon its
enrichment activities in exchange for economic aid and technical support.

Aghazadeh said the failure of European countries to come up with proposals
on what sort of guarantees they wanted led Iran to offer guarantees itself
that its nuclear program won't be diverted towards weapons.

"They rejected our proposal during London talks (last month) and refused to
give their own proposals. It was then that the government decided that talks
under this system are meaningless," he said.

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

       
                                *
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 3 Persian Journal: United States' Policy Toward Iran - 

http://www.iranian.ws

  Iran News   May 19th, 2005 - 21:02:18 

Nicholas Burns: United States' Policy Toward Iran 

 Press Release: US State Department 

R. Nicholas Burns, Under Secretary for Political Affairs 
Statement before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee 
Washington, DC 

INTRODUCTION
 
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Biden and distinguished
Members of the Committee, for the opportunity to discuss with
you today United States' policy toward Iran. 

Iran remains a serious foreign policy challenge for our country
and the democratic world at large. For nearly a quarter century
the United States and Iran have been without diplomatic
relations. With the images of our Embassy hostages seared so
deeply into our collective consciousness, it is easy to forget
that our countries once enjoyed excellent relations and, only a
generation ago, 200,000 Iranians were studying in the U.S. The
United States is proud to be home to a large community of
extremely talented Iranian immigrants who preserve a cultural
and personal bridge to Iran where diplomatic contact long ago
broke off. 

It is not with the Iranian people, but with the Iranian regime's
threatening and often irresponsible behavior, that our concerns
rest. We have repeatedly made clear our grave concerns regarding
the Iranian government's pursuit of weapons of mass destruction
and long-range delivery systems; its sponsorship of terrorism
including its direct support to Hizballah and Palestinian
rejectionist groups; its appalling human rights and democracy
record; its support for violent opposition to efforts to achieve
peace in the Middle East; and its interference in the affairs of
its neighbors -- especially Afghanistan and Iraq. 

Each of these issues is of vital concern to the United States
and, in each and every case, Iran has a position inimical to
that of the United States and the international community. At a
time when countries across the region are moving towards greater
openness, political participation and economic freedom, Iran
stands in stark contrast. 


Our concerns with Iran are not merely historical; they do not
simply reflect the pain felt, real as that pain is, over the
storming of our Embassy more than two and a half decades ago. It
is Iran's actions and policies today that drive our policy.
Iranian government policies, loosely grouped into three broad
categories that I will discuss briefly today, directly threaten
U.S. interests in the region and beyond. 

In each of these three areas, Iran has a demonstrated track
record of moving backwards against the tide of world events. I
will start with Iran's freedom deficit, appropriate given the
recent election of democratic governments in two of Iran's
neighbors and the upcoming June 17 Presidential elections in
Iran. 

IRAN'S DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD 

Iran is a great country with a unique history and culture. The
Iranian people have made extraordinary contributions in many
fields for thousands of years. Modern Iran will undoubtedly
remain a significant country in the future of the broader Middle
East. 

The United States believes the future of Iran should be
democratic and pluralistic. We support those who wish to see
Iran transformed from a rigid, intolerant theocracy to a modern
state. A peaceful, democratic Iran would be a key feature in a
reformed, more democratic Middle East. We believe Iran is a
country in the process of change. Some two-thirds of its people
are below the age of thirty-five. Many young Iranians support
the need for a more positive relationship with the U.S. In fact,
the U.S. may have a more positive public image in Iran than in
other countries of the region. We sense that the sentiment among
ordinary Iranians for change for reform and democracy is strong.
But that sentiment is ignored by the ruling clique. 

Iran suffers from a deficit of freedom. The regime's human
rights record remains abysmal and the government continues to
commit numerous, serious abuses, including summary executions,
disappearances, torture and other inhumane treatment. In the
late 1990s, elements of Iran's secret services murdered a number
of intellectuals and oppositionists. In 2000, a courageous
journalist named Akbar Ganji was imprisoned for uncovering the
truth and reporting it in his newspaper. Since Ganji was
imprisoned, many journalists and even webloggers have been taken
into prison where they have been abused and threatened. The
Iranian government's actions have essentially eliminated the
free press in Iran. In 2003, an Iranian Canadian
photojournalist, Zahra Kazemi, was beaten to death in detention.
The investigation and trial have been a farce and the Canadian
government has taken steps to scale back its relations with
Iran. 

During student protests in June 2003, 4,000 demonstrators were
arrested; a few are still held. In December 2003,
Parliamentarian Mohsen Mirdamadi was beaten by vigilantes as he
started a speech in Yazd. Before the 2004 elections, when
reformist members of parliament signed a petition to the Supreme
leader asking for more democracy, they were threatened with
arrest and arbitrarily stripped of their parliamentary immunity. 

In fall 2004, for a second year in a row, the United States
co-sponsored and actively supported a Canadian resolution at the
UN General Assembly condemning the human rights situation in
Iran. The Iran human rights resolution passed in the UN General
Assembly's 59th Plenary, sending an important signal to the
Iranian people that the international community recognized their
suffering and to the Iranian Government that dialogue on human
rights was no substitute for concrete action to improve its
record, and that the serious concern about Iran's overall
international behavior would not blunt the international
community's focus on the internal human rights situation. 

On the surface, the Iranian government points to a picture of an
active democracy in which Iranians participate regularly in
national and local elections. But this is a veneer behind which
lies a perverted process whose integrity is severely compromised
by the oppressive oversight exercised by hard-line clerical
bodies. One of the most egregious recent examples of this
extraordinary system was the rigging of the February 2004 Majles
elections, in which the Guardian Council disqualified thousands
of reformist candidates, including more than 85 sitting members
of the Majles. We commend the bravery and dedication of the many
ordinary Iranians who put their livelihoods at risk to advance
the principles of democracy, religious tolerance, and the
accountability of the government to its own people. 

We are similarly very concerned that the upcoming June 17
Presidential elections will represent another setback for the
democratic hopes of the Iranian people. Candidate registration
started Tuesday, May 10 in Iran and ended May 15. At the end of
the registration period, the names of the Presidential
candidates will be forwarded to the 12-member Guardian Council,
which then has up to 10 days to assess the eligibility of the
candidates. There is every indication the June election will not
result in a meaningful expression of the popular will, because
the political process and the media are controlled and
manipulated by an unelected few the clerical elite and their
associates. These unelected leaders dominate Iran's political
system, have the power to intimidate and disqualify candidates,
and through the exercise of that power have stymied popular
demands for freedom. Of the over 1,000 Iranians who have
registered to run in the upcoming elections, the Guardian
Council is likely to approve less than a dozen candidates.
Indeed, in 2001, only 10 of the 814 registered candidates were
allowed to run. The diminished role of women in Iranian
political life since the February 2004 Majles elections is
another clear indicator of the regime's effectiveness in
stymieing free popular will and of its anti-democratic beliefs. 

In November 2003 at the National Endowment for Democracy,
President Bush outlined a forward strategy for freedom in the
Middle East. He said that "sixty years of Western nations
excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle
East did nothing to make us safe -- because in the long run,
stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty." In his
2005 Inaugural Address, the President reiterated America's
support for the people of the broader Middle East and North
Africa in their fight for freedom. "We will persistently clarify
the choice before every ruler in every nation: The moral choice
between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom, which is
eternally right." President Bush spoke directly to the Iranian
people in his February 2, 2005, State of the Union Address,
saying: "As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with
you." 

The Administration is deeply appreciative of Congress' and this
Committee's support for the resources that enable us to
implement the President's Freedom agenda and reach out to the
Iranian people. A few examples: 

-- Since May 2003 we have funded a Persian language website that
serves as a "virtual embassy" by providing the only channel for
both U.S. policy statements in Persian as well as a range of
information about democracy, American society and values, and
consular information. 

-- We are also funding political discussion in Persian on
television and radio broadcasts into Iran under the auspices of
the Voice of America. Recently VOA announced that it was
increasing the duration of these broadcasts. The U.S. government
also funds news and music broadcasts into Iran on Radio Farda.
This service is specifically targeted at the large population of
younger people in Iran. 

-- The FY2005 Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related
Programs Appropriations Act doubled to three million dollars the
funds available to our Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Bureau
to support the advancement of human rights and democracy in
Iran. We are currently reviewing applications for FY2005; in
2004 we provided one million dollars to document human rights
abuses inside Iran and $500,000 for National Endowment for
Democracy programming. 

-- We have also recently established, with European and Canadian
allies, a Human Rights Working Group that will convene quarterly
to share information and coordinate our approach to the issue. 

These initiatives and programs require resources. Our commitment
of funds to support freedom in Iran is tangible evidence of the
United States' support for a better future for the Iranian
people, and we appreciate Congressional support for our programs
and efforts. 

The freedom deficit and the severe restriction on free
expression and fair elections is the first of our concerns with
Iranian government policy. 

COUNTERING IRAN'S NUCLEAR AMBITIONS 

A second and critical U.S. concern is our strong and resolute
opposition to Iran acquiring a nuclear weapons capability.
Iran's desire to acquire a nuclear weapon threatens the peace
and security of the United States, our friends and allies, and
the stability of the entire region. Iran's demonstrated track
record of nuclear deception and denial is troubling, including
an 18-year history of trying to hide from the world a
clandestine enrichment program, undeclared plutonium separation
experiments, and other suspicious activities, as reported by
IAEA Director General El Baradei. Iran failed to report the
irradiation of uranium targets and subsequent processing of
those targets to separate plutonium. Iran failed to report the
use of imported natural UF6 for the testing of centrifuges at
the Kalaye Electric company. Iran failed to declare the pilot
enrichment facility at Kalaye Electric, the laser enrichment
plant at the Tehran Nuclear Research Center, and the pilot
uranium laser enrichment plant at Lashkar Ab'ad. The list of
Iran's failures goes on and on and represents not mere
administrative failures but, in our view, the foundation pillars
of a clandestine nuclear weapons development program.
 
We see no sign Iran has made the necessary strategic decision to
abandon what we conclude is an active nuclear weapons program.
Iran's repeated brinksmanship in its negotiations with the
"European Union Three" or EU3, of France, Germany and the United
Kingdom, is part of Iran's continuing effort to divide the
international community, weaken our resolve and avoid adhering
to its international obligations. 

On this issue, though, let there be no misunderstanding in
Tehran. The international community stands united: Iran must not
be permitted to develop the capacity to build or deliver a
nuclear weapon. Many in the United States were skeptical of the
chances of success for the EU3 diplomatic effort, given Iran's
track record. But President Bush, on his recent visits to Europe
and Moscow, heard a clear commitment from our friends and
Allies: we share the goal of denying Iran a nuclear weapon and
recognize that there must be consequences should Tehran fail to
adhere to its international commitments. Our partners made clear
that Iran must provide objective guarantees to demonstrate that
it is not pursuing a clandestine weapons program under the cover
of a civilian nuclear energy program. On this point, the bar for
Iran must be set high: its history of deception of the IAEA and
the world has undermined the international community's trust. To
paraphrase a great American President: if we don't trust, then
we really must verify. 

During his visit to Europe in February, the President heard from
our friends of the importance of United States' support for the
EU3 diplomatic process, in order to reinforce to the world that
the ball lies squarely in Iran's court to adhere to its
agreements. On March 11, Secretary Rice announced that the U.S.
was prepared to take tangible, practical steps in support of the
EU3 diplomatic track, and would no longer block Iran's
application to join the WTO and would consider licensing the
export of spare parts for civilian passenger aircraft to Iran.
Since that time, we have maintained a near constant dialogue
with the EU3. For example, the Secretary saw UK Foreign
Secretary Jack Straw on Tuesday, and I speak on a daily basis
with my UK, French and German counterparts to reinforce our
utmost support for their leadership on this incredibly vital
issue to our shared security interests. 

The EU3 deserves our appreciation for its efforts to resolve
Iran's nuclear challenge through patient, principled diplomacy.
Iran appears to have maintained its suspension pledge since
November 22, 2004 but has asserted several times in recent weeks
that it intends to resume uranium conversion activities at
Isfahan which are covered by its November 2004 agreement with
the EU3, and would require the breaking of IAEA seals in place
to monitor that suspension. The Europeans have made plain their
deep concern with this possibility and reaffirmed that these
activities would constitute an Iranian breach of the agreement,
ending the negotiation process and requiring action by the
international community. We support the EU3 in their commitment
to the Paris Agreement signed in November and believe that, if
it is breached, the United States and the EU3 must support a
resolution in the IAEA Board of Governors reporting Iran to the
UN Security Council. 

President Bush and Secretary Rice have made clear publicly that
we support a peaceful, negotiated settlement of the Iranian
nuclear problem. That is why we support the EU3 process. Our
message to Tehran today is: adhere to the Paris Agreement,
maintain suspension of all nuclear-related activities, and
negotiate in good faith the eventual cessation and dismantling
of all sensitive nuclear fuel cycle activities. 

The spotlight must remain on the Iranian government and on the
requirement that the Iranian government adhere to its
international commitments. Unfortunately, we see no sign of a
strategic decision to abandon nuclear weapons efforts, and,
particularly in the light of recent threats by Tehran to resume
enrichment, we remain deeply skeptical of Iran's intentions.
U.S. policy toward Iran on this urgent issue is resolute. As
President Bush noted on September 27, 2004: "We've made it
clear, our position is that they won't have a nuclear weapon." 

IRAN'S DESTABILIZING IMPACT ON THE REGION AND BEYOND 

Iran has already used another unconventional weapon terrorism
against innocent Americans, Europeans, Arabs, Israelis and
others. Iran remains the most active state sponsor of terrorism
in the world. The State Department's 2004 Country Reports on
Terrorism notes that "its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and
Ministry of Intelligence and Security were involved in the
planning and support of terrorist acts and continued to exhort a
variety of groups to use terrorism in pursuit of their goals."
Iran's extensive involvement in supporting terrorism truly puts
it in a class by itself. 

We are deeply concerned about Iran's connections to numerous
terrorist groups, including those that violently object to the
right of Israel to exist or to any negotiated peace between
Israelis and Palestinians. For example, Iran provides money,
weapons, and training to HAMAS, Hizballah, and Palestinian
rejectionist groups. These are some of the world's most deadly
terrorist organizations, responsible for the killing of
thousands of innocents, including Americans. Hizballah, for
example, has been responsible for more American deaths than any
other terrorist organization in the world apart from al-Qaida.
Furthermore, Iran's support for these groups fuels terrorist
violence in Israel and the Occupied Territories, seeking to
undermine the prospects for Middle East peace at this moment of
historic opportunity. 

Iran continues to hold senior al-Qaida leaders who are wanted
for murdering Americans and others in the 1998 East Africa
Embassy bombings and for plotting to kill countless others. Iran
has refused to identify those individuals in its custody. 

We have sanctioned Iran as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, and
called for the regime to abide by the requirements of U.N.
Security Council Resolution 1373 to deny safe haven to those who
plan, support, or commit terrorist acts and to affirmatively
take steps to prevent terrorist acts by providing early warning
to other states by exchange of information. Iran should
immediately turn over to face justice all al-Qaida related
terrorists in its custody or on Iranian soil to appropriate
jurisdictions. 

We are also working closely with the UN and our key allies,
particularly France, to fully implement UNSCR 1559, which calls
for the dismantling of all armed militias in Lebanon, including
Lebanese Hizballah. Iran has provided Lebanese Hizballah with
funding, safe haven, training and weapons. We all remember that
Lebanese Hizballah was responsible for the death of hundreds of
Americans in Beirut in the 1980s. 

As we meet with our allies from around the world, we take every
opportunity to express our concerns about Iran's support for
terrorism and our concerns about Iranian interference in the
efforts to secure a lasting, just peace between the Israelis and
Palestinians. We actively seek the involvement of the
international community to reflect those concerns in their
dealings with the regime, diplomatically as well as
commercially. 

Iran must also live up to its commitments to develop productive
relationships with its neighbors, support the new Iraqi
government, and renounce in word and deed any relationship to
individuals or groups that support instability and engage in
terrorism. 

Iran is not meeting these commitments with regard to Iraq. Iran
made commitments to Iraq and the international community at the
November 2004 Ministerial Conference in Sharm El Sheikh to
assist Iraq in its security (including border control), to
support the political process, and to practice non-interference
in Iraq's internal affairs. Unfortunately, we see little
evidence of Iranian assistance, and continuing troubling
indications of Iranian interference in Iraqi internal affairs. 

We will continue to work closely with the new Iraqi government
to address all issues related to Iraq's stability and security.
In our dealings throughout the region we continue to stress the
importance of protecting Iraqi sovereignty. 

CONCLUSION 

Notwithstanding the success of the worst regime elements in
reasserting control over parliament, Iranian society is moving
in its own positive direction. Iranians are unhappy about the
Guardian Council's heavy-handed exclusion of reformist
candidates from elections, the government's curtailment of press
freedoms, and the deteriorating human rights situation. In
addition, they are frustrated by the country's chronic
unemployment and their government's failure to provide jobs for
the thousands of young Iranians entering the work force each
year. Structural flaws in the economy can be papered over with
extraordinarily high oil revenues, but they don't go away. Iran
is a great nation which has given the entire world a powerful
cultural legacy and the Iranians have much yet to offer in the
years ahead. 

It is our hope that U.S. relations with Iran will change for the
better; but that cannot happen without a change in Iran's
policies in the areas I have discussed. The pursuit of weapons
of mass destruction and delivery systems makes Iran less secure
and the region more unstable. The regime must end its
sponsorship of terrorism, including its direct support to
Hizballah and Palestinian rejectionist groups and begin to help
build a better life for all parties involved. American citizens
hear about Iranians who have gone to jail or have been murdered.
How can we be silent when we see individual Iranians risking
everything to achieve the democratic freedoms we ourselves
treasure? How can we turn our backs when the Iranian regime
attempts to subvert the newborn democracies in Iraq and
Afghanistan? 

We have had no diplomatic relations with Tehran for more than 25
years, through five Presidential administrations from both
political parties. While we are optimistic about Iran's future,
the onus to improve its relationship with the rest of the world
is squarely on Tehran and will be found in concrete actions in
the three broad areas I discussed briefly today. For all the
lack of diplomatic contact, there is no lack of communication
about what is necessary to transform this relationship. The
government in Tehran knows what is expected of it, and must act
if it wishes to rejoin the community of civilized nations. 

Released on May 19, 2005 

© Iranian.ws

.26     Powered by Iranian.ws

*****************************************************************
 4 Guardian Unlimited: France Calls Iran Nuclear Talks 'Fragile'
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Saturday May 21, 2005 1:46 AM

By ELAINE GANLEY 

Associated Press Writer 

AVALLON, France (AP) - European-led talks aimed at getting Iran
to abandon nuclear activities are ``very fragile,'' with
negotiators discussing economic, technical and political
cooperation, France's foreign minister said Monday. 

Michel Barnier would not elaborate on the proposals in an
interview with The Associated Press. But he said talks range
over issues including economic, technical and commercial
cooperation, Iran's wish to join the World Trade Organization
and political dialogue. 

``We are in negotiations that are very fragile and complex. We
are advancing with our eyes open,'' Barnier said. ``European
proposals are very serious and should be understood as such'' by
Iran. 

The Europeans have been pressing Tehran to abandon its uranium
enrichment activities in exchange for economic aid and technical
support. Enriched uranium can be used to produce energy or
nuclear weapons. 

Iran maintains its nuclear activities are meant to generate
electricity, but the United States maintains they are part of a
weapons program. 

Officials from France, Britain and Germany, acting on behalf of
the 25-nation European Union, are expected to meet with Iranian
officials next week. The talks will likely take place Wednesday
in Geneva, French officials said. 

On Tuesday, the State Department's number No. 3 official,
Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns,
plans to meet the European diplomats in Brussels for a strategy
session. 

Barnier said an accord reached in November under which Iran
agreed to suspend uranium enrichment activities is still
operational. 

``The Iranians know very well the consequences if the accord is
not respected,'' he said. ``Iran has much to win'' if the talks
to succeed, ``and we want to succeed.'' 

Barnier's comments came as an Iranian dissident and a senior
diplomat said Tehran was circumventing international export bans
on sensitive dual-use materials by smuggling graphite and a
graphite compound that can be used to make conventional and
nuclear weapons. 

With most countries adhering to international agreements banning
the sale of such ``dual-use'' materials to Tehran, Iran has been
forced to buy it on the black market, Iranian exile Alireza
Jafarzadeh told the AP - allegations confirmed by a senior
diplomat familiar with Iran's covert nuclear activities. 

Phone calls to Iranian diplomats seeking comment were not
answered. 

--- 

Associated Press reporter George Jahn in Vienna, Austria,
contributed to this report. 	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 5 AFP: IAEA backs Iran-EU crisis talks, still wants more answers from Tehran - 

Friday May 20, 07:27 PM

VIENNA (AFP) - The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
said it supported the EU-Iran nuclear talks, but diplomats
warned it was impatient for more information from Tehran and its
member states might refer the matter to the UN Security Council
if the talks failed. "We do support these negotiations," IAEA
spokeswoman Melissa Fleming told AFP, but declined to comment on
the talks because they were taking place "outside our
territory." 

Sources said Friday crisis talks between Tehran and the
so-called EU-3 of Britain, France and Germany and EU foreign
policy chief Javier Solana, could take place next week in Geneva
rather than Brussels as previously planned. 

The talks have been prompted by Tehran's recent statements that 
Iran is set to resume uranium conversion work, a move that would 
violate a November accord on freezing nuclear fuel work. 
Diplomats said the IAEA's 35-member state board of governors 
wants a commitment from the Islamic state that it will give up 
its plans. 

If it does, the board will choose to read it as a sign that 
Tehran can be trusted after failing for years to disclose the 
full nature of its nuclear programme. The Europeans want a 
permanent freeze of all nuclear fuel work, and in exchange is 
offering Iran political and commercial cooperation. 

They have warned that if Tehran makes good on its threat to 
resume conversion, they will push for a Security Council 
referral, something Washington has long favoured. Iran has so far 
agreed to hold off from resuming uranium conversion -- a 
precursor to the ultra-sensitive enrichment process -- pending 
the emergency talks. 

A diplomat close to the IAEA pointed out Friday that uranium 
conversion was not the same as uranium enrichment and posed "no 
immediate threat they they would develop nuclear weapons." But, 
he said, it was also true that "the conversion of yellowcake to 
UF6 has value unless to be used in enrichment centrifuges." 

Depending on the level to which uranium has been enriched, it can 
be used both for civil or military purposes, though Tehran 
maintains the sole aim of its nuclear programme is to provide an 
alternative energy source. Diplomats said the IAEA still wants 
answers from Tehran on several aspects of the programme, 
including an explanation for traces of radioactive material found 
in some of its facilities. 

Another issue still troubling the UN nuclear watchdog is plans 
its inspectors found in for a highly sophisticated P-2 nuclear 
centrifuge found in Iran. Tehran said it had not worked on the 
centrifuges for seven years, but said a diplomat: "The worry is 
that they are lying ... that they have been working secretly on 
more developed centrifuges." 

Tehran has said its decision to resume activities at Isfahan is 
"irreversible," and prompted more concern still by refusing IAEA 
inspectors access to its military site at Parchin. Washington 
charges that it is trying to build a detonator a nuclear bomb at 
the site. 

Diplomats say that if Tehran makes up its mind to resume 
conversion activities, the Islamic state will signal its final 
decision by informing the IAEA in a letter that it plans to open 
the seals the body's inspectors placed on their nuclear sites. If 
this were to happen and next week's talks were to fail, the 
Europeans will ask the board of governors to convene immediately, 
Solana has signalled. 

The board could then decide to take the matter to the Security 
Council, which could impose sanctions on Tehran. The IAEA board 
is due to hold its next meeting here on June 13. Up till now, it 
has resisted Washington's urging that Tehran be brought before 
the Council. But British Prime Minister Tony Blair has now joined 
sounded a threatening note that he would support such a move if 
Iran breached its commitments. According to diplomats in Vienna, 
there is a "general belief" at the IAEA headquarters that Iran's 
nuclear programme has reached the stage where it would take the 
country "three to 10 years to build a nuclear bomb."     

         Copyright © 2005 AFP AFP. All rights reserved. 
  
*****************************************************************
 6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Said to Be Smuggling Nuclear Matter
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 
 	 
Saturday May 21, 2005 1:46 AM

AP Photo VAH112 

By GEORGE JAHN 

Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Iran is circumventing international
export bans on sensitive dual-use materials by smuggling
graphite and a graphite compound that can be used to make
conventional and nuclear weapons, an Iranian dissident and a
senior diplomat said Friday. 

Graphite has many peaceful uses, including steel manufacture,
but also can be used as a casing for molten weapons-grade
uranium to fit it to nuclear warheads or to shield the cones of
conventional missiles from heat. 

With most countries adhering to international agreements banning
the sale of such ``dual-use'' materials to Tehran, Iran has been
forced to buy it on the black market, Iranian exile Alireza
Jafarzadeh told The Associated Press - allegations confirmed by
a senior diplomat familiar with Iran's covert nuclear
activities. 

``It is not clear how much governments are involved,''
Jafarzadeh said later in an interview with Associated Press
Television News, adding that he believes Iran is ``using front
companies to deceive other companies, other entities in foreign
countries, and they wouldn't know what the destination would
be.'' 

Phone calls to Iranian diplomats seeking comment were not
answered. 

While with the National Coalition of Resistance of Iran,
Jafarzadeh disclosed information about two hidden nuclear sites
in Iran in 2002 that helped uncover nearly two decades of covert
Iranian atomic activity - and sparked present fears Tehran wants
to build the bomb. 

Much of the equipment - including centrifuges for uranium
enrichment and other technology with possible weapons
applications - was acquired on the nuclear black market. 

Those implicated include Henk Slebos, a Dutch businessman who is
awaiting trial in the Netherlands on charges of importing banned
material - including 100 pieces of graphite - as part of
disgraced Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan's
clandestine smuggling network. 

Jafarzadeh, whose organization was banned in the United States
for alleged terrorist activity and who now runs the
Washington-based Strategic Policy Consulting think tank, said
Iran was additionally smuggling and trying to manufacture a
graphite-based substance called ceramic matrix composite. The
highly heat resistance compound is also used in missile
technology. 

He said he learned this from sources of information within Iran. 

The diplomat, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity
of his position, said Iran also may be interested in acquiring
specially heat-resistant ``nuclear-grade graphite'' that can be
used as moderators to slow down the fission process in reactors
generating energy. 

While Iran does not now have reactors using such moderators, it
insists it has the future right to all aspects of peaceful
nuclear technology. 

Neither Jafarzadeh nor the diplomat could say how much graphite
Iran had imported and over what period of time. 

But the diplomat said a graphite-moderated nuclear plant would
require a ``huge amount'' of graphite - as many as 1,000 tons
for a 250-megawatt reactor. 

Crucibles to hold molten uranium metal would need much less
graphite - no more than about 2.2 pounds per nuclear weapon, the
diplomat said. He said investigations by the Vienna-based
International Atomic Energy Agency revealed laboratory
experiments by Iran aimed at making nuclear-grade graphite,
which later were abandoned. 

Domestically manufactured Iranian conventional missiles would
require dozens of pounds of graphite per missile cone, he said. 

Jafarzadeh also said a plant now being built near the central
town of Ardekan for what Iranian officials say is steel
manufacturing will actually be a cover for mastering graphite
technology. 

The revelations came as Iran's top nuclear negotiators prepared
to meet early next week with the foreign ministers of France,
Britain and Germany, acting on behalf of the 25-nation European
Union, for what could be a last-ditch attempt to convince Tehran
to agree to a long-term freeze of uranium enrichment activities. 

French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier said Friday the talks
were ``very fragile.'' He said the talks range over issues
including economic, technical and commercial cooperation, Iran's
wish to join the World Trade Organization, and political
dialogue. 

The United States wants U.N. Security Council action against
Iran for what it says are nuclear weapons ambitions, and the
Europeans have threatened to support such U.S. calls if it
resumes enrichment programs. Iran says those programs are needed
to generate power, but Washington labels them as part of plans
to make weapons-grade material. 	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 7 Hankyoreh: Hoping for a Restoration of Intra-Korean Relations
 
[Editorial] 

Updated : May.21.2005 07:39 KST

The vice-ministerial talks between North and South were not easy
but have ended with the adoption of a joint press statement with
three clauses. It was agreed that there would be ministerial
talks June 21-24 in Seoul, that a ministerial-level delegation
from the South would visit Pyongyang for a joint even
celebrating the June 15th Joint Declaration, and that the South
will give the North 200,000 tons of fertilizer. 

It is regrettable that no concrete mention of the North Korean
nuclear issue was made despite it having been discussed until
the very end. It is also unfortunate that the issue of reunions
for the many people desperate to see family members in the North
and items such as the opening of transportation links was tabled
until June's ministerial talks. However, much significance may
be attached to the fact that talks reopened after a they were
disrupted ten months ago, and that a Southern delegation will go
to Pyongyang for the fifth anniversary of the summit. One hopes
to see the opportunity put to good use, so that North and South
may strip themselves of their pent-up emotions and restore
relations that are based on reconciliation and cooperation. 

The establishment of a channel for dialogue will function
positively in resolving the complicated nuclear issue. It
establishes a foundation from which our government can speak its
mind. It also is reason for a feeling of expectation to learn
that the Bush Administration has conveyed to the North Korean
mission at the United Nations that it recognizes the North's
sovereignty and will not attack it. 

Those in our society who take an overly critical attitude about
the lack of clear mention of the nuclear issue and the decision
to give the North fertilizer are looking at the question of
North and South with an eye that is too confrontational. It is
right as members of the same Korean nation to provide food and
fertilizer aid ahead of negotiations to resolve the hunger
experienced by our Northern brethren. The cause of peace on the
peninsula is advanced when the warmth of our hearts is conveyed
to them. 

The Hankyoreh, 21 May 2005. 

Copyright 2005 Hankyoreh Plus inc.   
*****************************************************************
 8 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Outlook for six-party talks   

The Nation's No.1 English Newspaper
 
North Korea agreed to normalize inter-Korean relations in return
for 200,000 tons of fertilizer to be provided by the South. That
sums up the four-day talks held in the North Korean border town
of Gaeseong through Thursday. The meeting, which came 10 months
after the two sides last met, was a half success in the sense
that it resumed the Seoul-Pyongyang dialogue but failed to make
any progress on the most important issue - the North Korean
nuclear crisis.

 Heading for Gaeseong, the Seoul delegation pledged efforts to
persuade the North to reaffirm the 1992 joint declaration on
making the Korean Peninsula a nuclear-free zone. During the
meeting, it drew attention by suggesting an "important proposal"
regarding the nuclear question.

 But all that the Seoul negotiators got from their Pyongyang
counterparts was an empty-sounding promise to "work together
with the South for the peace on the Korean Peninsula."
Unification Minister Chung Dong-young tried to put a positive
spin on the statement, saying that the agreement would
contribute to a peaceful resolution of tensions over North
Korea's nuclear program. But it did not contain any commitment
by the North to dismantle its nuclear weapons.

 In a sense, the meeting was not an appropriate forum to discuss
the nuclear question. Pyongyang has made it clear from the start
that the nuclear question is separate from the issue of resuming
the suspended inter-Korean dialogue. Furthermore, Pyongyang
showed it had no intention of discussing the thorny issue at the
Gaeseong meeting by downgrading it from a vice ministerial-level
meeting to a working-level one. It intentionally appointed a
director-general as head of its delegation, while the Seoul
negotiators were led by a vice minister.

 Seoul officials say the proper platform for tackling the
nuclear issue is the ministerial-level meeting that the two
sides agreed to hold in Seoul June 21-24. They may be right. But
they face a formidable task of persuading Pyongyang to return to
the stalled six-party talks on its long-standing nuclear
question. 

The Gaeseong meeting has improved the outlook for the six-party
talks by inducing Pyongyang to end its boycott of all official
dialogue since July last year. The news that the United States
had a direct contact with North Korea in New York last week also
brightens the prospects.

 A group of ranking U.S. officials, including Joseph DeTrani,
Washington's special envoy for negotiations with Pyongyang,
reportedly delivered a message to officials of the North Korean
mission in New York that the United States recognizes North
Korea as a sovereign state and that the United States has no
intention of attacking it. Washington has also reportedly
suggested that bilateral talks with Pyongyang within the
six-party framework would be possible.

 Washington's conciliatory gesture adds to the positive mood
created by the Gaesong meeting. But the ball is now in
Pyongyang's court. Seoul officials will have to use the resumed
channel of dialogue to step up pressure on Pyongyang to choose
the course of resolving the nuclear standoff in a peaceful way. 

2005.05.21
*****************************************************************
 9 Korea Herald: Seoul to discuss nukes in June talks with N.K.   

 (smjoo@heraldm.com) By Joo Sang-min 

2005.05.21
        
Chung also wants to strengthen political, military cooperation 

Rejecting criticism that this week's inter-Korean talks made no
progress in defusing nuclear tensions, Unification Minister
Chung Dong-young said he will take the opportunity of
ministerial-level talks in Seoul next month with the North to
press the isolationist state to return to the six-party talks.

 Chung also said Seoul will focus on political and military
issues in the June 21-24 high-level diplomatic discussion,
proposing a resumption of top-level military talks between
generals on both sides. General-grade military talks between the
Koreas agreed on tension-easing measures last summer near the
maritime and overland border areas but have not yet met again to
follow up those steps.

 "Inter-Korean cooperation in political and military areas is
weak, though the level of civic and cultural sectors is
considerable," said Chung while reporting to senior ruling Uri
Party lawmakers on the results of the inter-Korean
vice-ministerial talks, which wrapped up Thursday night in the
northern border town of Gaeseong.

 In the first senior-level talks in 10 months, the two Koreas
agreed to resume cabinet-level talks in Seoul and the South
promised to send the North 200,000 tons of fertilizer aid
starting May 21.

 The Koreas also agreed a delegation led by Chung will attend a
ceremony in Pyongyang on June 15 to mark the fifth anniversary
of the historic 2000 summit between former President Kim
Dae-jung and North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.

 Speculation persisted over whether Chung, on his first visit to
Pyongyang since he became unification minister last June, will
meet Kim.

 The cabinet-level talks in Seoul next month will be the 15th
such series of discussions, which the North suspended last
summer after the South took in a large group of defectors and
blocked a South Korean group from attending ceremonies marking
the 10th anniversary of the death of the North's founder, Kim
Il-sung, the father of Kim Jong-il. 

Chung said that during the Seoul talks he will also discuss the
nuclear standoff and other issues, including resuming reunions
of families separated by the 1950-53 War and a joint event to
open two recently completed cross-border roadways. 

Critics felt Seoul came away from this week's Gaeseong meeting
with less than they gave to the North, which showed less
interest in discussing the nuclear standoff than securing the
fertilizer aid.

 The government here deflected the criticism that the talks
contributed little to persuading the North to return to the
six-party talks between the Koreas, United States, Japan, China
and Russia which have been stalled since last June.

 "We clearly conveyed our opposition against the nuclear
standoff to the communist state during the talks. North Korea
listened to us carefully and what was delivered was a meaningful
message that could affect the North's decision-making process,"
Chung said. 

Instead of specifically referring to the escalating nuclear
standoff between Pyongyang and Washington, the joint statement
released after the Gaeseong meeting stated the two sides will
"cooperate for the peace on the Korean Peninsula in accordance
with rapprochement agreed in the June 2000 summit."

 Seoul reconfirmed the inter-Korean talks still serve as a
practical channel to ease the nuclear tensions despite
Pyongyang's stance that the issue can only be resolved when
Washington changes its "hostile" policy, Chung said. 

He said he will stress to Pyongyang during the Cabinet-level
discussions that the six-way talks are the only beneficial
solution to its nuclear weapons program.

 Although the North believes it has to resolve the nuclear issue
with the United States, the issue will have to be seriously
discussed June 21-24 to revive the moe than the 1992
inter-Korean declaration on a non-nuclear Korean Peninsula, he
said. 

But it is uncertain whether the North will respond to South
Korea's hopes that closer inter-Korean political cooperation can
ease international tensions over the nuclear standoff.

 Since it announced Feb. 10 that it possesses nuclear weapons
and will boycott the six-party talks indefinitely, Pyongyang has
been raising the stakes. This month it announced that it
unloaded 8,000 spent fuel rods from its Yongbyon nuclear power
plant, a move that will help it increase its supply of
weapons-grade plutonium. 

Speculation remains rife that if the North does not end its
boycott of the six-party talks, the United States and Japan
might consider referring the nuclear issue to the U.N. Security
Council for sanctions or other physical measures such as
maritime interception of purported North Korean smuggling of
drugs or counterfeit money. 

U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said in
Washington that the United States welcomed the four-day talks in
Gaeseong, but was disappointed North Korea did not seize the
occasion to decide to return to the six-party table. 

But there was a glimmer of hope raised by disclosure that U.S.
and North Korean officials met in New York May 13 for the first
in nearly seven months. 

The U.S. officials, including Joseph DeTrani, Washington's
special envoy for negotiations with the North and its No. 2 man
at the six-party talks, held a "working-level" session with
North Korean representatives to the United Nations, including
ambassador Pak Gil-yon and his deputy Han Song-ryol.

*****************************************************************
 10 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Restart of Six-Party Talks Still Possible
 
  Home> National/Politics    Updated May.20,2005 20:44 KST   
 
standoff look as if the three countries are operating to a
specific plan, raising hopes in some quarters that six-party
nuclear disarmament talks could resume even at this late stage. 

The White House and State Department on Friday confirmed that a
secret meeting between U.S. and North Korean officials in New
York took place, whose purpose was to make Washington¡¯s
position clear. The meeting came in response to the North Korean
Foreign Ministry saying on May 8 that Pyongyang would decide
whether it felt the U.S. really recognized it as a sovereign
state after directly meeting with it. 

At the time, a South Korean official said, "I took it as North
Korea indicating it could rejoin the six-party talks.¡± On May
9, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice acknowledged that
North Korea was a sovereign state. Right after that, at 60th
anniversary celebrations of the end of World War II in Moscow,
South Korean, U.S., Chinese and Russian leaders agreed to
maintain the six-nation framework and strengthen diplomatic
efforts. U.S. President George W. Bush, who had been pursuing a
hard line, took a step back. 

Working-level officials like Deputy Foreign Minister Song
Min-soon and Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Hill
announced they would step up diplomatic efforts. Then the New
York meeting between U.S. and North Korean officials took place
on May 14. "That was two days before the restart of inter-Korean
talks,¡± a South Korean official said. 

If all these are seen as positive signs, the process looks
something like this: North Korea puts out feelers about its
return to talks, the U.S. softens its line, inter-Korean and
U.S.-North Korean contacts take place, and vice-ministerial
talks between the two Koreas resume. Japanese Chief Cabinet
Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda said Friday ¡°the possibility has
grown¡± that the six-party talks may restart. 

But there remains room for pessimism. Even after the New York
meeting, North Korea has continued its daily criticism of the
U.S. The North's Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of
Fatherland said Thursday calls from Washington for the six-party
talks to resume rang hollow, while the KCNA said Washington
merely paid lip-service to the country¡¯s sovereignty.
Pyongyang¡¯s intentions, as ever, are hard to gauge, but this
does not sound like an imminent decision to return to talks. 

A South Korean official denied Japanese press reports that
Pyongyang agreed to respond within two weeks. But he added, ¡°I
think North Korea will issue its official position not far from
now after comprehensively looking at things, including the
results of intra-Korean talks... If you ask me to make a
prediction, I'd say Pyongyang will rejoin talks." 

(englishnews@chosun.com ) 

*****************************************************************
 11 AFP: South Korea positive, US disappointed over North Korea talks -

Friday May 20, 09:15 AM

SEOUL (AFP) - South Korea has put a positive spin on North
Korea's refusal to address the nuclear standoff during extended
talks this week, but domestic critics said the North had been
given an easy ride. 

The first senior-level talks between the North and South in 10 
months closed Thursday with a promise from South Korea to send 
200,000 tonnes of fertilizer aid to the North and a pledge from 
Pyongyang to send delegates to higher, cabinet-level talks in 
Seoul next month. 

US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said in Washington 
that the United States welcomed the four-day talks in Kaesong, 
just over the inter-Korean border in North Korea, but was 
disappointed that North Korea did not seize the occasion to 
announce a return to nuclear talks. 

The Stalinist country traditionally refuses to discuss the 
nuclear issue at inter-Korean talks, arguing the matter must be 
dealt with at talks between Pyongyang and Washington. However, 
Seoul used the talks to offer an unspecified package of aid to 
the North if it returned to the talks and agreed to abandon its 
nuclear weapons drive. The North Korean side listened to the 
offer, but made no reply, according to Seoul officials. 

North Korea has boycotted the six-nation talks since the third 
round in June in Beijing last year. Aside from the United States 
and North Korea, the talks include host China, Russia, Japan and 
South Korea. South Korean officials said they clearly conveyed 
Seoul's position through the inter-Korean talks that North Korea 
should return to the dialogue table on its nuclear program. 

South Korea's Unification Minister Chung Dong-Young, responsible 
for Seoul's relations with Pyongyang, said the North would have 
to address the issue at the cabinet level talks here in June. 
"Although the North believes it has to resolve the nuclear issue 
with the United States, the issue will have to be seriously 
discussed at the ministerial-level talks if we wish to keep the 
declaration of non-nuclearization of the Korean peninsula in 
place," he said.

However South Korea's main opposition Grand National Party 
expressed regret the nuclear issue was not addressed in the joint 
statement. "The latest talks have hurt the national pride," said 
the party in a statement. 

"The demands by our side including the nuclear issue and more 
reunions of separated families were completedly ignored by the 
North." 

After declaring itself nuclear-armed in February, North Korea 
said this month it had unloaded 8,000 spent fuel rods from its 
reactor, a step that would allow it to reprocess weapons-grade 
plutonium for more nuclear bombs. 

US officials have also said recently there were signs the North 
is preparing for a nuclear test. 

Meanwhile Boucher said Washington had used a back-channel at the 
United nations in New York to contact North Korean diplomats last 
week and urge them to come back to six party talks. 

"It's been almost a year since the six-party talks. There have 
been a lot of things said. And we have had, from time to time, 
discussions or meetings in this (New York) channel to make clear 
what our positions are," Boucher said. 

Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman, confirmed that "working 
level" talks were held on Friday in New York. 

Japan said it was more optimistic of a resumption of talks, after 
North Korean and US officials met in New York. "We know there was 
contact and it was made with the aim to resume the six-way 
talks," Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda, the 
government spokesman, said.     

         Copyright © 2005 AFP AFP. All rights reserved. 
  
*****************************************************************
 12 Asia Times: Pyongyang reveals its hand

By Selig Harrison 

(Republished with permission from Japan Focus) 

During the next three months, North Korea will unload its
nuclear reactor at Yongbyon, removing fuel rods that can be
reprocessed into plutonium for more nuclear weapons. Once again,
Pyongyang is offering to negotiate a freeze that would prevent
further reprocessing, as it did in June, 1994, leading to the
Agreed Framework, and as it has repeatedly offered to do in the
six-party talks. 

This is the good news emerging from my ninth visit to North
Korea from April 5 to April 9. The bad news is that Pyongyang is
no longer prepared to discuss the dismantlement of its existing
nuclear weapons as part of the six-party process in Beijing.
First Deputy Foreign Minister Kang Sok-ju told this writer
categorically that North Korea would no longer engage in
discussions on dismantlement until the United States normalized
its economic and political relations with Pyongyang and made a
credible commitment not to continue promoting "regime change". 

What this posture means is that Pyongyang intends to keep the
nuclear weapons it already claims to possess, but is prepared to
rule out the enlargement of its arsenal by negotiating a freeze. 

My meetings in Pyongyang included Kim Yong Name-nam, president
of the Supreme People's Assembly (one hour), Kang Sok-ju (two
hours), Deputy Foreign Minister Kim Gye-gwan, who has
represented Pyongyang until now in the Beijing talks (five
hours) and General Ri Chan-bok, the North Korean representative
at Panmunjom (two hours). 

All of them emphasized that North Korea now considered itself to
be on a par with the US as a nuclear weapons state and that the
denuclearization of the Korean peninsula must now embrace "the
US nuclear threat in the peninsula and its vicinity" as well as
the dismantling of North Korea's nuclear weapons. 

This position was spelled out at length in a March 31 Foreign
Ministry pronouncement calling for the removal of the US nuclear
weapons allegedly stored in secret at Kunsan and other US bases
in the South. However, it was clear that these are not serious
immediate demands. North Korean inspections of US bases in the
South, I was told, would logically have to be accompanied by
some form of inspection of North Korean nuclear facilities
involving the US, but such reciprocal inspection arrangements
could only occur, as a practical matter, after the US and North
Korea had established normalized relations and had greater
mutual trust. 

What North Korea wants now is a start toward normalization with
the US in the form of direct bilateral talks with the US. A
direct bilateral dialogue is regarded as an essential first
gesture of a willingness to recognize and legitimize the North
Korean regime. Six-party talks could also be held, but
Pyongyang's emphasis is on direct talks. 

Kim Gye-gwan emphasized that North Korea was not seeking to
impose preconditions for its participation in the six-party
talks relating to the agenda, such as a US willingness to
discuss its March 31 demands. However, North Korea would not
attend, he said, unless the US "improves the atmosphere for the
talks by making clear that it is not seeking regime change". 

The formal North Korean position is that Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice should apologize for calling North Korea "an
outpost of tyranny". But Kim Yong-nam said, "If they are not
prepared to do that, there should be some other way to provide
us with a justification to attend. It's up to them to find a
way. The ball is in their court." 

Similarly, Kang Sok-ju said that it was not enough for Rice to
have said: "No one denies that North Korea is a sovereign
state." I asked whether it would be satisfactory if she said
that "the United States will respect the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of the DPRK and is prepared for peaceful
coexistence despite the differences in our social systems".
"That's something we can accept," he said, "But we want to hear
it directly in open or secret discussions with the US." 

"We need a springboard to be at the six-party talks," Kang
added, "some signal that the United States treats us with
respect. We have to convince our army and our people that we are
acting in a way consistent with the dignity of a sovereign state
that is respected as a strong military state. It's not a
difficult thing to be at the six-party talks, but we can't do so
if we are going there under pressure." 

Although Kang Sok-ju and Li Gun, director of the American
Affairs Bureau in the Foreign Ministry, told me flatly that the
periodic unloading of the Yongbyon reactor would begin this
month, I could not get them to say whether the unloading had
already started, or to specify precisely when it would start.
Similarly, all of those I met were vague about whether a nuclear
test explosion was being planned, or whether one was even
necessary. 

When I asked Kim Yong-nam how he knew North Korea's nuclear
weapons would work in the absence of a test, he replied, "The
agencies concerned are convinced that they have all the
preparations made properly, and that our nuclear weapons are
operational." General Ri Chan-bok said, "There's no need for a
test, and we don't want to have one, even one underground,
because of the fallout. Without a test, our nuclear deterrent
will be functional. We are ready to put warheads on our missiles
whenever we want." 

This statement suggested that the warheads were not yet on the
missiles. It also prompted me to ask whether the North Korean
deterrent consisted only of missiles, or also included
air-deliverable nuclear bombs. "In the 21st century," he
replied, "it's hard for me to believe that any country would use
air deliverable nuclear weapons." 

Selig S Harrison is director of the Asia program at the Center
for International Policy. Harrison is the author of numerous
books including Korea Endgame: A Strategy for Korean Unification
and US Disengagement. He has visited North Korea nine times. 

(Republished with permission from Japan Focus)   															
														
Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110 											  
*****************************************************************
 13 Newsday.com: N. Korea nukes - a fresh approach

Editorials              
 	
Go for S. Korea’s face-saving measure
 
May 20, 2005

No one wants North Korea to become a nuclear power. But none of 
the nations affected by it has been able to defuse Pyongyang's 
mounting nuclear threat, or assuage its regime's paranoia about 
Washington's bellicose intentions, through negotiations or 
concerted action. Meanwhile, step by ominous step, both 
Washington and Pyongyang have escalated their posturing to the 
point of near-crisis.

 That point was reached last week when the Bush administration 
warned that Pyongyang would cross a "red line" if it went ahead 
with plans for its first test of a nuclear weapon - a move that 
would trigger unspecified U.S. acts of retaliation.

It's time to turn down the temperature on this simmering pot of 
geopolitical trouble. The South Korean government is giving both 
Washington and Pyongyang a way to back out of their unnerving 
impasse. They should take it.

 South Korean officials earlier this week told their North
Korean counterparts that if Pyongyang returned to the six-nation
disarmament talks that stalled nearly a year ago, Seoul was
prepared to make a new proposal for a more generous package of
aid and security guarantees - if the North dismantled its
nuclear weapons program. If accepted all around, the South
Korean plan would give both the United States and Pyongyang a
face-saving way of backing off their increasingly hostile
posturing. It's positive that representatives of the two
governments met this week in New York.

 Pyongyang needs to be assured that its regime would not be
threatened with overthrow by military force - an issue on which
the Bush administration remains far too ambiguous. But North
Korea must also be persuaded by all involved that it cannot
amass a nuclear arsenal to prevent a regime change.

 None of Washington's East Asian allies want North Korea to
collapse now. It would be a social and economic strain on the
entire region, creating massive instability.

 They do want the nuclear threat to be gone. So should President
George W. Bush. To accomplish that, he must go along with South
Korea's sensible proposal, designed to allay North Korea's
paranoid fears of a military takeover. Bush, of all people,
should know that the United States cannot afford to create
another regime change by force. 	 

 Copyright 2005 Newsday Inc.
*****************************************************************
 14 SF Chronicle: Mothballed weapons depot may become vibrant community

CONCORD / Cattle roam in ghost town at site of future development 

Friday, May 20, 2005

The flagpole outside the administration offices at the Concord
Naval Weapons Station isn't used these days. With no active-duty
military officials and a skeleton crew of civilians taking care
of the sprawling 5,200-acre inland portion, there's simply no
one to raise and lower the Stars and Stripes each day. 

Six hundred cattle graze undisturbed among rows of grass-covered
bunkers, where owls make their homes under the eaves. "Empty''
signs are posted outside magazines to assure people they no
longer hold missiles, bombs or other ammunition. Barracks and
offices that once housed Marines, the Navy and civilians are
falling into disrepair as paint peels and wood rots from years
of disuse. 

Concord officials have big dreams of transforming the inland
portion of the station -- which was included last Friday in the
Pentagon's base closure list -- into a vibrant community of
homes, office buildings, parks and open space. 

But right now it's little more than a ghost town. 

The Navy mothballed the area in 1999 when it transferred the
weapons depot mission to Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station in
Southern California. The larger 7,600-acre tidal portion at the
northern end of the base is now leased to the Army for its 834th
Transportation Battalion, which runs its own ammunition and
cargo shipping mission at the modern piers and rail yard along
the shore of Suisun Bay. 

The inland portion has grown so quiet that quail and coyote
scurry across crumbling asphalt roads without fear of vehicles
hitting them, and a herd of 55 tule elk ranges undisturbed over
the valleys and hills long an oasis between Concord and Bay
Point. 

Founded during World War II, the weapons station once bustled
with activity. During World War II, the Korean War and the
Vietnam War, as much as 100,000 tons of ammunition passed
through its port to points overseas. At its height during the
Vietnam War, about 3,000 military and civilian personnel worked
at the base. 

During the 1980s, the number of workers and the size of
shipments had shrunk, but the depot was still a vital part of
the Navy. In 1992, two new bunkers with huge sliding doors were
built to accommodate 25-foot-long missiles. 

Those bunkers are part of the General Ammunition magazine area
east of Willow Pass Road, where about 200 bunkers are lined in
rows as long as several city blocks. Passing motorists can see
the grass-covered berms and the concrete loading areas within
the bunkers, but up close the bunkers are larger and more
numerous than a faraway glimpse would suggest. 

Railroad tracks run along almost every row of about 20 bunkers
so ammunition could be loaded directly into the bunkers, which
have ventilation systems to keep the proper humidity to protect
the ammunition. The kinds of munitions have varied over the
decades, from the 16-inch shells and depth charges of World War
II to Standard anti-aircraft missiles and Tomahawk missiles used
in modern warfare. The Navy continues to refuse to confirm or
deny whether any nuclear weapons were ever stored in Concord, a
common allegation during the base's recent history. 

The high explosive bunkers are nearby, behind two rows of fences
once topped with razor wire and guarded by patrols. Those
bunkers, older and more nondescript than the general ammunition
bunkers, are topped with a ceramic layer for further protection
against accidental explosions. 

While the largest stateside loss of life during World War II
came when 320 men were killed at the station's Port Chicago
while loading ammunition onto ships, no explosion has ever
occurred at the bunkers, said Navy spokesman Gregg Smith, and
there is no contamination around them. 

Still, there are about 20 sites that would have to be cleaned
before the base could be used for housing or other civilian
uses, including some areas with arsenic contamination from
vegetation control. Most of the inland portion could be
transferred to the city of Concord without a lot of
environmental cleanup, the Navy says. 

Much of the inland portion behind the North Concord/Martinez
BART station and Willow Pass Park was for decades a buffer zone
free from development, although a long-abandoned airstrip behind
the park remains. About 100 miles of railroad tracks, mostly
spur lines to the bunkers and miles of sidings that now hold 350
empty boxcars headed for the scrap yard, are now choked with
weeds and California poppies. 

Concord covets the tidal portion of the weapons station as well,
but the area was not included on the base closure list, and a
tour shows that it has a much greater military presence than the
inland portion. It also has more areas that would be off-limits
to development because of wetlands, environmental contamination
or steep terrain. 

Lt. Col. David McClean, commander of the 834th Transportation
Battalion, said Thursday most people had no idea that the Army
had a busy ammunition shipping operation at the Concord Naval
Weapons Station. 

The Army uses the four ports, including two with modern cranes
like those at the Port of Oakland, to load and unload railcars
carrying ammunition, military equipment and other cargo bound
for the Pacific area. 

On a daily basis, between 74 and 100 military and civilian
personnel work at the tidal area, but when ships come in, the
numbers swell with dozens of additional civilian stevedores and
longshoremen who work while the Coast Guard patrols to keep
passing boats away. 

McClean said the Army would like to move its headquarters, which
are just north of the town of Clyde, to the administration area
of the inland portion - - north of Highway 4 -- so it would be
farther away from the buffer zone for an explosion at the port. 

The Army has plans to upgrade parts of the tidal portion,
including a plan to spend $8.6 million in fiscal year 2010 for a
pier support complex. 

"There is definitely a strategic importance to this area,''
McClean said. 

E-mail Erin Hallissy at . 				
Page B - 1 			


The San Francisco Chronicle] 
*****************************************************************
 15 KTVB.COM: Idaho nuclear watchdogs wary of uranium consolidation 

05:55 PM MDT on Friday, May 20, 2005 

Associated Press 

BOISE -- Idaho nuclear watchdogs say they're concerned the
federal government may want to store bomb-grade uranium from
weapons labs in other states at the Idaho National Laboratory. 

Jeremy Maxand of the Snake River Alliance says the complex near
Idaho Falls should not become a repository for enriched uranium
and plutonium that could be used to create nuclear bombs. 

Leaders of the National Nuclear Security Administration say
they're interested in using two highly secure concrete buildings
at INL for storing the material. 

But they won't make any decision until hearing from an advisory
committee to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman. The committee is
expected to release its recommendation next month.



*****************************************************************
 16 IPS-English DISARMAMENT: Israeli Arsenal Vexes Nuclear
 
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 16:10:36 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS NA WD IP IK PI BW
DISARMAMENT: Israeli Arsenal Vexes Nuclear Negotiators
By Haider Rizvi

UNITED NATIONS, May 20 (IPS) - The U.S. administration has sought to keep a 
tight focus on the suspected nuclear activities of Iran and North Korea at 
month-long talks here on the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). But 
other countries also have highlighted the impact of Israel's nuclear 
weapons arsenal on efforts to establish a Middle East nuclear-free zone.

To be sure, diplomats from Arab and developing countries said they share 
some of U.S. President George W. Bush's concerns about Iran's and North 
Korea's nuclear ambitions.

During open debate that has lasted for the past two weeks, however, speaker 
after speaker also has urged the international community to help set up a 
nuclear-free zone in the Middle East by urging Israel to give up its 
nuclear weapons programme.

''The presence of nuclear arms is an impediment to peace not only in the 
region, but in the world,'' Qatari diplomat Nasr Al Ali told delegates at 
the talks, held every five years.

''These weapons are a major obstacle to peace and security in the region,'' 
Saudi representative Naif Bin Bandar Al-Sudairy said in a statement.

Demands to establish a zone free of nuclear weapons in the Middle East stem 
from a number of U.N. General Assembly resolutions and recommendations made 
by consensus at past NPT review conferences.

Armed with an estimated 200-300 nuclear bombs, Israel has said that it is 
willing to join the treaty but only after a comprehensive peace agreement 
has been reached with its Arab neighbours, many of whom it has described as 
''hostile'' nations.

''A Middle East nuclear weapons free zone will be viewed very favourably by 
Israel once we have a comprehensive peace in the area,'' said Israeli 
Ambassador Daniel Ayalon recently, ''and there are no dangers of attacks or 
delegitimisation by any other country.''

Israeli officials said their nuclear arms do not pose a threat to other 
countries and that they serve as a deterrent against invasion by larger 
neighbours.

''The real risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East emanates from 
countries that, despite being parties to the international treaties, do not 
comply with their relevant international obligations,'' said Alan Bar, 
director of the Israeli foreign ministry's arms control department.

''These countries,'' Bar added, ''are engaged in ongoing efforts to acquire 
weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile efforts that have a 
destabilising effect on not only in the region, but on a global scale as 
well.''

Bar said Israel has ''never threatened its neighbours nor abrogated its 
obligations under any disarmament treaty.''

Arab diplomats rejected those assertions.

''Peace is not based on possession of weapons of mass destruction,'' said 
Sudairy. ''Real peace must be founded on confidence, trust, and good 
intentions. It is based on freeing the region from injustice, occupation, 
and aggression.''

Pro-Israel policy advocates specialising in nuclear issues, however, said 
Iran stood out as the greatest potential source of nuclear destabilisation 
in the Middle East.

''The question now is whether the whole NPT regime is threatened by Iran 
and not whether a nuclear free zone is immediately feasible,'' said Ariel 
Cohen, a senior analyst at the U.S.-based Heritage Foundation.

''It may be feasible at some point, but right now you see a threat to the 
NPT regime coming in the aftermath of both India and Pakistan and North 
Korea delivering blows to non-proliferation,'' Cohen told IPS.

Both India and Pakistan, which tested nuclear weapons in 1998, have refused 
to sign the non-proliferation treaty. North Korea, defying U.S. pressure to 
abandon its nuclear programme, opted out of the treaty about two years ago.

''If Iran violates NPT,'' said Cohen, ''there will be a domino effect that 
may involve Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, at which point Israel may go 
hot. Meaning Israel may not just hide behind creative ambiguity as it did 
so far, but will put its nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert, and that 
will be Iran's contribution to a more unstable Middle East.''

Cohen's fear about nuclear instability in the Middle East is something that 
many US-based independent-minded researchers and analyst also share -- but 
from a radically different perspective.

''The world does well to remember that most Middle East weapons programmes 
began as a response to Israel's nuclear weapons,'' said Joseph Cirincione, 
director for non-proliferation at the liberal think tank Carnegie Endowment 
for International Peace and co-author of its recent study, ''Universal 
Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security.''

''Everyone already knows about Israel's bombs in the closet,'' he said. 
''Bringing them out into the open and putting them on the table as part of 
a regional deal may be the only way to prevent others from building their 
own bombs in their basements.''

Cirincione said it would not be easy to create such an agreement but 
nevertheless insisted there is no time to lose.

Seeing current diplomatic trends in the Middle East as being favourable to 
the Bush administration, Cirincione said ''this is precisely the time'' to 
intensify efforts to rid the Middle East of nuclear weapons.

''It should be obvious that Israelis are better off in a region where no 
one has nuclear weapons than in one where many nations have them,'' he said.

Interviews with the U.S. diplomatic sources did not indicate significant 
movement in such a direction.

''Our position has been the same,'' an official from the U.S. permanent 
mission to the United Nations said. ''We have urged Israel to join the 
treaty. We have a long-standing concern over its safeguard facilities.''

The official's response suggested that while Washington recognises the need 
for a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East, it has no public intention as 
yet of convincing Israel to sign the NPT.

In the 1990s, the United States, Israel, and Arab nations all had supported 
the goal of non-proliferation but they failed to make any progress toward 
it after the Palestinian-Israeli peace process collapsed.

Numerous delegates, citing what they described as U.S. attempts to make 
Iran the focus of international debates on proliferation while turning a 
blind eye to Israel's illegal possession of nuclear weapons, said they were 
compelled to dub the U.S. nuclear policy as based on double standards and 
hypocrisy.

''Some states which are waging war against nuclear weapons are defending 
Israel and thwarting initiatives to establish a nuclear-free zone in the 
Middle East,'' said Syrian Ambassador Fayssal Mekdad, in an obvious 
reference to the United States, which has accused Syria of supporting 
terrorist groups.

Even so, while voicing disappointment with the U.S. role, Arab diplomats 
are actively participating in the review conference negotiations. Egypt has 
emerged in a leadership role. Representing the Non-Aligned Movement of 115 
developing countries, the Egyptian delegation is urging the conference to 
set up a subsidiary body to implement its past resolutions on nuclear 
weapons free zones.

''This conference should establish a practical roadmap that guarantees the 
establishment of nuclear weapons free zone in the Middle East,'' Egyptian 
envoy Ahmed Fathallah told delegates.

This month's talks are scheduled to wind down on May 27. Few if any 
diplomats said they expect significant progress on the Middle East or any 
other major items on their agenda. But that will not stop them from 
pressing the case.

''Israel has to be brought in,'' Mekdad said. ''We are not going to give 
up. We'll be there talking about it.''

(END/IPS/NA/WD/IP/IK/PI/BW/HR/AA/05)


= 05202000 ORP010
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 17 Bellona: Moscow will fight former nuclear chief’s extradition to the United States
 
The Russian Foreign ministry requested this week that Switzerland 
send the detained former Russian atomic energy minister Yevgeny 
Adamov back to Moscow for prosecution and to reject demands to 
extradite him to the United States, where he is facing charges of 
diverting $9m in US nuclear aid money to personal businesses, 
among other accusations.

  Former Russian Atomic Energy Minister Yevgeny Adamov.   
  Bellona archive   

Charles Digges, 2005-05-20 15:56

According to officials with the US department of State,
Washington has expressed its dissatisfaction with the way Moscow
is proceeding in the case. 

Adamov was arrested in Bern on May 2 while visiting his daughter
to help her sort out problems with a number of banks that has
frozen her accounts. 

Lawyers for former Atomic Power Energy Yevgeny Adamov, 65, who
is being held in a Swiss prison on a US Warrant issued by the US
District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania,
Wednesday told Bellona web that they were appealing against his
detention on the basis that Switzerland violated his immunity as
a former minister. If extradited to the United States and found
guilty, Adamov faces up to 60 years in prison and a fine of
$1.75 m. 

Nonetheless, Adamov is "confident that he will soon return to
Russia," his Swiss lawyer, Stefan Wehrenberg, said.
International law experts in Switzerland confirmed this may well
be the case.

  Former Russian Minister of Atomic Energy Adamov arrested in
Switzerland at US request   

  Swiss authorities have arrested Russia's former Atomic Energy
Minister Yevgeny Adamov after a US court accused him of
defrauding America to the tune $9m in funding intended to
improve safety at Russian nuclear facilities, according to Swiss
authorities.
   
The United States has so far not issued an official request for
Adamov’s extradition to Swiss authorities, said his lawyers. It
has until the end of June to do so. The United States has,
however, prepared an indictment, reviewed by Bellona Web,
reading several dozen pages detailing Adamov’s private bank
transactions through his US accounts and indicting him with
conspiracy to transfer stolen money and securities, conspiracy
to defraud the United States, money laundering and tax evasion. 

The indictment also includes Adamov’s business partner,
Russia-born US national Mark Kaushansky. 

Russia had originally appeared to distance itself from Adamov
after his May 2 arrest in Bern, noting he was facing charges in
connection with his commercial activities in the early 1990s
prior to his appointment as Russian atomic energy minister. 

But a Moscow court on Thursday—in a possible effort to
countermand the as yet unsent US extradition request—issued an
extradition request of its own, charging Adamov with fraud in
Russia. 

Money vs. politics and nuclear secrecy 
At the centre of this tug-of-war are Moscow’s obvious concerns
that Russia’s nuclear secrets will fall into the hands of the
United States. Adamov was, during his tenure as Russia’s atomic
minister from 1998 to 2001, privy to both how US nuclear threat
reduction funding was spent as well as classified material
pertaining to Russia’s monolithic civilian and military nuclear
industrial complex. This threatens to charge the case with
international political and security concerns. 

Seeking to address this threat, the Russian Foreign Ministry
said in its Wednesday statement that the accusations against
Adamov could relate to his activities as a government minister
and that any prosecution should take place in Russia rather than
in a foreign criminal jurisdiction. 

``We believe that if there are grounds for criminal prosecution
of Adamov, this should take place in Russia according to Russian
law,'' said the ministry. 

"The Swiss side has been informed through diplomatic channels of
our serious concern over the detainment of Yevgeny Adamov, which
was made, we believe, without due regard for certain norms of
international law," the statement continues. 

The Foreign Ministry continued: "We proceed from the assumption
that criminal persecution of the former minister and former
member of the Government of Russia in the territory of a foreign
state and his extradition for this purpose to a third country
bears on the national security interests of Russia." 

According to Russian diplomats interviewed for this article, at
least several charges brought against Adamov date back to the
time when he was still Russia’s minister of atomic energy. 

"According to the norms of international law, such actions have
immunity to foreign criminal legislation, which rules out the
possibility of criminal persecution of Yevgeny Adamov in a
foreign state without the agreement of concerned Russian
agencies," the Russian Foreign Ministry statement read. 

A spokesman from the Russian Ministry of Justice, who asked that
his name not be used, told Bellona Web that he was not sure that
such immunity extends to former members of the Russian
government. 

Some international experts say that Washington is using the
charges against to derive valuable information about Russia’s
atomic weapons programme. 

"What’s at stake is not the money that Adamov purportedly stole
or embezzled, but the information that he has about Russia’s
nuclear programmes," said Andre Liebich, central and east
European expert at Geneva’s Graduate Institute for International
Studies in an interview this week.. 

Liebich said the Adamov case represents Washington’s attempt to
put pressure on Moscow to come clean about its former and
possibly current nuclear programmes, and is another sign of
deteriorating relations between the two nuclear powers. 

"The US has been very keen to see these programmes wound down
and the arms decommissioned and has been paying in part for this
process. Adamov, of course, is at the very centre of this,"
Liebich said. 

Long delays expected 

Helen Keller, professor of international law at Zurich
University, says the whole case could undergo considerable
delays. 

Keller said that once the US sends its formal request for
Adamov’s extradition, Swiss authorities will examine whether the
US and Russian requests deal with the same offences in order to
pass judgement on their "seriousness".
 
"Adamov has the right to make representations," said Keller. "He
could, for example, assert that the entire affair is a political
process. This would be something the Swiss authorities would
have to examine seriously. He can also appeal any decision." 

Keller said the fact that Russia handed in its request first and
that the case involved a Russian citizen was in Moscow’s favour.
But she added that the Swiss would also have to take into
account the prospects of Adamov receiving a fair trial in
Russia. 

"There are concerns that the Russian courts are not independent,
as we’ve seen with the Yukos [oil company] trial," she said. 

Russia’s Case 

Adamov has long been a controversial figure within Russian
nuclear circles. In 2000, legislation legalising the import of
foreign radioactive waste to Russia for storage and eventual
reprocessing was ram-rodded though the Duma, despite public
opinion polls indicating some 90 percent of the Russia
population was against the legislation package. After its
passage, many Duma members openly admitted they had taken bribes
and other favours from Adamov. 

Adamov came under increasing fire in connection with the
legislative package but he insisted the accusations were in
retaliation for his refusal to be corrupted. "Many times I was
offered million-dollar bribes," he said in a 2002 interview with
The Moscow Times, an English-language daily. "But I always
refused." 

At the same time, the Duma accused Adamov of illegally setting
up companies inside and outside Russia, including a consulting
firm called Omeka registered in Monroeville, Pennsylvania. the
United States government was also investigating the relationship
between Adamov's Pittsburgh-based consulting firm and a company
that buys down-blended weapons-grade uranium taken from old
Russian warheads, and sells it to American nuclear power plants. 

Since leaving the minister's post, Adamov had officially joined
NIKIET and worked on projects to improve safety at Russia's 11
RBMK-1000 reactors still in operation. He nonetheless maintains
an unofficial advisory roll with Rosatom, the Ministry of Atomic
Energy’s successor, according to Rosatom and international
officials interviewed by Bellona Web. 

The Swiss dilemma

 The Swiss government has extradition treaties with both Russia
and the United States, and under the present complicated
circumstances, will take its decision "in consideration of all
the circumstances" a government official in Bern said in
telephone interview Friday. 

These include the seriousness and place where the offences were
committed, the dates of the extradition requests, the
nationality of the person involved and the possibility of
subsequent extradition to another state. 

Swiss authorities expected Russia to exert pressure on them to
to ensure Adamov is sent home. 

"It’s perfectly likely that Moscow would take reprisals against
Swiss interests and citizens in Russia," said Liebich. 

He said this could take the form of finding a Swiss company or
official in violation of Russian law. "It’s difficult to do
business in Russia without violating one law or another," he
said.   

  Publisher: , President: 
Information: , Technical contact: 
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62  * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
 18 BBC: Trident protesters start
 
Last Updated: Friday, 20 May, 2005
 
The protesters were served with an eviction notice on Wednesday                                                               

Anti-nuclear protesters who had occupied an island near
Britain's largest naval yard in Plymouth have started their
blockade of the base. 

Police arrested one person for obstruction on Friday morning at
Devonport Dockyard where Trident nuclear submarines are
refitted. 

The protesters were evicted from privately-owned Drake's Island
in Plymouth Sound on Thursday. 

Friday's action is part of a weekend-long peace camp in the
city. 

'Nuclear-free state' 

The action is being taken by the Campaign for Nuclear
Disarmament (CND) and Trident Ploughshares. 

CND chairwoman Kate Hudson will be in Plymouth urging the ending
of the refit programme and for the UK's Trident nuclear weapons
system to be scrapped and not replaced. 

[Devonport Dockyard]                            
Trident nuclear submarines are refitted at the base                                                                

The protest is taking place exactly a week after Trident 
Ploughshares supporters occupied privately-owned Drake's Island 
in Plymouth Sound. 

A district judge ordered the squatters to vacate the island - 
which they declared a nuclear-free state - by 1545 BST on 
Thursday. 

A spokesman for the group said it had left the island to set up 
the new camp on the mainland. 

Devonport is the base for refits of the Royal Navy's Vanguard 
class nuclear-powered submarines, which are each capable of 
firing 16 Trident missiles with nuclear warheads. 

Police said the person arrested was a 60-year-old woman from 
Essex.                                                   



*****************************************************************
 19 Xinhua: China to strengthen int'l nuclear cooperation   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-05-20 09:19:17   

  [China will strengthen international cooperation in its
nuclear industry to ensure secure and independent construction
of nuclear power plants in the country.]   

BEIJING, May 20 -- China will strengthen international
cooperation in its nuclear industry to ensure secure and
independent construction of nuclear power plants in the country. 

    Chinese Vice Premier Zeng Peiyan made the statement in his
letter of congratulation to the 13th International Conference On
Nuclear Engineering, which lasts until Friday in Beijing. 

    Zeng Peiyan also noted China will readjust the structure of
its energy resources and speed up independent construction
capabilities of nuclear power plants. 

    The four-day International Conference On Nuclear Engineering
focus on power station design and construction, as well as
operation and maintenance. 

    (Source: CRIENGLISH.com)   

  Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 20 [NukeNet] Fwd: nuke coalition picks 6 sites
 
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 16:06:56 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

Nuclear Group Picks 6 US Sites For Possible New Reactors
05-19-05

CHICAGO (Dow Jones)--A consortium of utilities and nuclear plant
builders said Thursday it has picked a list of six U.S. sites where it
may seek to obtain licenses for two new nuclear plants.

The sites, in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, South Carolina, Maryland
and New York, are principally at existing, operating nuclear plants. By
October, the NuStart Energy Development consortium plans to narrow the
list to two sites, and those sites will be included on two planned plant
applications with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

They would be the first reactor applications in 30 years, signaling
return for a power technology that was essentially abandoned as an
option for new plants decades ago.

"There is growing recognition that, if we are going to meet our future
needs for electric energy and also reduce our emissions of greenhouse
gases that may be causing climate change, we simply must build the next
generation of advanced nuclear energy plants," said Marilyn Kray,
NuStart's president.

Kray is also vice president at Exelon unit Exelon Generation. Exelon, a
NuStart member, is the largest U.S. nuclear utility.

No member of NuStart, which also includes second-largest nuclear
utility Entergy, has firm plans to build a new reactor. But if NuStart
received a license, possibly in 2010, members could use the license to
build at that time.

The consortium picked two Entergy nuclear plants as possible new
reactor sites, including the Grand Gulf plant in southwest Mississippi
and the River Bend plant in east-central Louisiana. The consortium is
also considering two plants owned by member Constellation Energy, the
Calvert Cliffs plant in Maryland and Nine Mile Point plant in western
New York.

The other two sites under consideration include the U.S. Department of
Energy's Savannah River nuclear facility in South Carolina and the
Tennessee Valley Authority's unfinished Bellefonte nuclear plant in
Alabama.

The Bellefonte site is notable, considering its place as an example of
what went wrong during the last nuclear plant buildup. TVA abandoned the
substantially completed plant in 1988, after spending $4.6 billion
there, when it became apparent its capacity wasn't needed.

The nuclear industry, with 103 active reactors providing 20% of the
nation's power, is attempting a comeback by trying to avoid past
pitfalls. NuStart includes General Electric unit GE Energy and British
Nuclear Fuels unit Westinghouse Electric, two plant builders with
advanced reactor designs that NuStart believes will be cheaper to build
and simpler to run.

The consortium plans to seek a license for each reactor vendors'
design. It will seek the licenses through a new, streamlined NRC
licensing plan that allows utilities to apply for construction and
operating approval at the same time.

NuStart is also operating within the DOE's "Nuclear Power 2010"
program, which offers 50-50 cost sharing to help companies bear the
expense of preparing the first new licenses. NuStart signed an agreement
with the DOE earlier this month to split the $520 million combined cost
for the two license applications.

NuStart plans to submit its applications in 2008 and hopes to receive
approval by 2010. A new plant could then be built by 2014.

Consortium members include Exelon, Entergy, TVA, GE Energy,
Westinghouse, Constellation, Duke Energy, Southern Co., FPL unit Florida
Power & Light, Progress Energy, and EDF International North America.

-By Jon Kamp; Dow Jones Newswires; 312-750-4129; jon.kamp@dowjones.com

_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 21 [NukeNet] PSEG's Hope Creek Gets Lower Marks From Nuclear
 
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 16:06:58 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)


PSEG's Hope Creek Gets Lower Marks From Nuclear Monitor

By Kristen McNamara
of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, an 
industry-funded group that evaluates nuclear reactors, has lowered its 
rating of Public Service Enterprise Group Inc.'s (PEG) Hope Creek reactor 
to the second lowest rung on its five-tier system, three people familiar 
with the plant's operations said.

The institute, known as INPO, reduced Hope Creek's rating to 4 from 3 
following a recent site evaluation, the people said. They asked not to be 
identified, because the institute's ratings are confidential.

Downgrades can raise companies' insurance premiums. The reduced ranking for 
Hope Creek echoes ongoing problems dogging PSEG and its nuclear operations.

Spokesmen from PSEG and INPO declined to comment on the rating. "The 
information is private and confidential between the company and INPO," PSEG 
spokesman Chic Cannon said.

He did, however, say the draft report the institute presented to senior 
PSEG managers described overall plant performance as acceptable. It noted 
areas of improvements, such as operating efficiencies, and said the station 
is heading in right direction, Cannon said. "We don't talk about any 
specific activity related to a member," Terry Young, INPO's director of 
communications said.

No Safety Warning

INPO says its rankings don't reflect hard scores on particular criteria, 
but instead are qualitative assessments of how well plants operate.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and INPO have an agreement through 
which the institute alerts the NRC to any significant safety concerns at 
the nation's more than 100 nuclear plants. The institute didn't notify the 
NRC of any such concerns at Hope Creek during its recent inspection, 
commission spokesman Neil Sheehan said.

The NRC, which conducts its own plant evaluations each year, has scheduled 
a public meeting on June 8 to discuss PSEG's efforts to better identify and 
resolve problems at its Salem and Hope Creek reactors in southern New 
Jersey and to ensure workers feel comfortable raising safety concerns.

The agency stepped up its oversight of those plants last summer after 
finding PSEG failed to resolve recurring problems and didn't make safety 
its top priority.

Exelon Corp. (EXC), the biggest and arguably best nuclear operator in the 
U.S., announced in late December its intention to purchase PSEG. It began 
in January running day-to-day operations at Hope Creek and the two-unit 
Salem plant, which it co-owns. Exelon's oversight expected to improve the 
plants' performance.

Insurance Costs

The Nuclear Electric Insurance Ltd, which insures domestic and 
international nuclear utilities for the costs associated with 
interruptions, damages and decontaminations, can increase premiums up to 
25% for nuclear sites that don't meet INPO's standard of acceptable 
performance.

PSEG doesn't disclose its nuclear insurance costs or comment on whether 
those costs could increase, spokeswoman Leslie Cifelli said. The insurance 
payments that nuclear companies make vary widely.

The insurance company said its pegs premiums to INPO's evaluations, rather 
than to the NRC's, because the institute provides more detail.

American Nuclear Insurers, which writes third-party nuclear liability 
insurance, doesn't factor a plant's INPO rating into its premiums. It looks 
instead at a reactor's output, location and performance, according to John 
Hoffman, the organization's director of underwriting.

Nuclear Fort Knox

The nuclear industry created INPO in 1979, after the Three Mile Island 
accident, to establish standards of excellence against which to measure 
U.S. reactors.

Teams of 15 to 20 assess safety and operations at the country's working 
nuclear units every 18 to 24 months. Composed of INPO staff and 
representatives from the industry, including workers from other plants, 
they identify a site's strengths and weaknesses across a range of 
categories such as equipment reliability, safety culture and radiological 
protection.

The organization copyrights its evaluations and maintains a secure Web site 
accessible only to members. INPO presents its evaluations to companies' top 
executives, but its written reports don't include the 1-5 grade, INPO 
spokesman Terry Young said. That information is provided orally.

The confidentiality is meant to ensure an open exchange of information 
between the institute and its members, he said.

Participation in INPO is voluntary, but all U.S. nuclear operators are 
members. Those companies are also members, through INPO, of the World 
Association of Nuclear Operations, an international self-regulating group 
established after the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident.

-By Kristen McNamara, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-2061;

kristen.mcnamara@dowjones.com

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

19-05-05 1200GMT


_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 22 NRC: NRC Terminates Special Oversight Panel, Begins Augmented Reactor Oversight
Program for Davis-Besse

News Release - Region III - 2005-02
 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region III
  No. III-05-028           May 20, 2005   
  CONTACT:     Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663
 Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662     E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov  
  

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has terminated its
special Oversight Panel for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant
and returned the monitoring of the facility to an expanded
version of the agencys Reactor Oversight Process. 

The agency established its Davis-Besse Oversight Panel in April
2002 to coordinate the NRCs regulatory activities in response to
the corrosion damage to the reactor vessel head and other safety
issues at the plant. The panel included NRC managers and staff
from the Region III office in Lisle, Ill., NRC Headquarters in
Rockville, Md., and the NRC resident inspectors at the plant. 

Davis-Besse -- operated by FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company
and located near Oak Harbor, Ohio  resumed operation in March
2004 after being shut down for about two years to address
equipment and staff performance problems. 

Since Davis-Besse returned to operation, the plant has operated
safely, said James Caldwell, NRC Regional Administrator. With
the record of safe operation at power for more than a year now
and their satisfactory completion of the order requiring
independent assessments and a successful mid-cycle outage, the
NRC can make the transition from a special panel to an augmented
oversight program. 

The NRC Oversight Panel will meet with FirstEnergy officials on
May 24 to discuss the transition. The meeting, which will be
open to public observation, will begin at 6 p.m. at the Camp
Perry Clubhouse, 1000 Lawrence Road, Bldg. 600, in Port Clinton.
At the conclusion of the meeting, before adjournment, the NRC
staff will be available for public questions and comments. 

The Reactor Oversight Process includes monitoring of plant
safety performance with statistical measures called performance
indicators and inspections of plant safety performance and
activities by NRC resident inspectors and specialists based in
the regional office and NRC headquarters. 

Although oversight of the plant will be returned to the normal
program, it will be substantially expanded to include additional
inspections focused on corrective action program implementation
and additional requirements imposed on the plant in an NRC
Confirmatory Order issued at the time of startup. 

The Confirmatory Order required Davis-Besse to contract with
outside organizations to perform independent assessments in the
areas of operations, engineering, corrective actions, and safety
culture. In addition, FirstEnergy established action plans to
reduce the backlog of maintenance and corrective action items,
improve the corrective action program, and ensure a safety
culture where individuals feel free to raise safety issues. 

The NRC will perform inspections beyond the regular oversight
program to monitor these independent assessments and the status
of the action plans. 

The NRC uses a color-coded system to measure the safety
significance of problems and inspection findings at nuclear
plants ranging from green, through white and yellow, to red, the
most significant. 

A white finding at Davis-Besse dealing with inoperable emergency
sirens identified during testing in May 2004, remains open and
will result in an additional inspection later this year to
review the utilitys corrective actions. 

The letter notifying FirstEnergy of the transition from the NRC
Oversight Panel to the normal Reactor Oversight Process is
available on the NRCs web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html. Use
accession number ML051400049 to locate the document.   



  


 	Last revised Friday, May 20, 2005 	   
*****************************************************************
 23 NRC: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Joseph M. Farley 
 
                         FR Doc E5-2556 
[Federal Register: May 20, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 97)] [Notices] 
[Page 29369-29370] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20my05-150]                         
 
Nuclear Plant, Units 1 And 2; Notice of Issuance of Renewed 
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 And NPF-8 for an Additional 
20-Year Period Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has issued Renewed 
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8 to Southern 
Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC or the licensee), the 
operator of the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP), Units 1 and 
2. Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-2 authorizes 
operation of FNP, Unit 1, by the licensee at reactor core power 
levels not in excess of 2775 megawatts thermal in accordance with 
the provisions of the FNP, Unit 1, renewed license and its 
technical specifications. Renewed Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-8 authorizes operation of FNP, Unit 2, by the licensee
 
[[Page 29370]] at reactor core power levels not in excess of 2775 
megawatts thermal in accordance with the provisions of the FNP, 
Unit 2, renewed license and its technical specifications.
 
The FNP units are Westinghouse pressurized-water nuclear reactors 
located in Houston County, Alabama, on the west bank of the 
Chattahoochee River.
 
The application for the renewed licenses complied with the 
standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations. As required 
by the Act and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, 
the Commission has made appropriate findings, which are set forth 
in each license.
 
Prior public notice of the proposed issuance of these renewed 
licenses and of an opportunity for a hearing regarding the 
proposed issuance of these renewed licenses was published in the 
Federal Register on November 5, 2003 (68 FR 62640).
 
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) SNC's 
license renewal application for FNP, Units 1 and 2, dated 
September 12, 2003; (2) the Commission's safety evaluation report 
dated May 2005 (NUREG-1825); (3) the licensee's updated final 
safety analysis report; and (4) the Commission's final 
environmental impact statement dated March 2005 (NUREG-1437, 
Supplement 18). These documents are available at the NRC's Public 
Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, first 
floor, Rockville, Maryland 20852, and can be viewed from the NRC 
Public Electronic Reading Room at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html .
 
Copies of Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8 
may be obtained by writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Director, 
Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs. Copies of the safety 
evaluation report (NUREG- 1825) and the final environmental 
impact statement (NUREG-1437, Supplement 18) may be purchased 
from the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, 
Virginia 22161-0002 (http://www.ntis.gov), 1-800- 553-6847, or 
the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, 
P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954 
(http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/index.html ), (202) 512-1800. 
All orders should clearly identify the NRC publication number and 
the requestor's Government Printing Office deposit account number 
or VISA or MasterCard number and expiration date.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of May 2005.
 
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Pao-Tsin Kuo, Program Director, License Renewal and Environmental 
Impacts Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E5-2556 Filed 5-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 24 MSNBC.com: Six sites finalists for nuclear power plants - Environment -
           
  U.S. consortium's list could be step toward renaissance  
    
  [IMAGE: BELLEFONTE NUCLEAR PLANT]   
    
  The Bellefonte Nuclear Plant in Scottsboro, Ala., was never 
completed but it might find new life after a consortium placed it 
on a shortlist for the first nuclear power plants in the United 
States in two decades.  
  

  MSNBC staff and news service reports

Updated: 11:15 a.m. ET May 20, 2005

A nuclear power plant hasn't been built in the United States in 
two decades, but that could change in the next few years after a 
consortium announced locations in six states as possible sites 
for a nuclear renaissance.

Nuclear power consortium NuStart Energy on Thursday named the
sites from which it will later pick two for which to apply for
licenses to build and operate nuclear power plants.

Four of the six already house operating nuclear power plants.
The sites, by location, are:
  + Scottsboro, Ala. The Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, an unfinished
site owned by the U.S. government's Tennessee Valley Authority.
  + Port Gibson, Miss. The Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, owned by
Entergy.
  + St. Francisville, La. The River Bend Station, owned by
Entergy.
  + Aiken, S.C. The Savannah River Site, a U.S. Department of
Energy nuclear weapons lab.
  + Lusby, Md. The Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant, owned by
Constellation Energy.
  + Oswego, N.Y. The Nine Mile Point plant, owned by
Constellation Energy.

All six sites chosen by NuStart are owned either by a consortium
member or by the Department of Energy.

The consortium, which hopes to work on two advanced plant
designs, said it expects to name the two finalists by October. 

Global warming advantage

The last license to result in the construction and operation of
a new nuclear plant in the United States was issued in 1973.

The U.S. nuclear industry has been virtually frozen since the
accident at Three Mile Island in 1979, the worst nuclear
accident in U.S. history. No company has followed through with
plans to build a new nuclear plant since the accident.

However, President Bush has backed renewed construction of
nuclear plants as part of his energy policy.

And, in an indication of a possible shift in public opinion, a
few environmentalists have said they are willing to revisit
nuclear power because, unlike fossil fuel, it doesn't produce
emissions tied to global warming.

In addition, designs for new generation plants include smaller
reactors that create less radioactive waste.

75 factors to be weighed
NuStart President Marilyn Kray said the four sites with
operating power plants have the â€œmost comprehensive licensing
basis,â€ and the five sites housing power plants have the
benefit of established transmission systems.

The consortium will evaluate the sites on 75 factors including
seismic activity, availability of water and emergency
preparedness issues.

It is also sending letters to state and local politicians and
development leaders to determine what incentives they might
offer to attract the plant.

Kray said Nustart is not particularly worried about protests
from environmental activists at the local level, but does expect
some resistance from environmentalists on the national level.

The NuStart consortium consists of nine utilities, including
Exelon, Entergy, and Duke Energy, as well as nuclear reactor
manufacturers GE Energy, a unit of General Electric, and
Westinghouse Electric Co., a unit of BNFL Plc. (GE is a parent
in the joint venture that owns MSNBC.)

Under the Department of Energyâ€™s Nuclear 2010 program, half of
the estimated $520 million cost of the project is being
shouldered by the Energy Department and half will be paid by the
consortium members.

The consortium expects to apply for licenses in 2008.
Construction could then begin in 2010 with completion in 2014,
NuStart said.Reuters contributed to this report.

Â© 2005 MSNBC.com
*****************************************************************
 25 Pocatello Idaho State Journal: Crews hold drill at ISU nuclear reactor
 
POCATELLO - Crew members on a Pocatello fire truck and ambulance
thought they were responding to a nuclear emergency Thursday
night. Instead, they discovered it was a drill required by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the Idaho State University
Engineering Department to retain certification to run its
nuclear reactor.

At 5:30 p.m., an emergency call came in about a person who was
possibly contaminated with radioactive material at the reactor. 
  
"We wanted to see how the whole scenario would work out and what
they would do. I'm very happy with their response," said
Division Chief Dave Gates. "Our guys asked for all of the things
they should have asked for and did the things they should have
done."

The drill is required to be done on an annual basis to test the
readiness of emergency responders. 

	 	 	 	 	
At 5:30 p.m., an emergency call came in about a person who was
possibly contaminated with radioactive material at the
reactor."> 	

published online on Friday, May 20, 2005
 
Copyright © 2005 Pocatello Idaho State Journal
 P O Box 431 Pocatello, ID 83204-0431   

*****************************************************************
 26 Newsday.com: Nine Mile nuclear complex considered for fourth reactor
             
May 20, 2005, 12:37 PM EDT

OSWEGO, N.Y. --          A consortium looking to build the first 
U.S. nuclear plant in 30 years has chosen the Nine Mile Point 
nuclear complex on Lake Ontario as one of six possible sites. 

NuStart Energy Development, a group of nine nuclear energy 
companies, is planning to build plants at two sites, said Carl 
Crawford, NuStart spokesman. The six finalists were selected from 
a list of 37 sites owned by NuStart's members, he said. 

Construction could start as early as 2010, and the facilities 
could be operating by 2014, Crawford said. 

Nine Mile Point, about 45 miles north of Syracuse, is home to
the James A. Fitzpatrick reactor, owned by Entergy Nuclear, and
the two Nine Mile Point units, operated by Constellation Energy. 

The consortium will narrow the list of sites from six to two
this summer, after talking to state and local officials about
what incentives they would provide. NuStart also will consider
demand for power, transmission facilities and public acceptance
of nuclear power. 

Federal energy officials have predicted that demand for
electricity could increase 50 percent by 2025, and the nuclear
industry hopes to fill the breach. Energy experts say the
outlook for nuclear energy is improving because of increasing
volatility in natural gas and fossil fuel prices. 

In anticipation of new reactors, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission has adopted licensing procedures that are expected to
help reduce construction costs and the time it takes to approve
a plant. 

Crawford said NuStart plans to submit applications to construct
next-generation nuclear plants at two sites. One site would host
a nuclear plant designed by General Electric, the other would be
designed by Westinghouse. 

NuStart would not build or operate the plants. The consortium's
role ends with license application. 

Once the license is approved, it would be up to member companies
individually or in partnership to decide whether to build and
operate a plant, Crawford said. None of the members has
committed to building a plant. 

___ 

Information from, The Syracuse Post-Standard: www.syracuse.com 

Copyright © 2005, The Associated Press     
*****************************************************************
 27 Kommersant: Ukraine to Diversify Nuclear Vendors 

New Russia's First Independent Newspaper
 	
 KOMMERSANT Daily, MAY 20, 2005

Yury Nedashkovsky (third from right), president of Ukrainian 
Energoatom, is attentive when evaluating the advantages of 
Russian supplier of nuclear fuel.                                         


Ukrainian delegation headed by the state-run Energoatom
President Yury Nedashkovsky has completed its tour to
enterprises of Russian , yet monopolistic vendor of fresh fuel
to Ukraine. TVEL will have to oppose the UK-US Westinghouse
already this year. 

--> Nedashkovsky specified they first visited Novosibirsk Works
of Chemical Concentrates, after that, they inspected nuclear
fuel assembly production at the Engineering Works in the Moscow
District’s town of Electrostal. “Our prime objective is to
examine the quality control system. Now I may say for certain –
we don’t doubt we were absolutely correct to shift to industrial
operation of Russian fuel assembly of improved design,”
Nedashkovsky said.
 
Negashkovsky announced Ukraine expects to pass this year a new
fuel/energy concept that covers the period up to 2030. “The
guidelines were presented to about three weeks ago,” he pointed
out, adding that the concept provides for reduction of gas and
petroleum consumption at the power plants and promotes coal and
nuclear industries.
 
In 2004, four nuclear plants of Ukraine accounted for 53.2
percent energy output of the country. According to Nedashkovsky,
Ukraine will construct nine new nuclear units by 2030, and
construction of two more units will be in progress. 

The next statement made by Nedashkovsky was next to sensational.
He announced Ukrainian intention to hold an international tender
for construction of new power units, i.e. not only contractors
but also suppliers of nuclear reactors will compete with each
other. Today’s nuclear power plants in Ukraine are equipped with
Russian reactors (VVER-440 and VVER-1000). 

Moreover, Ukraine is willing to diversify deliveries of fresh
fuel, which is currently supplied by Russian . “Already this
year, we will load six fuel rod arrays made at Westinghouse to
the South Ukrainian nuclear plant, 42 more cartridges will be
loaded in 2006,” head of Energoatom specified. --> 

by  www.kommersant.com
		 
   © 1991-2005 ZAO "Kommersant. Publishing House". All rights 
reserved.
*****************************************************************
 28 AU ABC: News in Science: Cracks in safety of new reactor? - 

20/05/2005 
		 		 		
A replacement for this reactor, 25 kilometres from the centre of 
Sydney, is due to be completed shortly (Image: Reuters/David 
Gray)                                                                                                                                                                     
									
 Concerns about the structural integrity of Sydney's new nuclear
reactor being built at Lucas Heights have been raised by
Greenpeace following a safety review released this week.

 says evidence in a new (IAEA) raises "strong concerns" about
the future structural integrity of the new reactor's concrete
containment.

The report was commissioned by the federal government's , which
is deciding whether to issue the (ANSTO) a licence to operate
the reactor.

The report also recommends ANSTO upgrade some of its proposed
safety checks, and raises staffing issues.

Concrete cracks

Greenpeace cites the report's mention of cracks in concrete
below where the reactor would sit.

While the report states the cracks have been repaired,
Greenpeace is concerned this might indicate problems with the
concrete.

"Any discussion about cracks in the reactor containment already
are extremely worrying," says James Courtney, nuclear campaigner
for Greenpeace Australia Pacific.

"I would like to know how they repaired it, the depth of the
cracks, why the cracks occurred, the location of the cracks." 

Courtney says Greenpeace is also concerned about how accessible
areas in the concrete might be to future checking once the core
of the reactor goes in.

"If they are covered up by another element of the reactor core
then it won't be able to be monitored," he says.

  [protest] 
  
  A protestor at the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor (Image:
Reuters/David Gray)  

ARPANSA chief executive officer, Dr John Loy, says the agency
has been aware of the cracks for about a year.

"It's an issue that we were aware of and we ensured that ANSTO
undertook repairs and that they undertake analysis to
demonstrate that the repairs will continue to mean that the
building retains its integrity over its lifetime."

Loy describes the cracks as "noticeable", and says they are not
surprising but are "something you'd keep an eye on".

He says the cracks are in a location that will be accessible in
the future.

Other aspects of the report

This latest report follows earlier ones ARPANSA commissioned to
help it decide where and how the facility should be built.

This one reviews whether ANSTO's proposed operation of the
reactor, laid out in their application for an operating licence,
meets international safety standards.

Loy says the new report recommends ANSTO develop a more rigorous
system of checking certain safety systems at the reactor than it
has proposed.

The report also calls for the reactor manager to have more
control "in order to avoid any conflicts regarding safety" and
indicates it is unable to assess whether the minimum staffing
level proposed by ANSTO would be adequate in all situations.

Loy says ARPANSA has asked ANSTO to respond to the report
recommendations.

"In general [the IAEA] indicated that it's a modern reactor and
it's well designed and sophisticated and the probability of an
accident is clearly very low," says Loy.

Loy says the worst-case scenario for an accident at the reactor
has been "endlessly" considered. 

He says all information on this is publicly available, except
for details of what would happen in a terrorist attack.

The need for a nuclear reactor

David Noonan, nuclear campaigner for the rejects the
independence of the report.

"We could be dealing with the issue of safety by not having the
reactor."

He says there is no demonstrated need for the reactor and there
are alternative sources of medical isotopes. 

"We should be having medical people reviewing the claim that we
have to have a reactor in Australia's largest city."

ARPANSA will accept public submissions on ANSTO's operating
licence application until 31 August.

These can be forwarded by email to
operatinglicenceapplication@arpansa.gov.au. 

*****************************************************************
 29 PRN: Davis-Besse to Return to Standard Regulatory Oversight 

[PR Newswire - A United Business Media Company] 	 

May 20 /PRNewswire/ -- FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company 
(FENOC) said today that it had been notified by the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) that the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power 
Station will return to the standard oversight process, effective 
July 1, 2005. 

"We are, of course, gratified by this news," said FENOC President 
and Chief Nuclear Officer Gary Leidich. "We believe this decision 
reflects the major improvements we've made at Davis-Besse, and 
its safe operations since the restart last year. It also is an 
acknowledgement of our employees' renewed commitment to safe 
operations." 

Enhancements to the plant included such projects as modifying 
back-up pumps on safety systems, increasing the capability of the 
plant's emergency containment sump, stripping and repainting the 
dome of the containment building and installing a 
state-of-the-art reactor coolant system leak monitor. Davis-Besse 
also revamped its reactor coolant system leak detection program, 
making it one of the most effective in the industry, and expanded 
programs for employees to report safety issues. 

"While we have made a lot of progress at Davis-Besse," Leidich 
said, "we understand that we must remain vigilant against 
complacency. By returning to the standard regulatory oversight, 
we know that our hard work is paying off and that we're on the 
right track." 

FENOC is a subsidiary of FirstEnergy Corp., a diversified energy 
company headquartered in Akron, Ohio. FENOC operates Davis-Besse, 
as well as the Perry Nuclear Power Plant in Perry, Ohio, and the 
Beaver Valley Power Plant in Shippingport, Pennsylvania. 

Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights 
*****************************************************************
 30 [NYTr] USA's Radiation Victims Seek $3 Bn in Compensation
 
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 14:13:29 -0500 (CDT)

 
Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
sent by mart

Deadly Cold War Legacy:

1) Marshalls to seek new nuclear compensation from US

2) Guam Residents demand compensation for radiation poisoning from U.S. Nuke
tests on Marshall Islands too. Residents put out call for islanders to
testify before Guam legaslature hearings.

3) Cancers from U.S. Marshal Islands nuclear bomb tests set to double: study

AFP via Yahoo - May 18, 9:28 AM ET 
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050518/pl_afp/marshallsusnuclear_050518132859  

Marshalls to seek new nuclear compensation from US 

MAJURO (AFP) - The tiny central Pacific state of the Marshall Islands will
go before a US Congress hearing next week to claim more than three billion
dollars compensation for the effects of nuclear testing on their islands
half a century ago.

The US House of Representatives will hold the first hearing next week on a
nuclear test compensation petition filed nearly five years ago by the
government of the Marshall Islands, a string of coral atolls populated by
under 60,000 people.

The petition is seeking the extra compensation and health care to deal with
the effects of 67 nuclear tests conducted by the US between 1946 and 1958
during the Cold War.

Marshall Islands President Kessai Note said Tuesday that the Marshall
Islands will "work tirelessly together to make certain that the nuclear
issue is settled in a fair and just manner".

The US government provided 270 million dollars compensation in an agreement
that expired in 2001, but islanders say that level is woefully inadequate
based on recent US government studies.

In 1954, the US conducted the Bravo hydrogen bomb test -- the largest test
with a force equivalent to 1,000 Hiroshima bombs -- at Bikini. Unsuspecting
islanders living on downwind islands were contaminated with high-level
fallout.

The US government maintains only four atolls Bikini, Enewetak, Rongelap and
Utrikwere -- were affected by radiation but Marshall Islands leaders say
many other inhabited islands were also affected.

"We're finding people on remote islands with high percentages of cancers,"
Foreign Minister Gerald Zackios said.

A US   National Cancer Institute National Cancer Institute report issued
late last year concludes that US nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands could
be expected to directly cause about 530 cancers, more than half of which
have yet to appear. This will be raised as a key piece of evidence by
Marshall Islands officials.

US House of Representatives Resources Committee chairman Richard Pombo
confirmed this week to Marshall Islands government leaders that his
committee will hold an oversight hearing on May 25 in Washington.

Senate Energy Committee chairman Senator Pete Domenici has also indicated
his plan to hold a hearing soon.

A report to the Congress from US Department Energy and Department of State
officials issued in January concluded that there was no legal requirement
for the Congress to provide more compensation to the Marshall Islands.

But the earlier compensation agreement leaves the compensation decision to
the Congress, allowing the Marshall Islands to make its case provided it can
prove there were "changed circumstances" that show the earlier agreement was
"manifestly inadequate."

                         ***

Pacific Daily News (Guam) - May 18, 2005
http://www.guampdn.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050518/NEWS01/505180323/1002

Radiation survivors testify

By Katie Worth

While the U.S. military was irradiating the Marshall Islands with nuclear
tests in the 1950s, Rose Cruz Jessop and Margarita Cruz were growing up on
Guam, eating fish caught by their uncles and vegetables farmed by their
grandfather, drinking rain water and fresh cow's milk from their back yard.

Fifty years later, Jessop is suffering from brain cancer that doctors do not
believe she will recover from. Cruz's vocal chords are paralyzed after a
recent bout with thyroid cancer. They have watched their parents, aunts,
uncles and siblings die from similarly horrible ailments.

Like many others on Guam, Cruz and Jessop blame the nuclear tests for their
family's health problems, and were among those at a public hearing last
night imploring Guam's lawmakers to do something about it.

The Guam Legislature is considering a resolution that would petition the
U.S. Congress to amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act to include
Guam. The 1990 act currently provides compensation to residents in the
continental southwest who were impacted by Nevada's nuclear tests in the
same era, as well as others who worked in the industry.

Though the Marshall Islands tests occurred some 1,500 miles from Guam, a
recent study by the federal National Research Council concluded that the
island did receive "measurable fallout" from those tests, and "should be
eligible for compensation under the RECA in a way similar to that of other
downwinders."

Last night's testimony varied from emotional accounts of health battles to
the sober opinions of doctors and indigenous rights advocates.

Jessop began to sob as she testified to senators that her brain cancer will
likely be fatal.

When she was growing up, she said, she and her family lived off the riches
of the oceans and the earth, innocent of the fact that the winds may be
carrying radiation that would later poison them.

When first diagnosed in 1997, Jessop said, she was forced to leave her
teenaged children to take care of themselves and their dying grandmother
while she went to get her own treatment.

"It's been a long, hard road for all of us," she told senators. "I pray that
you will help your people to be compensated for their suffering, especially
to those families who have already lost someone dear and close to them."

Call for Testimony:

To submit written testimony: contact legislative Speaker Mark Forbes' office
at 472-3518/9.

For information on the issue: contact Pacific Association for Radiation
Survivors president Robert Celestial at 633-4595, 688-7277, or email:
rcgolf@netpci.com.

                       ***

AFP via Taipei Times - April 18, 2005
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2005/04/18/2003250976

[ "Although many islanders developed severe radiation burns and had their
hair fall out as their land was engulfed in fallout, US Atomic Energy
Commission authorities issued a statement following the test saying "there
were no burns" and the islanders were in good health. US officials later
allowed islanders to return home to live in radioactive environments without
performing any cleanup work on their islands" ]

Cancers from US nuclear testing set 
to double: study

FALLOUT: Hundreds in the Marshall Islands have developed cancer as a result
of US bomb tests, and many more are likely to contract the disease

AFP, MAJURO, MARSHALL ISLANDS - A US study has found that the number of
cancers caused by hydrogen bomb testing in the Marshall Islands is set to
double, more than half a century after the tests were conducted in the tiny
Pacific nation.

The study by the US government's National Cancer Institute (NCI) estimated
530 cancers had already been caused by the tests, particularly the explosion
of a 15 megaton hydrogen bomb code-named Bravo on March 1, 1954.

It said another 500 cancers were likely to develop among Marshall Islanders
who were exposed to radiation more than 50 years ago.

"We estimate that the nuclear testing program in the Marshall Islands will
cause about 500 additional cancer cases among Marshalleseexposed during the
years 1946-1958, about a nine percent increase over the number of cancers
expected in the absence of exposure to regional fallout," the NCI study
said.

The study said because of the young age of the population when exposed in
the 1950s, more than 55 percent of cancers have yet to develop or be
diagnosed.

The NCI completed the study in September last year but it was only publicly
released last week after officials from the Marshall Islands noticed a
reference to it in a US Congressional report and requested a copy.

It was prepared for the US Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
which is scheduled to launch hearings next month to review a petition from
the Marshall Islands seeking more than US$3 billion in additional
compensation for nuclear test damages and health care.

At the time of the Bravo test at Bikini Atoll, US officials played down the
health implications for islanders.

Bikini Islanders were not evacuated despite their land's being engulfed in
snow-like radioactive fallout for two-to-three days after the Bravo bomb,
which was equivalent to 1,000 Hiroshima bombs.

Although many islanders developed severe radiation burns and had their hair
fall out as their land was engulfed in fallout, US Atomic Energy Commission
authorities issued a statement following the test saying "there were no
burns" and the islanders were in good health.

US officials later allowed islanders to return home to live in radioactive
environments without performing any cleanup work on their islands.

The US paid US$270 million in a compensation package in the mid-1980s part
of which went to the Majuro-based Nuclear Claims Tribunal.

But the tribunal says only a limited amount was made available for payouts
and has described the original settlement as "manifestly inadequate."

       
                                *
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 31 [du-list] New improved  DU from space
 
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 16:06:55 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/39618.html

Item begins....

THE US Air Force is seeking White House permission to develop and deploy 
space-based weapons which could strike targets anywhere in the world within 
90 minutes of receiving orders to open fire.
The Pentagon admitted yesterday that a programme - nicknamed "Rods from 
God" - exists and is aimed at establishing an orbital squadron of robotic 
space vehicles which could launch metre-long solid slugs of tungsten, 
titanium or depleted uranium towards the surface of the planet at speeds of 
up to 7200mph.
The metals, some of the hardest known to science, would hit with the force 
of a small nuclear weapon or meteor and would be capable of vaporising even 
hardened underground bunkers without the penalty of nuclear fallout from an 
atomic warhead.
A second plan, code-named Global Strike, calls for a fleet of shuttle-type 
craft armed with precision-guided conventional missiles which could be 
directed against anything from tank formations to terrorist leaders 
hundreds of miles below.
The air force has had an experimental laser-beam platform known as the 
XSS-11 in orbit since last month. The microsatellite is believed to be 
tasked with disrupting hostile nations' reconnaissance and communications 
satellites by blinding their sensors.
General James Cartwright, head of the US strategic command, said that the 
goal of developing space weaponry was to allow attacks to be delivered 
quickly anywhere on the face of the earth.
His remarks were supported by General Lance Lord, the senior officer in the 
air force's space command, who said the US needed the capability to ensure 
the nation had "freedom to attack as well as freedom from attack in space."
In September last year, General Lord told an air force conference that 
"space superiority is not our birthright, but it is our destiny. Space 
supremacy is our vision for the future."
Major Karen Finn, a spokeswoman for the US Air Force, said yesterday that 
the focus of the strategy was "not putting weapons into space, but in 
ensuring free access to space". She added that the draft directive 
submitted to the White House did not call for militarisation of space.
Critics of any policy which might trigger an arms' race beyond the 
atmosphere say that the use of even tungsten hyper-velocity slugs might be 
mistaken for a nuclear attack and could accidentally spark an atomic war.
Any deployment of the attack systems would face diplomatic, financial and 
technological hurdles, but the only treaties or international agreements in 
existence involve bans on nuclear warheads in space.
Richard Garwin, one of the most respected experts in US weapons science, 
said: "Cost will be a determining factor. It costs about £400,000 to hit a 
target with a Tomahawk cruise missile launched from a submarine, aircraft 
or surface warship. A space-based laser would send the price of that hit up 
to £50m."
The White House is expected to make a decision and issue a national 
security directive before the end of June.

THE US Air Force is seeking White House permission to develop and deploy 
space-based weapons which could strike targets anywhere in the world within 
90 minutes of receiving orders to open fire.
The Pentagon admitted yesterday that a programme - nicknamed "Rods from 
God" - exists and is aimed at establishing an orbital squadron of robotic 
space vehicles which could launch metre-long solid slugs of tungsten, 
titanium or depleted uranium towards the surface of the planet at speeds of 
up to 7200mph.
The metals, some of the hardest known to science, would hit with the force 
of a small nuclear weapon or meteor and would be capable of vaporising even 
hardened underground bunkers without the penalty of nuclear fallout from an 
atomic warhead.
A second plan, code-named Global Strike, calls for a fleet of shuttle-type 
craft armed with precision-guided conventional missiles which could be 
directed against anything from tank formations to terrorist leaders 
hundreds of miles below.
The air force has had an experimental laser-beam platform known as the 
XSS-11 in orbit since last month. The microsatellite is believed to be 
tasked with disrupting hostile nations' reconnaissance and communications 
satellites by blinding their sensors.
General James Cartwright, head of the US strategic command, said that the 
goal of developing space weaponry was to allow attacks to be delivered 
quickly anywhere on the face of the earth.
His remarks were supported by General Lance Lord, the senior officer in the 
air force's space command, who said the US needed the capability to ensure 
the nation had "freedom to attack as well as freedom from attack in space."
In September last year, General Lord told an air force conference that 
"space superiority is not our birthright, but it is our destiny. Space 
supremacy is our vision for the future."
Major Karen Finn, a spokeswoman for the US Air Force, said yesterday that 
the focus of the strategy was "not putting weapons into space, but in 
ensuring free access to space". She added that the draft directive 
submitted to the White House did not call for militarisation of space.
Critics of any policy which might trigger an arms' race beyond the 
atmosphere say that the use of even tungsten hyper-velocity slugs might be 
mistaken for a nuclear attack and could accidentally spark an atomic war.
Any deployment of the attack systems would face diplomatic, financial and 
technological hurdles, but the only treaties or international agreements in 
existence involve bans on nuclear warheads in space.
Richard Garwin, one of the most respected experts in US weapons science, 
said: "Cost will be a determining factor. It costs about £400,000 to hit a 
target with a Tomahawk cruise missile launched from a submarine, aircraft 
or surface warship. A space-based laser would send the price of that hit up 
to £50m."
The White House is expected to make a decision and issue a national 
security directive before the end of June.

THE US Air Force is seeking White House permission to develop and deploy 
space-based weapons which could strike targets anywhere in the world within 
90 minutes of receiving orders to open fire.
The Pentagon admitted yesterday that a programme - nicknamed "Rods from 
God" - exists and is aimed at establishing an orbital squadron of robotic 
space vehicles which could launch metre-long solid slugs of tungsten, 
titanium or depleted uranium towards the surface of the planet at speeds of 
up to 7200mph.
The metals, some of the hardest known to science, would hit with the force 
of a small nuclear weapon or meteor and would be capable of vaporising even 
hardened underground bunkers without the penalty of nuclear fallout from an 
atomic warhead.
A second plan, code-named Global Strike, calls for a fleet of shuttle-type 
craft armed with precision-guided conventional missiles which could be 
directed against anything from tank formations to terrorist leaders 
hundreds of miles below.
The air force has had an experimental laser-beam platform known as the XSS
   ----------

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.13 - Release Date: 5/19/05


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Has someone you know been affected by illness or disease?
Network for Good is THE place to support health awareness efforts!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/RzSHvD/UOnJAA/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/
  

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 32 USATODAY.com: Both sides claim victory in nukes suit
 
  Posted 5/19/2005 10:45 PM   

Both sides claim victory in nukes suitSPOKANE, Wash. — A federal
jury awarded more than $500,000 Thursday to two victims of
thyroid cancer who blamed their disease on radiation from the
government's Hanford nuclear installation, which made plutonium
for bombs for four decades. 

The jury of six men and six women deadlocked over whether
another plaintiff's thyroid cancer was caused by Hanford
radiation, and it ruled against three others with
thyroid-related autoimmune diseases. 

The lawsuit was brought against three government contractors
that ran operations at Hanford: General Electric, DuPont and UNC
Nuclear. But under law, the government will pay the damages and
the costs of defending the contractors. 

In their lawsuit, the six plaintiffs claimed that they were
exposed to radiation during the 1940s when they were children
living downwind from Hanford, near Richland. 

The complicated decision in a landmark trial was claimed as a
victory by both sides. 

"It is still a historic day," plaintiff's attorney Richard
Eymann said, because his clients convinced the jury that their
thyroid cancer was caused by the production of plutonium at the
south-central Washington site. 

"The Department of Energy should take a hard look at this," said
Eymann, who represents about 2,300 people with similar claims. 

Attorney Kevin Van Wart, whose Chicago law firm represented the
contractors, said the six people in this case were the strongest
of the potential plaintiffs. "These were their best, handpicked
cases," Van Wart said. 

He also said that the award for damages  $227,508 for Steve
Stanton and $317,251 for Gloria Wise  fell far short of the
cost of bringing the case to trial. 

The 560-square-mile Hanford site began with the top-secret
Manhattan Project to build an atomic bomb during World War II.
The plutonium for the bomb dropped on Nagasaki was made there. 

Today, work there centers on a $50 billion to $60 billion
cleanup to be finished by 2035. 

The outcome of this trial, which began April 25, will likely
determine whether trials go forward in other "downwinder"
lawsuits or new settlement talks begin. Cancer victims win
suit5/19/2005 10:45 PMSPOKANE, Wash.-->   

  © Copyright 2005 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.--> 
*****************************************************************
 33 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Jury awards $545,000 to two Hanford-area cancer victims
 	 	 	 	 	 
[seattlepi.com]     

Friday, May 20, 2005 

 Others lose out in suit blaming diseases on radiation releases 

By NICHOLAS K. GERANIOS
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

SPOKANE -- A federal jury awarded more than $500,000 yesterday
to two thyroid cancer victims who blamed their disease on
radiation from the government's Hanford nuclear installation,
which made plutonium for bombs for four decades. 

The jury deadlocked over whether another plaintiff's thyroid
cancer was caused by Hanford radiation, and it ruled against
three others with thyroid-related autoimmune diseases. 

The verdicts came in a 14-year-old lawsuit against corporations
that made plutonium for the federal government at the
south-central Washington reservation, and was claimed as a
victory by both sides. 

"It is still a historic day," said plaintiffs' attorney Richard
Eymann, because a jury for the first time found that Hanford
emissions caused thyroid cancer. 

"They went in saying we could not prove any of this, and we
picked up two and had a hung jury on a third," Eymann said. "The
Department of Energy should take a hard look at this." 

The six people who went to trial were the so-called bellwethers
among nearly 2,300 Hanford "downwinders" who have sued major
contractors who ran the federal nuclear reservation for the
government after it started making plutonium in 1944. 

Kevin Van Wart, whose Chicago law firm represented General
Electric Co., E.I. DuPont de Nemours Co. and UNC Nuclear Inc.,
said the six "were their best, handpicked cases," and the
plaintiffs won only two. 

He noted that the jury awarded only $227,508 in damages to Steve
Stanton and $317,251 to Gloria Wise, far less than it cost to
bring the case to trial. 

Plaintiff Shannon Rhodes of Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, said she was
shocked that the jury deadlocked on her claim that her thyroid
cancer was caused by the radiation. 

"I'm just so disappointed," Rhodes said. 

The jury of six men and six women in the three-week trial ruled
against the autoimmune disease claims of Wanda Buckner, Shirley
Ann Carlisle and Katherine Goldblum. All six of the plaintiffs
grew up near the Hanford reservation. 

Meetings will be scheduled soon to determine what to do about
the hung jury in Rhodes' case, and how to deal with the others
who have filed claims, U.S. District Judge Frem Nielsen said.
The decisions could be appealed. 

"I hope at this stage the parties give a good-faith effort to
mediation," Nielsen said. 

Attorney Roy Haber of Eugene, Ore., who represented Wise, said
the jury was able to see that there was a clear scientific link
between radioactive iodine 131 and thyroid cancer. 

Haber said the science wasn't as clear in the autoimmune cases,
but has become clearer recently and would be more convincing in
the next trials. 

Haber also criticized the companies for choosing to spend some
$70 million in federal money on litigation, rather than
compensating victims. 

Nielsen ruled that jurors would not be allowed to hear that it
is the government, not the contractors, who would pay if the
plaintiffs won. The government also is paying for their defense. 

The six downwinders were infants and small children living near
the site during the 1940s, when there were many radiation
releases from plutonium factories. 

Other downwinders lived in Eastern Washington, northeastern
Oregon and north-central Idaho.                 

  [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 
98119 (206) 448-8000
 
©1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer
*****************************************************************
 34 PE.com: Perchlorate forum to advocate controls 

| Inland Southern California | Inland News
 
INLAND: The chemical has contaminated water across the region
and has shown up in food. 

10:55 PM PDT on Thursday, May 19, 2005 

The Press-Enterprise 

The Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice will
host a forum Saturday on perchlorate, a rocket fuel ingredient
that has contaminated drinking water supplies in Inland
communities and across the nation. 

The center, based in Glen Avon, is advocating tight government
controls on perchlorate contamination in drinking water. The
chemical has been found in the Colorado River, underground water
basins, cow's milk, human breast milk and lettuce. In sufficient
doses, perchlorate can interfere with thyroid function, a
particular concern for infants and pregnant women because
thyroid hormones are essential to proper neurological
development. 

The forum, from 10 a.m. to noon at Rialto High School, 595 S.
Eucalyptus Ave., will feature speakers including state Sen. Nell
Soto, D-Colton, as well as a medical expert and a health-science
professor. For information, call Davin Diaz at (909)381-8883.

*****************************************************************
 35 KLTV 7: Colorado agency to rethink ban on drilling near nuclear test site

Tyler-Longview-Jacksonville, TX: 

   May 21, 2005       

DENVER A company's request to drill near the site of a 1969 
underground nuclear explosion could force Colorado to clarify its 
rules regarding the area.

The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission will decide June 
Sixth whether to clarify a ban on drilling inside a half-mile 
zone around the Project Rulison site, near Rifle, Colorado.

Presco Incorporated of The Woodlands, Texas, has applied for a 
permit to drill inside the zone. That raised questions about the 
ban issued by the Colorado commission last year.

Presco wants to start a well inside the zone and end outside it. 
The well would then draw the gas from outside the prohibited 
area.

If the commission amends the ban, Presco would still have to 
apply for permits for each well it wants to drill.___On the 
Net:Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: 
http://oil-gas.state.co.usPresco Inc.: 
http://www.prescocorp.comGarfield County: 
http://www.garfield-county.comU.S. Department of Energy 
Environmental Management: http://www.em.doe.gov Copyright 2005 
Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be 
published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.                                  
   
Copyright 2001 - 2005 WorldNow and KLTV. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 36 Daily News: Foes step up heat on nuke waste firm 
  
  BY HUGH SON
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER 

Borough activists are gearing up to nuke a controversial
Williamsburg radioactive waste storage facility.

 "It's definitely our last chance to stop this," said Deborah
Masters of the environmental group Neighbors Against Garbage
this week, referring to the Radiac Research Corp., a waste
facility on Kent Ave.

 The state Department of Environmental Conservation will have a
public hearing Monday before making a decision next month about
whether to renew Radiac's permits.

 Radioactive materials and flammable toxins are stored in three
inconspicuous buildings on the Brooklyn waterfront near homes
and within a block of Public School 84.

 "You'd think this kind of facility would be in the middle of
the desert in Nevada," said Sean Nagle of El Puente, a human
rights group. "The population has grown so much that it defies
logic to have it here."

 Mayor Bloomberg's recently approved housing plan will bring an
additional 40,000 residents to the area around the warehouse.

 Critics afraid of a fire or terrorist attack on the city's only
radioactive waste facility have opposed Radiac since 1989 and
called the building a "dirty bomb" waiting to explode.

 But Radiac spokesman John Tekin said no major incidents have
occurred in the 35 years the facility has been in the
neighborhood.

 "The whole doomsday scenario is irresponsible and erroneous,"
Tekin said. "People are blowing this out of proportion."

 Tekin insisted the warehouse mostly stores "hospital trash. You
can go to any hospital or university and find the same material."

 But Radiac documents obtained by the Daily News showed the
facility also stores up to 15,000 gallons of poisons, acids and
flammable liquids, including deadly gases such as nitric oxide.

 State officials said the facility would have to adhere to
stringent security standards if the permit is granted.

 Area residents called the safety assurances cold comfort.

 Grand St. tenant Mary Ziegler said she was able to climb onto
Radiac's roof in the middle of the day.

 "I was up there for an hour in the middle of the day shooting
pictures," Ziegler said.

 For others who live in the shadow of the facility, even its
periodic safety drills are unsettling.

 "Whenever they test their sirens, you just really wonder, is
this the end?" said Bob Beswick, who lives next to the storage
site. 

Originally published on May 20, 2005   

All contents © 2005 Daily News, L.P.
 Disclaimer and Copyright Notice | Our Privacy Policy
*****************************************************************
 37 Bellona: Sweden allocates $30 million to Russia's nuclear waste recycling 

Sweden will help Russia to handle the liquid nuclear waste on
the Kola Peninsula. 

2005-05-20 20:37

According to the SevRAO nuclear waste management, Sweden will
allocate 30 million USD for the project. A group of inspectors
from the donor countries like Sweden, Great Britain and Norway
is currently visiting Murmansk Oblast. On May 18, the group
visited the Kola Peninsula's nuclear waste storage facility in
Andreyeva Bay, where the international project is progressing.
The inspectors said they were satisfied with the speed of its
implementation, Interfax reported.   

  Publisher: , President: 
Information: , Technical contact: 
Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62  * P.O.Box
2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway




*****************************************************************
 38 RIA Novosti: PUTIN SUBMITS SPENT FUEL CONVENTION TO PARLIAMENT
 
MOSCOW, May 20, (RIA Novosti) - President Vladimir Putin of the
Russian Federation has submitted a draft convention on the safe
handling of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste
(hereinafter referred to as Convention) to the State Duma (lower
parliamentary house) for ratification, reports the Kremlin press
service. 

The Convention was signed by the Russian Federation January 27,
1999 in Vienna. 

As of today, the Convention involves 34 countries, including 21
that operate their own nuclear power plants. Great Britain,
Germany, Spain, the United States, Finland, France, Sweden and
Japan are all parties to the Convention. 

The Convention sets forth the high contracting parties'
commitments as regards the safe handling of spent nuclear fuel
being formed during the operation of civilian nuclear power
units and the safe handling of NPP radioactive waste. 

The Convention mostly aims to ensure and maintain high standards
as regards the safe handling of spent nuclear fuel and
radioactive waste through enhanced national measures and
international cooperation. This document is also called upon to
provide effective protection against potential hazards at every
stage of handling spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste or
protecting private individuals, society and the environment from
the harmful impact of ionizing radiation today and in the
future. The Convention aims to prevent radiological accidents
and to reduce their consequences at any stage of handling spent
nuclear fuel or radioactive waste. 

The Convention does not contain any norms, whose application may
exert additional pressure on the environment. Consequently, it
is not subject to state environmental expert checks. 

The Convention is an essential element of international nuclear
legislation as regards the safe handling of spent nuclear fuel
and radioactive waste. It can serve as a basis for drafting
future Russian normative-legal acts that regulate safety issues
during the handling of radioactive waste.
 
© 2005 "RIA Novosti"   
*****************************************************************
 39 Las Vegas SUN: State seeks license application draft

May 19, 2005 

Expected rejection of latest request to trigger evaluation

 By Suzanne Struglinski <suzanne@lasvegassun.com> SUN WASHINGTON 
BUREAU

 WASHINGTON -- Nevada's attorneys were to send a letter to the
Energy Department today asking for a draft copy of the Yucca
Mountain project's license application, even though they know it
will be denied.

 The department has denied several requests by the state for the
draft before, but this rejection will allow additional
evaluation by a panel of the Atomic Safety Licensing Board
within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

 The department claims it does not have to give the state a copy
of the draft license application, or make it public, while the
state argues it should be a public document and made available.
The state believes the draft holds vital information, especially
on the proposed nuclear waste repository's ability to hold it
radiation.

 At a hearing on Yucca Mountain project documents Wednesday,
Judge Alan Rosenthal said it is important to have this matter
issued quickly.

 The board is evaluating how the state, the department and other
interested parties have to put documents into a special database
known as the Licensing Support Network. The database will be
used during hearings as the board evaluates the department's
license application to store nuclear waste at Yucca.

 The department did not anticipate including the draft when it
finalized its document collection, possibly later this year, and
the state was likely to file a complaint, arguing that it should
be included.

 So the board, the state and the department agreed Wednesday to
work out the issue even before the document collection is
complete.

 The state and the department will file briefs until the end of
June on the issue.

 Attorney Michael Shebelskie of the law firm Hunton &Williams,
which represents the Energy Department, said if the board were
to side with Nevada, the department would not have to produce
the draft until it completes its collection.

 Also at the hearing, the board said it has tentatively
concluded that documents deemed confidential, archaeological or
private will just simply be redacted and put into the database.

 It is also leaning toward allowing some "employee concern"
documents, or papers that outline complaints made by department
employees or contractors about the project on the network.

 The board described a process in which documents that contain
no personal or private information, such as a name, Social
Security number or address but are relevant to the Yucca project
can be put in the database without redaction. But documents that
contain personal information must be redacted and put into a
separate database.

 Those with access to the private database can only access the
redacted documents under a special agreement that they cannot
give them to anyone else.

 Attorney Joe Egan, who represents Nevada, called this "an
acceptable compromise."

 The state wants to see what problems employees raised in order
for the state to flesh out its arguments against the repository.

 Kelly Faglioni of Hunton &Williams said a portion of 5,000
documents would fall into that category, but they could not be
narrowed down further without a document-by-document search.

 Egan said the board did not address rules for documents deemed
protected under attorney-client privilege, deliberative process
or work-product, the three-major classifications. Egan expects
the judges will address them in their final decision, which is
expected to come later this year.

 Meanwhile, the board also ordered the department to file
monthly updates of its estimated schedule for the Yucca Mountain
project.

 The department's attorneys will have to keep the board informed
on when it will complete its document collection and turn in the
license application.

 Judge Thomas Moore, the board chairman, told the department's
attorneys that he wants a realistic schedule and that it made no
sense for the board to set deadlines if it was going to make
them "sweat excessively."

 "This board is not interested in the politics of this," Moore
said. "It makes a huge difference in how many towels it's going
to take to keep your forehead dry."

 Moore said the licensing hearing for the project are also
likely to go on for a "very long time ... contrary to what is
politically correct to say."

 The licensing process is limited to three years by federal law,
with a one-year extension option that Congress would need to
approve.

 
 
*****************************************************************
 40 Las Vegas SUN: Guest columnist Jim Gibbons: Another perspective on Yucca Mountain
 
Guest columnist Jim Gibbons: Another perspective on Yucca 
Mountain

Jim Gibbons, a Republican in the U.S. House of Representatives,
represents Nevada's 2nd Congressional District.

 It is unfortunate that Jeff German, who writes for a paper
committed to reporting every development with the Yucca Mountain
Project, did not take the time to review my record in fighting
this misguided policy. In a recent column, "Gibbons has late
awakening," Mr. German asks, "Where has Gibbons been during his
eight years on Capitol Hill?" While he could easily read the
back issues of the Las Vegas Sun, I am pleased to have this
opportunity to answer him directly.

 As a member of Congress, I have vigorously fought and opposed
the Yucca Mountain Project against both the Clinton
administration and the Bush administration. I have spoken out
against this proposal over 100 times on the floor of the U.S.
House of Representatives. I have written dozens of letters to
key administration leaders identifying areas where the science
at Yucca has proven to be inconsistent with the law outlined in
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. I have met with officials from
both the current and previous administrations urging them to
reconsider their proposed efforts to ship and store nuclear
waste in Nevada due to the poor credibility of the science.

 When Yucca Mountain was officially proposed by then-DOE
Secretary Abraham to President Bush, I was quoted as saying, "It
is unfortunate that Secretary Abraham would continue
green-lighting a project that has been riddled with corruption
and mismanagement since its inception." This statement echoes my
remarks in 2001 when allegations arose about a key Yucca
contractor under the Clinton administration.

 At that time, I said, "This appears to be part of an ongoing
persistent bias to find Yucca Mountain suitable long before the
evidence has been completed." I have maintained this same
position about the bias of DOE towards opening Yucca Mountain at
any cost during my entire Congressional career.

 I have also consistently voted against every spending bill put
forward in Congress that allocated federal funding to Yucca
Mountain and have continuously opposed spending billions of
dollars on Yucca Mountain. The Las Vegas Sun even quoted me as
saying, "I think it is irresponsible to continue to waste
millions upon millions of dollars on a project that is unsafe
and in no way will solve our nation's nuclear waste problem."

 Additionally, in the Las Vegas Sun's own analysis of the 2004
Congressional races, the paper stated: "Gibbons strongly opposes
a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. As a geologist, he
says he cannot accept the idea that putting such highly
radioactive material in a mountain would work."

 Furthermore, I find it unfortunate that Peggy Maze Johnson of
Citizen Alert asserts that I have not been paying attention to
the issue of science. My office has oftentimes utilized the
talent and research provided by many activist groups in our
fight against Yucca Mountain -- including from Citizen Alert.

 As a geologist, I am fully aware of the scientific problems
with Yucca Mountain and the policy of deep geologic burial of
high-level nuclear waste. In fact, I have publicized them for
years. In 2001 the General Accounting Office outlined over 200
technical and scientific flaws with the project. At that time, I
stated both to the Las Vegas Sun and to President Bush that it
is a failed scientific process and Yucca Mountain will turn out
to be the greatest waste of taxpayer dollars in U.S. history.

 The Nevada delegation remains unified in our opposition to the
Yucca Mountain Project. I would give Citizen Alert more
credibility if they offered to meet with me or my staff to
discuss specific areas where we could strengthen or advance our
fight in Congress. Unfortunately, they issue a politically
charged attack against me -- even though they seem to share my
passionate opposition to the Yucca Mountain project.

 The fact remains that throughout my tenure in Congress, I have
taken on both Republican and Democratic administrations as well
as congressional leaders on this issue. While my fight against
Yucca Mountain has not sat well with leaders in my own party,
including the Speaker of the House, I remain committed to seeing
that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act is modified so that it
reflects the science and technology of the 21st century ...
rather than the outdated, decades-old science that was used to
create it.

 
 
*****************************************************************
 41 SF Chronicle: Military waste under fire / $1 trillion missing -- 
Bush plan targets Pentagon accounting
 
Sunday, May 18, 2003

The Department of Defense, already infamous for spending $640
for a toilet seat, once again finds itself under intense
scrutiny, only this time because it couldn't account for more
than a trillion dollars in financial transactions, not to
mention dozens of tanks, missiles and planes. 

The Pentagon's unenviable reputation for waste will top the
congressional agenda this week, when the House and Senate are
expected to begin floor debate on a Bush administration proposal
to make sweeping changes in how the Pentagon spends money,
manages contracts and treats civilian employees. 

The Bush proposal, called the Defense Transformation for the
21st Century Act, arrives at a time when the nonpartisan General
Accounting Office has raised the volume of its perennial
complaints about the financial woes at Defense, which recently
failed its seventh audit in as many years. 

"Overhauling DOD's financial management operations represent a
challenge that goes far beyond financial accounting to the very
fiber of (its) . . . business operations and culture," GAO chief
David Walker told lawmakers in March. 

WHAT HAPPENED TO $1 TRILLION? 

Though Defense has long been notorious for waste, recent
government reports suggest the Pentagon's money management woes
have reached astronomical proportions. A study by the Defense
Department's inspector general found that the Pentagon couldn't
properly account for more than a trillion dollars in monies
spent. A GAO report found Defense inventory systems so lax that
the U.S. 

Army lost track of 56 airplanes, 32 tanks, and 36 Javelin
missile command launch-units. 

And before the Iraq war, when military leaders were scrambling
to find enough chemical and biological warfare suits to protect
U.S. troops, the department was caught selling these suits as
surplus on the Internet "for pennies on the dollar," a GAO
official said. 

Given these glaring gaps in the management of a Pentagon budget
that is approaching $400 billion, the coming debate is shaping
up as a bid to gain the high ground in the battle against waste,
fraud and abuse. 

"We are overhauling our financial management system precisely
because people like David Walker are rightly critical of it,"
said Dov Zakheim, the Pentagon's chief financial officer and
prime architect of the Defense Department's self-styled fiscal
transformation. 

Among the provisions in the 207-page plan, the department is
asking Congress to allow Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to
replace the civil service system governing 700,000 nonmilitary
employees with a new system to be detailed later. 

The plan would also eliminate or phase out more than a hundred
reports that now tell Congress, for instance, which Defense
contractors support the Arab boycott of Israel and when U.S.
special forces train foreign soldiers, as well as many studies
of program costs. 

The administration's proposal, which would also give Rumsfeld
greater authority to move money between accounts and exempt
Defense from certain environmental statutes, prompted
influential House Democrats to write Speaker Dennis Hastert last
week complaining that the proposals would "increase the level of
waste, fraud, and abuse . . . by vastly reducing (Defense)
accountability." 

"The Congress has increased defense spending from $300 billion
to $400 billion over three years at the same time that the
Pentagon has failed to address financial problems that dwarf
those of Enron," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, one of
the letter's signatories. 

Saying critics of the bill "were arguing for more paperwork,"
Hastert spokesman John Feehery said his boss would support the
Bush reforms on the House floor. "The purpose is to streamline
the Pentagon to become a less bureaucratic and more efficient
organization . . . while also making it more accountable,"
Feehery said. 

PROCESS WILL TAKE MONTHS
 

The debate will center around the defense authorization bill,
the policy- setting prelude to the defense appropriations
measure that comes up later in the session. With the House and
Senate considering different versions of the transformation
proposals, it will be months before each passes its own bill and
reconciles any differences. 

But few on Capitol Hill would deny that, when it comes to fiscal
management, 

Defense is long overdue for "transformation." 

In congressional testimony Rumsfeld himself has said "the
financial reporting systems of the Pentagon are in disarray . .
. they're not capable of providing the kinds of financial
management information that any large organization would have." 

GAO reports detail not only the woeful state of Defense fiscal
controls, but the cost of failed attempts to fix them. 

For instance, in June 2002 the GAO reviewed the history of a
proposed Corporate Information Management system, or CIM. The
initiative began in 1989 as an attempt to unify more than 2,000
overlapping systems then being used for billing, inventory,
personnel and similar functions. But after "spending about $20
billion, the CIM initiative was eventually abandoned," the GAO
said. 

Gregory Kutz, director of GAO's financial management division
and co-author of that report, likened Defense to a dysfunctional
corporation, with the Pentagon cast as a holding company
exercising only weak fiscal control over its subsidiaries -- the
Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. Today, DOD has about 2,200
overlapping financial systems, Kutz said, and just running them
costs taxpayers $18 billion a year. 

"The (Pentagon's) inability to even complete an audit shows just
how far they have to go," he said. 

Kutz contrasted the department's loose inventory controls to
state-of-the- art systems at private corporations. 

"I've been to Wal-Mart," Kutz said. "They were able to tell me
how many tubes of toothpaste were in Fairfax, Va., at that given
moment. And DOD can't find its chem-bio suits." 

CRITICS CALLED UNPATRIOTIC
 

Danielle Brian, director of the Project on Governmental
Oversight, a nonprofit group in Washington, D.C., said waste has
become ingrained in the Defense budget because opposition to
defense spending is portrayed as unpatriotic, and legislators
are often more concerned about winning Pentagon pork than
controlling defense waste. 

"You have a black hole at the Pentagon for money and a blind
Congress," Brian said. 

But things may be changing. 

GAO's Kutz said Rumsfeld has "showed a commitment" to cutting
waste and asked Pentagon officials to save 5 percent of the
defense budget, which would mean a $20 billion savings. 

Legislators are also calling attention to Defense waste.
"Balancing the military's books is not as exciting as designing
or purchasing the next generation of airplanes, tanks, or ships,
but it is just as important," Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.V., said
last week. In a hearing last month about cost overruns, Rep.
John Duncan, R-Tenn., of the House Committee on Government
Reform said: "I've always considered myself to be a pro-military
type person, but that doesn't mean I just want to sit back and
watch the Pentagon waste billions and billions of dollars." 

But while Capitol Hill sees the need, and possibly has the will
to reform the Pentagon, the devil remains in the details, and
the administration aroused Democratic suspicions when it dropped
its 207-page transformation bill on lawmakers on April 10 --
leaving scant time to scrutinize proposals that touch many
aspects of the biggest department in government. 

"We have as much problem with the process as with the
substance," said said Rep. John Spratt, D-S.C., who co-signed
Waxman's letter calling the transformation bill "an effort by
the Department to substantially reduce congressional oversight
and public accountability." 

Defense's Zakheim counters that the reform proposals would
"remove the barnacles of past practices (and provide) DOD with
modern day management while preserving congressional oversight
and prerogatives." 

But Waxman, a critic of the administration's handling of Iraqi
reconstruction contracts, called the proposals "a military wish
list" to take advantage of "the wartime feeling." 

"Secretary Rumsfeld is hoping to march through Congress like he
marched through Iraq," Waxman said. 

E-mail Tom Abate at . 				
Page A - 1 			

The San Francisco Chronicle] 
*****************************************************************
 42 Idaho Statesman: Firm won't take radioactive rubble

05-20-2005       
 
Very low level material was from nuke plant
 
A hearing on U.S. Ecology's permit is slated for 7 tonight at
RimRock High School near Grand View. 	 	 	 

The Idaho Statesman | Edition Date: 05-18-2005

U.S. Ecology has decided against burying very low level
radioactive rubble from a Connecticut nuclear power plant in its
waste storage area near the Snake River in Owyhee County,
officials said.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission had approved allowing the
Boise-based waste management company to bury the waste that
would be lower in radioactivity than rocks in the Owyhee
mountains nearby. But the Snake River Alliance, a group that
oversees nuclear weapons, waste and power issues in Idaho, and
others had opposed the disposal plan.

"While we fully agree with the NRC Safety Evaluation Finding
that 'the material authorized for disposal poses no danger to
public health and safety,' we have reached a decision not to
propose this waste's acceptance at our Grand View facility,"
wrote Steve Romano, president and chief executive officer of
American Ecology, the parent of U.S. Ecology.

The company still is asking the Department of Environmental
Quality to modify its permit to allow additional very low level
radioactive isotopes to be stored at Grand View. A hearing on
the permit is scheduled for tonight at RimRock High School.

The permit modification would clarify U.S. Ecology's ability to
accept lightly contaminated soil and debris that contains small
quantities of manmade isotopes," said Chad Hyslop, a U.S.
Ecology spokesman.

The waste would include lightly contaminated soil and debris
from manufacturers of industrial gauges, medical and research
reactors and laboratories.

The waste still could not exceed the radioactive level of waste
already stored at the site.

Snake River Alliance, while pleased the Connecticut waste won't
come to Idaho, still opposes the permit modifications.

"This is basically incrementally creating a low level nuclear
waste dump," said Jeremy Maxand, Snake River Alliance executive
director.

U.S. Ecology lines the area in which the waste will be dumped
with five layers of plastic and protective fabric.

Under the fabric is three feet of compacted clay and 500 feet of
impermeable clay that underlies the site.

More than 300,000 tons of low-level radioactive waste from Cold
War weapons programs was dumped there in 2003.   

*****************************************************************
 43 Brattleboro Reformer: Panel approves VY dry cask deal

May 20, 2005 Brattleboro, VT                                                                                 
 			 								 					
By CAROLYN LORIÉ Reformer Staff

MONTPELIER -- On Thursday, the House Natural Resources and
Energy Committee approved a bill that allows spent nuclear fuel
at Vermont Yankee to be stored in concrete containers in
exchange for a $4 million annual payment to the state.

 The funds collected from Entergy Nuclear, the Louisiana-based
company that owns the plant, will go into a renewable energy
fund. The Department of Public Service will administer it.

 "This is a very important bill for Vermont's energy future,"
said Rep. Steve Darrow, D-Putney.

 In the bill, legislators wrote that the uncertainty of how long
the fuel will be in the state creates a need for
"intergenerational equity to help balance the burdens and
benefits of nuclear power between succeeding generations of
Vermont electricity consumers."

 The company will be expected to pay the annual charge as long
as the fuel is there, even after the plant shuts down. 

Also in the bill are specific instructions for the Vermont
Public Service Board on environmental matters concerning dry
cask storage. Entergy is expected to file for a certificate of
public good from the board as soon as the Legislature passes the
final bill.

 The bill limits the number of dry casks to that necessary to
allow the plant to operate until 2012 and further stipulates
that the company must seek legislative approval to extend its
license.

 The Ways and Means Committee, as well as Appropriations, must
still approve the bill, before it can be considered by the full
House and eventually the Senate.

 "We put a lot of work into this bill. We've put a lot of
important things in it," said Darrow. "I hope to see the Senate
pass it and get it on the governor's desk this year."

 Negotiations between the state and Entergy continue, meaning if
a memorandum of understanding is reached, the bill could be
radically altered to reflect that agreement.

 Company officials, the Department of Public Service and three
representatives from the Natural Resources and Energy Committee
met throughout the day on Thursday.

 According to committee chairman Robert Dostis, D-Waterbury, the
talks are moving in a "positive direction." He declined to
comment further on the substance of the negotiations, citing an
agreement by all sides to not discuss the matter publicly until
a deal in finalized.

 Entergy officials had no comment on Thursday's vote by the
committee.

 Though company officials have argued that a fee would create a
financial hardship, testimony provided by Richard Cowart,
consultant to the committee from the Regulatory Assistance
Project, showed that the company stood to make an additional $40
million to $50 million a year, if the bid to increase power by
20 percent is approved. At its peak, the company could make as
much as $83 million a year.

 The figures, however, are estimates based on data revealed
during the sale of the plant in 2002. Entergy officials have not
released the company's actual earnings, claiming the information
is proprietary.

 While the bill calls for the company to pay $4 million a year,
there is a provision that would allow the Department of Public
Service to develop a system whereby Entergy would be given
credit for investing in renewable energy in the state. The
credit would go toward reducing the annual charge.

 Another provision authorizes the Public Service Board to make a
determination about whether the charge would be a financial
hardship for the company.

 In addition to an annual fee for the right to store the fuel in
dry casks, the bill also calls for imposing a $25 per year
charge per kilowatt-hour for generating plants that produce more
than 510 megawatts. Vermont Yankee will meet that criterion if
its bid to increase power by 20 percent is approved by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

 Spent nuclear fuel at Vermont Yankee is currently stored in a
pool in the reactor building. Like all nuclear plants, however,
the pool was designed only as temporary storage. Initially, fuel
was to be shipped out to be reprocessed and then, when
reprocessing was stopped, it was supposed to get sent to a
national repository.

 The federal government, however, has yet to open Yucca Mountain
and there is some uncertainty about whether it will ever open.

 In the meantime, nuclear plants around the country are running
out of storage space for the spent fuel and turning to dry casks
as a way of creating more room in the spent fuel pool. Vermont
Yankee officials expect to run out of room by 2008 or 2007 if
the power boost is approved.

 The issue of allowing dry casks to be installed at the plant
site has been a contentious one, with environmental groups
lobbying for heavy restrictions and Entergy resisting the
imposition of any charge.

 After Thursday's vote, Peter Alexander, executive director of
the New England Coalition, lauded aspects of the bill, but said
that an agreement between Entergy and the state would be
preferable.

 "It looks like that will only happen if the Legislature
threatens to fail to pass this bill," he said.

Copyright ©1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., 
*****************************************************************
 44 Bradenton Herald: Patience wearing thin in Tallevast

| 05/20/2005 | 

Residents frustrated by mounting questions, delays

 DONNA WRIGHT

 Herald Staff Writer

Tallevast residents can't use their irrigation wells to water
their yards because of a underground plume of groundwater
contamination. 

Yet they look down the road and see sprinklers at a nearby golf
course spraying the greens. 

And they wonder why. 

The plume that runs under their homes runs under the golf course
and nearby airport property, too. 

"Why then, are the golf course wells still in use?" Tallevast
leaders ask. 

Then, there is the question of the big fountain in the pond in
front of the old Loral American Beryllium Co. plant, the source
of the contamination plume. 

Tallevast residents worry the mist that sprays continually from
that fountain could be making them sick. They want to know if
anyone has tested the pond water or the golf course irrigation
wells. 

Gail E. Rymer, director of corporate and community affairs for
Lockheed Martin, said Thursday that the pond and golf course
irrigation wells are not contaminated. Lockheed is the former
owner of the beryllium plant and has assumed responsibility for
cleaning up the mess. 

The pond, Rymer said, collects storm water runoff. No springs or
wells feed the pond. The water has been tested and found to be
clean. 

Rymer also said the irrigation wells on the golf course have
been tested by the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection and the Department of Health. 

Those wells, too, are clean, according to the state tests, Rymer
said. 

The Herald was not able to confirm late Thursday with the state
agencies that those tests had actually been done. 

DEP spokeswoman Pam Yeager said she could not answer those
questions until William Kutash, the program administrator in
charge of the Tallevast clean-up, returns to work next week from
a leave of absence. 

Nor could Charles Henry, Manatee County Health Department's
environmental manager, confirm the pond water and irrigation
wells have been tested. 

Henry told Tallevast leaders Wednesday that he had no knowledge
of the source of the pond water. He also said that the local
health department only tests drinking water wells and the
irrigation wells would most likely be tested by DEP, but he had
no idea if the tests had been done. 

None of this makes a lot of sense to Wanda Washington, vice
president of Family Oriented Community United and Strong, an
advocacy group representing Tallevast residents. Washington said
FOCUS had not received any test data from either the ponds or
irrigation wells. 

Washington suspects something other than storm water feeds the
pond, which she said remains too high to simply be a collection
site for runoff. 

"We really question why that pond is so high," Washington said. 

That question is just one of many worrying Tallevast residents
who say they are tired of all of the meetings that seem to do
nothing but raise more questions. 

In the past two weeks, FOCUS leaders fired off two letters to
DEP, which has regulatory control over the clean-up, and the
Environmental Protection Agency, demanding answers. 

Why, the FOCUS leaders asked, have they had to wait more than
three months for DEP's evaluation of Lockheed's last two reports
on the growing size of the plume? 

Patience, Washington said, is wearing thin in Tallevast. 

She said DEP promised residents it would get back to them with
an assessment of the Feb. 1 report. 

It never came. 

Nor have FOCUS leaders received DEP's analysis of the April 15
report. The report showed the plume of industrial solvents in
the groundwater reached 131 acres, up from 50 acres previously
reported. 

In a May 16 letter to Derek Matory of EPA, Washington and Laura
Ward, president of FOCUS, said DEP's lack of response is "quite
disconcerting as they are the regulatory body that has been
charged with the responsibility of oversight." 

Washington and Ward's letter accused DEP watchdogs of falling
asleep. 

"Are we to continue in our vulnerable state, allowing our
families to sit in harm's way while parties involved in
oversight, regulation or corrective action play 'table tennis'
with our lives?" the FOCUS leaders asked. "Who is in charge
here? The legal consent order between the state of Florida and
Lockheed Martin Corp. gives the DEP broad enforcement powers to
resolve this most acute situation. Why are they responding so
passively?" 

Yeager, the DEP spokeswoman from the Tampa regional office, said
staff is still reviewing the two Lockheed reports. 

"That takes a while to put together," Yeager said. "That site
has complicated geology. We are getting the site assessment
report in order and we are working on our consent order with the
responsible parties to address the situation and rectify it." 

Yeager acknowledged DEP had received the May 12 letter FOCUS
sent to Kutash, but because of his leave, the administrator had
not yet read his mail. 

In that letter, Washington and Ward asked DEP to require
Lockheed Martin to do additional extensive soil testing
throughout Tallevast. 

Lockheed Martin has agreed to pay for an independent contractor
of Tallevast residents' choosing to sample 20 domestic wells, 18
irrigation wells, six surface water locations, four soil samples
at local day care centers and four interior wipe samples at the
community center. 

But the defense giant said it would not honor Tallevast
residents' request to test the soil at an additional 24
locations identified by FOCUS leaders, unless DEP instructed
them to do so. 

Rymer said Thursday that Lockheed had already done tests on all
of the soil samples DEP required. Directions for additional soil
testing must come from DEP, Rymer said. 

Tallevast residents say the additional soil testing is necessary
because a new toxin identified in the April report appears to
migrating quickly through the plume. 

That toxin is 1,4 Dioxane, known to cause cancer in laboratory
animals. 

As 1,4 Dioxane characteristically can rise or fall with the
water table and is capable of spreading in the groundwater more
quickly in both breadth and depth, FOCUS leaders wrote, the
community feels it is of the utmost importance that they get a
handle on it as well. 

"Why have you not considered this action, in light of the
revelations of that last Lockheed Martin report?" 

Karen Collins-Fleming, director of Manatee County Environmental
Management Department, said she can empathize with Tallevast
residents' frustration. 

"I understand the residents' feelings," Collins-Fleming said.
"They think these things are taking far too long, but this is a
very complex issue." 

Collins-Fleming said she has not yet completed her own review of
the April 15 report, but what she analyzed so far raised no new
red flags. 

"We have enough red flags as it is," Collins-Fleming said. "I
think DEP and Lockheed Martin are fulfilling their
responsibilities." 

Rymer said that despite the delay in hearing back from DEP, work
continues on delineating the plume. 

"We are moving ahead and to date we have found nothing major,"
Rymer said. "If we had, you would have heard about it."   

*****************************************************************
 45 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Up to 1,000 Hanford workers to be laid off
 	 	 	 	 	 
  [seattlepi.com]     

Friday, May 20, 2005 

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

RICHLAND -- A contractor at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation
plans to lay off up to 1,000 workers -- nearly one-fourth of its
work force -- in late September, a company official announced. 

Fluor Hanford Chief Executive Ron Gallagher announced the
layoffs in a message to employees Wednesday afternoon. 

Fluor is the primary contractor for cleanup and manages the
Hanford nuclear site, where plutonium was produced for the
nation's nuclear weapons program. The company employs 3,886
people at the site. 

"The pace of cleanup has reached a point where significant
changes to the work force are necessary to reflect the work
scope that remains for the balance of our contract," Gallagher
said. 

Fluor's contract is set to expire in September 2006. In the past
year, the company has stabilized 20 tons of plutonium material
at the Plutonium Finishing Plant and removed 2,300 tons of spent
fuel from Hanford's K basins, two leak-prone pools of water
designed to hold spent nuclear fuel. 

In the coming months, the company expects to complete several
other projects, including the removal of radioactive sludge from
one of the K basins. 

Fluor also expects to finish draining liquid sodium from the
Fast Flux Test Facility, a research reactor built to test
advanced nuclear fuels. 

The layoffs are in addition to 700 construction workers who were
laid off by Bechtel National at the waste treatment plant
earlier this year. And 300 non-construction workers for Bechtel
will lose their jobs in June.                 

  [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 
98119 (206) 448-8000
 
©1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer
*****************************************************************
 46 Washington Post:: U.S. Weighs Consolidating Bomb Materials

By CHRISTOPHER SMITHThe Associated Press
Friday, May 20, 2005; 4:10 AM

BOISE, Idaho -- To guard against terrorists storming a U.S.
weapons lab and setting off a crude nuclear device, the Bush
administration is considering consolidating much of the nation's
plutonium and bomb-grade uranium at a few highly secure sites,
including concrete bunkers in Idaho.

Currently, the material is scattered at 13 sites around the
country.
       
[Graphic labels where uranium is stored and where the government
wants to move it. (AP Graphic)] Graphic labels where uranium is
stored and where the government wants to move it. (AP Graphic)
(AP) 


Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman is expected to get an advisory
board's report next month on the potential cost savings and
security improvements from combining the hundreds of tons of
weapons fuel.

The Energy Department and a federal agency that oversees the
nation's nuclear stockpile have been discussing the idea for
more than a year, after a series of security lapses during mock
terrorist attacks at federal weapons labs.

"The argument is by putting more of the materials in fewer
places, you simply reduce security risks and therefore reduce
the cost of securing the materials," said Anson Franklin,
spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration in
Washington.

Authorities fear a suicidal terrorist squad could penetrate lab
security and trigger a nuclear explosion.

The United States no longer manufactures or tests nuclear
weapons. But scientists still use small amounts for research,
including studying how existing nuclear warheads age and how
weapons might be built by terrorists or rogue nations.

Then-Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham last year proposed a
series of steps to tighten security, including creating an elite
federal force to guard nuclear installations and moving the most
sensitive nuclear material from labs that are in populated areas
or have security vulnerabilities.

But an organization that monitors nuclear security says the
department has been slow to follow through because some labs
have resisted.

"It's very much like the whole base-closing thing: No one is
going to agree to close their own facility, they are all trying
to protect their program," said Danielle Brian, executive
director of the Project on Government Oversight, a
Washington-based group that has lobbied for tighter security at
Energy Department labs.

A new report by the group estimates consolidation of bomb-grade
material would save $3 billion over the next three years.

The group proposes removing all weapons-grade material from six
sites: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore,
Calif.; Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, N.M.; the
Hanford Nuclear Reservation near Richland, Wash.; Savannah River
near Aiken, S.C., Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge,
Tenn.; and Argonne National Laboratory West near Idaho Falls,
Idaho.

The material would then be placed with existing stockpiles or in
unused bunkers under beefed-up security at seven sites: the
Idaho National Laboratory, the Nevada Test Site north of Las
Vegas; Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, N.M.; the
Pantex Plant in Amarillo, Texas; the Y-12 National Security
Complex at Oak Ridge; the BWXT Nuclear Products Division in
Lynchburg, Va., and Nuclear Fuel Services in Erwin, Tenn.

One of the structures proposed for use at the Idaho National
Laboratory is Building 691, a never-used $450 million
underground bunker with 5-foot-thick concrete walls.
___

On the Net:

Idaho National Laboratory: 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 

Project on Government Oversight: 
		 	© 2005 The Associated Press 	 	 	 	 
© 1996- The Washington Post Company       |               |              
*****************************************************************
 47 SF Chronicle: Industry may have edge on Los Alamos 
/ Final bid directive adds stand-alone pension, higher fees
 
Friday, May 20, 2005

Federal officials issued their final specifications Thursday for
the forthcoming competition to run Los Alamos National
Laboratory -- and at least one California lawmaker suggested the
document might favor a defense industry bid over one from the
University of California, which has run the nuclear complex for
six decades. 

UC officials and other competitors said Thursday that they were
still reading the thick "Request for Proposals" document and
would not comment on it for several days. Bids must be submitted
by July 19, and the winner of the competition is scheduled to be
announced Dec. 1. 

A first reading of the document -- which was issued by the
National Nuclear Security Administration, a quasi-independent
agency that runs the nuclear weapons complex for the U.S.
Department of Energy -- revealed two potentially controversial
provisions: a requirement that lab employees be covered by a
stand-alone pension plan, and a huge increase in the annual
payment to the contractor running the lab. 

According to the document, the promised annual payment cap is
$79 million -- about 10 times the average annual payment to UC
in recent years. 

But in a statement Thursday, Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Walnut
Creek, criticized that increase, saying it will pass on
unnecessary costs to the taxpayer. 

Moreover, she continued, "I want to warn the DOE about what
appears to be a warming toward bids offered by defense industry
companies. Our national labs have a long and proud history of
being run by academic institutions with an unquestionable
commitment to the highest standards of science. I want to
caution the DOE and urge officials to carefully guard against
the corporatization of science." 

UC officials have traditionally depicted their management of Los
Alamos and two other national labs as public services that
generate relatively little revenue for the university. The
increase in the management fee could conceivably make bidding
for the contract more attractive to profit-making corporations
such as giant military contractors. 

UC has joined arms with Bechtel National, BWX Technologies Inc.
and Washington Group to fight for the contract. Its announced
competitors include the giant University of Texas and aerospace
titan Lockheed Martin, which have formed a partnership to submit
a bid, and Northrop Grumman, which joined the competition April
25 and is expected to name a collaborator possibly as early as
today. 

However, the UC regents have yet to vote on whether to join the
competition. 

A terse statement from Michael R. Anastasio, leader of the fight
to keep Los Alamos in UC hands, said that decision is expected
to be made soon. Anastasio is also director of Los Alamos'
sister lab, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 

Tauscher, whose district includes the Lawrence Livermore lab,
also said she was disappointed by the decision to require a
stand-alone pension, which she said would be less attractive to
lab staffers because they would no longer be covered by UC's
retirement plan. 

The university's generous pension plans are seen as having
helped attract the best and brightest employees. 

Officials with the Texas-Lockheed team, which is headed by C.
Paul Robinson, former president and director of Sandia National
Laboratories, are "going through (the request for proposals) to
see what has changed" since earlier drafts, said their
spokesman, Don Carson. "Unless there's something dramatically
different, we're counting on competing and winning," Carson
added. 

Some UC backers fear that the Energy Department would like to
kick UC out of Los Alamos. At a congressional hearing in March,
longtime UC ally Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., accused the Energy
Department of writing the specifications in a way that would
make it "very, very hard for the University of California to get
the bid." 

The text of the RFP is at Keay Davidson at . 				
Page A - 7 			


The San Francisco Chronicle] 
*****************************************************************
 48 Daily Bruin: Lab proposals requested
 
Friday, May 20, 2005                                 

By Sara Taylor DAILY BRUIN REPORTER staylor@media.ucla.edu

The competition for management of the Los Alamos National
Laboratory took a step forward Thursday when the final request
for proposals was released. 

Though the University of California has been making preparations
to bid for management, they have been waiting for the release of
the request to make a final decision. The UC has managed the lab
since it opened in 1943, but the Department of Energy put the
management contract up for bid after recent management problems.

The final request outlines some notable ways in which the lab
will be run differently than it has been in the past.

Under the new system, the manager will receive more than ten
times the amount of money the UC receives now, will have to
assume more risk and create a new pension plan.

With the final request out, the decision is likely just around
the corner.

"A final decision regarding the University of California's
participation in the competition is expected to be made soon,"
UC Spokesman Chris Harrington said in a statement.

The UC announced May 11 it would prepare a possible joint bid
with Bechtel National Inc., DWX Technologies and Washington
Group International in preparation for the bidding process.

The UC Board of Regents has the final say on whether to bid.

There have been concerns due to recent security issues and the
classified work that is conducted there. But in their March
meeting, the regents seemed favorable to the idea of continuing
to manage the lab. Several board members said their concerns had
been alleviated.

A discussion on the lab contract is on the agenda for the
regents' upcoming meeting next week, but Harrington said it is
not yet known if they will come to a decision.

But, with the request out, "the competition is starting in
earnest," Harrington said.

The proposals are due by July 19, which leaves the university
little time to make its final decision. 

After that, the National Nuclear Security Administration hopes
to announce the lab's new management by December 1, with the new
manager taking over operations by July 1, 2006, according to an
NNSA press release.

The lab has been operated by the UC as a non-profit venture
since the lab's inception.

The final request contains some other changes from the way the
lab has been run in the past, most notably that it will no
longer be a non-profit venture.

"It appears that the RFP (request for proposals) is skewed
towards a corporate structure rather than a not-for-profit
agency," said Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., who represents the Los
Alamos area in Congress.

The future manager will be paid up to $79 million a year. The
current manager makes about $8 million.

The switch to a for-profit enterprise has raised some concerns,
as science may be overshadowed by business.

"I hope this requirement does not affect the science at the lab
– or result in an exodus of employees – as many have feared,"
Udall said.

But Tyler Przybylek, chairman of the board of NNSA, assured that
the lab's status as a for-profit institution would not
compromise the science.

"Good operations and good business aren't the enemies of great
science; they enable it," he said.

With reports from Bruin wire services.

Copyright 2005                  
*****************************************************************
 49 SignOnSanDiego.com: Los Alamos nuclear lab suffers fallout from scandals
 
The Union-Tribune
  
By Heather Clark ASSOCIATED PRESS

 1:18 p.m. May 20, 2005

 LOS ALAMOS, N.M.  The Wen Ho Lee case. Confusion over the
whereabouts of classified computer disks. Workers buying camping
and hunting gear on the government's dime. Disgruntled
scientists posting complaints on a blog. A potential brain drain
among the weapons experts. 

Los Alamos, the government lab that built the atomic bomb during
World War II, is beset with turmoil and uncertainty, and there
could be more to come. 

To clean up the place and run it more efficiently, the U.S.
government is putting the contract to operate Los Alamos up for
bid for the first time since the lab was created in 1943 as part
of the top-secret Manhattan Project. 

The University of California, which has run Los Alamos from the
beginning, could be out. A defense contractor with a more
bottom-line outlook could be in. 

And that worries some. 

The government's request for bids appears to be "skewed toward a
corporate structure, rather than a not-for-profit entity," said
Democratic Rep. Tom Udall of New Mexico. "I hope this
requirement does not affect the science at the lab  or result
in an exodus of employees  as many have feared." 

Tyler Przybylek of the National Nuclear Security Administration,
the Energy Department agency that plans to award the new
contract by Dec. 1, gave assurances Thursday that Los Alamos
would continue to be a world-class scientific institution. 

"I think that what people will see over time is good operations
and good business aren't the enemies of great science; they
enable it," Przybylek said. 

Los Alamos, with about 8,000 University of California employees
and 3,000 contract workers, is one of the nation's three chief
installations responsible for maintaining the nation's nuclear
arsenal and manufacturing weapons components. 

The lab also conducts research on a host of topics of national
interest, including miniaturized technology, genetics,
computing, the environment and health. 

In 1999, in a case that proved a major embarrassment for the
government and the lab, Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee was
jailed amid an investigation into possible Chinese espionage.
The case proved to be weak, and Lee pleaded guilty to
mishandling classified information and was released with an
apology from a federal judge. 

The lab was rocked by other security lapses, as well as credit
card abuses, theft of equipment and other instances of
mismanagement. 

Pete Nanos, a former Navy admiral, was brought in as director
two years ago to "drain the swamp," as he put it, and was
credited by the Energy Department earlier this month, when he
stepped down, with instituting some sound business practices. 

But he also made enemies with his brusque management style,
calling scientists who flouted the rules "cowboys" and
"buttheads." Last summer, Nanos suspended nearly all work for
weeks and turned the place upside-down in a search for two
missing computer disks that never even existed; there was merely
a paperwork error. 

Some workers responded with a blog site that ridiculed their
boss. 

On Thursday, the government released its request for proposals
from businesses or institutions interested in running Los
Alamos, offering to pay up to $79 million a year to a contractor
 nearly 10 times the amount the University of California now
makes for a job it essentially regards as a nonprofit venture. 

The University of Texas plans to team up with Lockheed Martin
and bid on the contract. The University of California has joined
forces with Bechtel but has yet to decide for certain whether it
will compete. Northrop Grumman also plans to bid. 

Charles Mansfield, who heads a group of retired lab employees,
said uncertainty over the lab's future and poor morale have led
key scientists to consider retiring early. "From the nation's
standpoint it's turning out to be a terrible debacle," he said. 

Roughly 200 people since Oct. 1 have indicated they are
considering retirement, with more than half from the weapons and
physics, weapons engineering and manufacturing and
threat-reduction divisions, lab spokesman James Rickman said. 

"Those people are critical to the core mission of the
laboratory," Rickman said. "We're trying to work as an
institution to make sure that we capture and retain the very
critical, sometimes esoteric, knowledge that these people have.
It's absolutely critical to the security and reliability of the
nuclear weapons stockpile." 

Associated Press Writer Erica Werner in Washington contributed
to this story. 

Los Alamos National Laboratory: <B>www.lanl.gov</B>

 © Copyright 2005 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.   
*****************************************************************
 50 Casper Star-Tribune: Idaho site could get nuclear materials
 
Casper, Wyoming - Friday, May 20, 2005    
  
By The Associated Press 

BOISE, Idaho (AP) -- To guard against terrorists storming a U.S.
weapons lab and setting off a crude nuclear device, the Bush
administration is considering consolidating much of the nation's
plutonium and bomb-grade uranium at a few highly secure sites,
including concrete bunkers in Idaho.

Currently, the material is scattered at 13 sites around the
country.

Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman is expected to get an advisory
board's report next month on the potential cost savings and
security improvements from combining the hundreds of tons of
weapons fuel.

The Energy Department and a federal agency that oversees the
nation's nuclear stockpile have been discussing the idea for
more than a year, after a series of security lapses during mock
terrorist attacks at federal weapons labs. 

Authorities fear a suicidal terrorist squad could penetrate lab
security and trigger a nuclear explosion.

The United States no longer manufactures or tests nuclear
weapons. But scientists still use small amounts for research,
including studying how existing nuclear warheads age and how
weapons might be built by terrorists or rogue nations.

The Project on Government Oversight, a Washington-based group
that has lobbied for tighter security at Energy Department labs,
proposes removing all weapons-grade material from six sites:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif.;
Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, N.M.; the Hanford
Nuclear Reservation near Richland, Wash.; Savannah River near
Aiken, S.C., Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tenn.;
and Argonne National Laboratory West near Idaho Falls, Idaho.

The material would then be placed with existing stockpiles or in
unused bunkers under beefed-up security at seven sites: the
Idaho National Laboratory, the Nevada Test Site north of Las
Vegas; Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, N.M.; the
Pantex Plant in Amarillo, Texas; the Y-12 National Security
Complex at Oak Ridge; the BWXT Nuclear Products Division in
Lynchburg, Va., and Nuclear Fuel Services in Erwin, Tenn.

One of the structures proposed for use at the Idaho National
Laboratory is Building 691, a never-used $450 million
underground bunker with 5-foot-thick concrete walls. 

  Copyright © 2005 by the Casper Star-Tribune published by Lee
*****************************************************************
 51 Tri-Valley Herald: Feds unveil vision for Los Alamos
 
Article Last Updated: 05/20/2005 09:33:34 AM                              

Research culture will have to make room for business with new bid
 			 			 			 			 			 			 
  By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER   

      A CAR DRIVES down a road leading into the Nevada Test Site
in a 1996 photo in Mercury, Nev. The Bush administration is
considering consolidating much of the nation s plutonium and
bomb-grade uranium at seven highly secure sites. (LENNOX
MCLENDON - AP file)       

In a long-awaited call for bids on running the birthplace of the 
bomb, the federal government on Thursday signaled that science 
and technology will remain the soul of Los Alamos National 
Laboratory. 

But Los Alamos will become more like a business, with
private-sector executives and a yet-to-be-determined level of
nuclear-weapons production built into a lab that traditionally
has fought those things and defined itself strictly as an
academic haven. 

That battle ended in many ways Thursday as federal
nuclear-weapons contracting officials laid out their vision for
the troubled laboratory. 

"Excellence in science is enabled by excellence in business and
operations," said Tyler Przybylek, chairman of a federal panel
charged with evaluating contractors bidding for Los Alamos'
management. 

The lab's research culture, nurtured by scientist-executives
named by the University of California, emerged from 				 				
					 					 					 				 				 				 					 					 				 the Cold War
to collide with new demands for solid management, tight security
and a safe workplace. 

After a string of university management and security failures,
the government ordered the lab contract opened for competitive
bidding, and the university is facing a first-ever challenge for
control of Los Alamos from two of the nation's largest defense
contractors. The three teams have 60 days to assemble massive
bid packages, followed by an oral test of each top executive
chosen to lead the lab. A career Energy Department executive,
acting deputy chief of weapons Tom D'Agostino, is scheduled to
choose among the teams by Dec. 1, with the new seven-year
contract starting in earnest a year from now. 

The fight over Los Alamos will be costly, with estimates of
mounting a bid for the lab running $6 million to $10 million
apiece, but the biggest cost is to taxpayers. Whoever wins the
				 				 					 					 					 				   				 				 					 					 				
management contract at Los Alamos will have to create a new
pension plan for the lab's 10,000-plus employees. Meanwhile, to
lure challengers and top-flight business talent, the government
revealed Thursday that it is willing to pay up to $79 million a
year to the winning contractor. 

That's more than nine times what the university is paid now, and
the school returns most of it to Los Alamos scientists for
research that they, rather than the government, dream up. With
the new, more generous fees, potential bidders are head hunting
for executives and partners on their bidding teams, offering
stock options and salaries unheard of inside the federal
government's constellation of laboratories. 

Rep. Ellen Tauscher, an Alamo Democrat and defender of the
university's management of two nuclear-weapons labs, warned the
U.S. Department of Energy about "warming" to defense contractors
over academia. 

"I want to caution the DOE and urge officials there to carefully
guard against the corporatization of science," she said in a
statement. 

On Thursday, executives at Lockheed Martin Corp. and Northrop
Grumman said that absent any surprises in the government's bid
request, they expect to fight to run Los Alamos. 

"Barring something that changes, we're a serious bidder, there's
no question about it," said Gregg Donley, president of the
technical services unit of Northrop, the nation's third largest
defense firm. 

"I would say we're 99.9 percent sure," said Lockheed spokesman
Don Carson. "Unless there's some hidden surprise, I would say we
intend to bid. We intend to compete hard and to win." 

University of California officials said Thursday that they had
not decided when to ask the school's governing Board of Regents
about mounting a bid. 

"We are very pleased that the final RFP (request for proposals) 
is out and that the competition is starting in earnest," said 
Michael Anastasio, director of Lawrence Livermore lab and head of 
the university's team with Bechtel National, BWXT and Washington 
Group International, in a statement. 

"A final decision regarding the University of California's
participation in the competition is expected to be made soon,"
the statement said. 

Politicians with weapons labs in their districts sounded a wary
note on the government's competition, which federal officials
say probably will be the template for another competition over
operation of Lawrence Livermore Lab. 

The university's pension plan provides rich benefits and is
sufficiently overfunded that for 15 years, neither lab workers
nor the federal government have had to make contributions. The
plan, along with university affiliation, have been chief 				
				 					 					 					 				   				 				 					 					 				
recruiting points for Los Alamos. 

"I remain concerned that under this RFP, senior scientists will
decide to retire, and that there will be vastly different
pensions for employees depending on when they were hired," said
Sen. Jeff Bingaman, R-N.M. "But the final decisions have been
made, and I'm glad that the bidding process is moving forward." 

Tri-Valley Herald All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 52 The New Mexican: Feds sweeten deal for LANL manager       
 	
 Fri May 20, 2005 9:30 pm   							 						


Bidders seeking to manage Los Alamos National Laboratory must 
pick a price  between $63 million and $79 million a year. Thats 
up to nine times what the University of California, the labs 
current manager, makes now. 

They must find a person smart enough to be director of a $2.1 
billion research lab and confident enough to certify to the 
government each year that the nuclear weapons there will work. 

They must be prepared to clean up 62 years of environmental 
waste. They must create an attractive pension plan. 

They must draft a plan for rebuilding a troubled nuclear-weapons 
lab, which has sparked the ire of Congress for its safety, 
security and businessmanagement flaws. They must show their 
abilities in manufacturing and be willing to manage a bomb 
factory. 

And they have 60 days to do it.

 With the release of the bidding criteria Thursday, the 
much-anticipated competition officially began. 

From what I can see, this will be a vigorous competition, U.S. 
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said, recognizing what he called 
three strong bidding teams. 

By Dec. 1, the National Nuclear Security Administration, part of 
the U.S. Department of Energy, intends to name the winner. 

                 We think that over the first seven years of the 
contract, you will see great differences in how the lab is 
operated, no matter who wins, said Tyler Przybylek, head of the 
government board that will evaluate proposals. 

Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, two large defense 
contractors, have announced plans to compete. The University of 
California, which has operated Los Alamos since Robert 
Oppenheimer founded it in 1943, has teamed up with Bechtel, a 
large engineering firm, to prepare a potential bid. UCs Board of 
Regents will have the final say, however, on whether that team 
enters the competition. 

We now have a timeline and that, I am sure, is a relief to the 
many dedicated LANL employees, Gov. Bill Richardson said in a 
statement. 

As always, he urged UC to bid.

 Meanwhile, Nuclear Watch of New Mexico is preparing a bid with
another anti-nuke group. 

We are pleased to see that the NNSA has added a requirement
that competitors list their environmental, safety and security
violations for the last five years. While our record is clean,
its going to be fun to see the long list that our competitors,
UC/Bechtel and Lockheed Martin, will have to compile, said Jay
Coghlan, director of Nuke Watch. 

Under the current contract, UC can earn up to $8.7 million per
year, depending on how the government reviews its performance.

But its liability is capped. 

Under the new contract, the lab manager can earn much more, but
the risks are higher. The exact amount earned will be based on
performance. The lab manager will be guaranteed 30 percent of
the negotiated fee, but must earn the other 70 percent. Through
good performance, it can hold onto the contract for a total of
20 years. 

Other than with nuclearrelated accidents and work done overseas,
the liability is not capped. For-profit lab managers will also
have to pay gross-receipts taxes to New Mexico. The Energy
Department also reserves the right to ask the lab manager to
remove employees who are not doing their jobs. 

The U.S. Department of Energys final criteria are substantially
different than its draft version released in December.
Politicians didnt praise it. 

The final (request for proposals) is not everything I would
have wanted, but it is what is now in place to dictate the last
leg of the competition, Domenici said in a statement. 

U.S. Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., has his worries, too. 

In addition to maintaining LANLs long tradition of excellent
science, my main concern has been to protect the benefits of
current lab employees and retirees, he said. It appears that
the final RFP is skewed toward a corporate structure, rather
than a not-for-profit entity. I hope this requirement does not
affect the science at the lab  or result in an exodus of
employees  as many have feared. 

The government put the greatest weight on three of seven areas.
First, in science and technology, bidders must show they can
foster an environment of scientific skepticism, conduct major
manufacturing programs, recruit scientists and cooperate with
other laboratories. 

Second, bidders will be judged heavily on who they select for
director and how they solve problems in an oral presentation.
Third, bidders must prove their ability to manage laboratory
operations, including security, safety and environmental
cleanup. 

You will do the cleanup work until we tell you otherwise,
Przybylek said, noting a significant change from the draft
version that said a separate contractor would do it. The bidders
also must prove they can deliver projects within budget and on
schedule. 

Among the major manufacturing programs the Energy Department
wants is a new pitproduction facility to replace the one at
Rocky Flats near Denver that closed. The facility would
manufacture triggers for bombs. Los Alamos lab is one of five
sites being considered for this work.

 Frankly, we dont have a crystal ball regarding who will get
the pit-production facility, Przybylek said. So were trying to
say that whoever wants our laboratory has to be flexible and
agile enough to adapt to whats coming in the future, he said. 

The person selecting the winning proposal was going to be a
political appointee: Linton Brooks, head of the NNSA. But Thomas
Paul DAgostino was later chosen. He is a captain in the U.S.
Naval Reserves and a Department of Energy career executive. He
is functioning now as the landlord for Los Alamos. 

I recommended him (to Brooks) because I think he perfectly fits
tradition and what we want to do with this competition, he
said. We need everybody to believe that we evaluated these
proposals as we said we would, we understood them, we were fair
and there was no bias involved.

It appears that the final (request for proposals) is skewed
toward a corporate structure, rather than a not-for-profit
entity. I hope this requirement does not affect the science at
the lab  or result in an exodus of employees ... 

TOM UDALL 

U.S. representative, D-N.M.

Scoring criteria for LANL contract bids

Bidders for the Los Alamos National Laboratory contract must
submit a proposal and a price  between $53 million and $79
million a year. Out of a possible 1,000 points, the U.S.
government will evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each
proposal against the following criteria: Science and technology,
325 points Laboratory operations, 175 points Business
operations, 75 points Laboratory organization, 75 points Key
personnel and oral presentation, 250 points 

Performance over the past five years, 75 points 

Transition plan, 25 points 

The cost proposed by the bidder wont be point scored. But the
government will use it to determine the best value. 

The government is more concerned with obtaining a superior
technical and management proposal than making an award at the
lowest evaluated total cost, according to the request for
proposals. But should proposals be close or similar in merit,
the cost is more likely to be a determining factor.		 	   	 	 	
			

Copyright 2004 Santa Fe New Mexican                                                                                             
*****************************************************************
 53 Seattle Times: Hanford likely caused cancer downwind, jury decides
 
Friday, May 20, 2005 - Page updated at 12:25 a.m. 	 	
 	
By Warren Cornwall Seattle Times staff reporter                                            

A federal jury yesterday found that the Hanford factories that
produced plutonium for the nation's nuclear arsenal probably
caused cancer in two people living in nearby towns. 

The decision by the jury in Spokane is a historic first for
those who have accused the federal government and contractors of
sickening people by secretly releasing radiation  affirming the
claims of at least some "downwinders." A jury has never before
said a U.S. nuclear-bomb plant sickened citizens living
downwind. 

The 12-member jury found that thyroid cancer suffered by two
plaintiffs more likely than not came from radiation that Hanford
released, exposing them as children in the 1940s and early '50s. 

But the jury rejected the claims of three others who suffered
noncancerous thyroid diseases. And it deadlocked on the case of
a woman with thyroid cancer who received a lower radiation dose
than the other two plaintiffs with cancer. 

The jury awarded one of the cancer victims, Steve Stanton of
Walla Walla, $227,508 for economic losses and pain and
suffering. The other, Gloria Wise of Kennewick, was awarded
$317,251. 

While the verdicts may bolster the cases of other downwinders
with cancer and high radiation exposures, they also suggest
those who don't have cancer  many of the more than 2,300
plaintiffs in pending lawsuits  may have a hard time convincing
a jury that Hanford is to blame for their illnesses. What's next 



" U.S. District Court Judge William Fremming Nielsen urged both
sides  former Hanford neighbors sued DuPont and General
Electric  to attempt mediation over remaining cases, which
include more than 2,300 plaintiffs. 

" Both sides have said they may appeal rulings by the judge that
could have influenced the outcome of yesterday's trial. 

The trial pitted former Hanford neighbors against DuPont and
General Electric, the companies that ran the Hanford site for
the federal government. While the government wasn't a defendant,
it's paying the bill for the defense  at least $50 million so
far  and would have to pay any awards or settlements because it
indemnified the contractors for their work there. 

The two sides yesterday offered vastly different interpretations
of what the verdict meant. Each declared victory in the cases,
which are supposed to provide a precedent for any settlement
talks involving the remaining plaintiffs. 

While losing three of the cases was a disappointment, winning
the two cancer cases against a government-funded defense team
representing two powerful companies should force settlement
talks, said Louise Roselle, lead counsel for the downwinders. 

"The government and these defendants have an obligation to this
community and it's time that they honor it. And that's what this
jury is saying," Roselle said. "The implication is that the
defendant and the government should sit down and talk
settlement. We've shown them that we can win cases." 

But Kevin Van Wart, the lead defense attorney, said the
rejection of the noncancer cases and the size of the judgments
posed major problems for the plaintiffs' attorneys.
Thyroid-cancer claims make up around 250 of the 2,300 downwinder
cases; most of the remaining cases involve noncancer thyroid
disease or other types of cancer, he said. 

"These are very small awards. And the cost of litigating these
claims for the plaintiffs far exceeded the recoveries," Van Wart
said. "At the end of the day it's unclear if they will recover a
nickel even if these verdicts are upheld, just because of the
expense of putting on this case." 

Roselle, however, said yesterday's verdict doesn't erase the
chances of people with noncancerous thyroid diseases. 

"Just because we lost those cases with this jury doesn't say
anything about what would happen with another jury," she said. 

Meetings will be scheduled soon to determine what to do about
the hung jury in the case of Shannon Rhodes, and how to deal
with the others who have filed claims, U.S. District Judge
William Fremming Nielsen said. Yesterday's decisions also could
be appealed. 

"I hope at this stage the parties give a good-faith effort to
mediation," Nielsen said. 

The Department of Energy, the federal agency that oversees
Hanford, had little to say. The agency "was not party to the
proceedings that have taken place and therefore it would be
inappropriate for me to comment," a spokesman said. 

The lawsuits stem from decades of operations at factories that
were both the centerpiece of the nation's nuclear-weapons
program and a source of radiation that spread across Eastern
Washington. 

Beginning in 1944, Hanford converted uranium into plutonium for
the core of nuclear bombs. First built as part of the World War
II-era Manhattan Project, it produced the plutonium for the
first nuclear explosion during the Trinity test in New Mexico,
and for the bomb dropped on the Japanese city of Nagasaki. 

The factories also spewed radioactivity into the air and water.
That included radioactive iodine, I-131, which is linked to
increased risks of thyroid disease and thyroid cancer. The six
cases before the jury involved people suffering thyroid problems
who were children during the height of the iodine releases in
the 1940s and early 1950s. 

Hanford's plutonium-processing work stopped in the 1990s. 

Stanton, a 60-year-old engineer, welcomed the verdict as a
vindication of what he has believed all along  that the thyroid
cancer discovered in 1996 stemmed from radiation he absorbed
growing up in Walla Walla. He said the jury award was fine. 

"Money is an issue. But I think the principle of the thing is
probably more important: that government and big business need
to be more careful what they put out in the atmosphere that
could hurt people," he said. 

His case and the others, however, could continue to wend their
way through the courts. Both sides have said they are
considering appealing rulings by the judge that may have
influenced the outcome. 

Plaintiffs' attorneys said they are considering whether to seek
a new trial for Rhodes, the woman with thyroid cancer whose case
the jury couldn't agree on. 

Warren Cornwall: 206-464-2311 or

Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company                                              
    
*****************************************************************

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: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************