***************************************************************** 05/31/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.124 ***************************************************************** 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 Guardian Unlimited: Row over Iran nuclear programme 2 RIA Novosti: RUSSIA TO SUPPLY NUCLEAR FUEL TO IRAN UNDER IAEA CONTRO 3 AFP: "Some progress" in Iran nuclear talks - Bush - 4 ITAR-TASS: Russia ready to supply Iran nuclear power industry with f 5 Korea Herald: Top nuclear negotiator travels to U.S. 6 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: N. Korea Seen Unwavering in Nuclear Weapo 7 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: U.S. 'to Boost WMD Intercept Network' 8 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Seoul Holds Closed-Door Meeting Held Ahea 9 Xinhua: Bush says six-party talks will work 10 Japan Times: Pyongyang eyes nuclear test 11 Korea Times: Inconsistency in Bush's NK Strategy? 12 Korea Times: Roh to Present Nuclear Solution to Bush 13 Minjok-Tongshin: DPRK Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Slams Rice's Rem 14 US: US Media Deny DU Genocide 15 US: [southnews] DU Bill introduced Into US Congress 16 Independent: The real Star Wars: Bush revives missile defence plan 17 [NYTr] NPT Conference: A Shameful Failure 18 Annan Urges World Leaders To Break Nuclear Deadlock 19 [du-list] BBC Ignores Evidence of War Crimes 20 IPS-English /REPEAT/POLITICS: World Cannot Afford Failure on 21 Bellona: Multipurpose Akula-class nuclear submarine under repairs in 22 Salt Lake Tribune: Dyer: Situation probably not as bad as it seems 23 Japan Times: A blow to the NPT 24 csmonitor.com: Nuclear Holes to Be Filled 25 asahi.com: EDITORIAL: Nuclear nonproliferation NUCLEAR REACTORS 26 US: NRC: NRC to Hold Conference With Arizona Public Service Co. for 27 Guardian Unlimited: Moral and political questions over nuclear energ 28 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss Performance for Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant 29 BBC: Sweden shuts down atomic reactor 30 US: NRC: NRC Publishes Licensing, Inspection and Annual Fees for Fis 31 St. Petersburg Times: Former Chernobyl Pilot Soars Above His Obstacl 32 US: NRC: RIN 3150-AH69 Delegation Changes 33 US: NRC: Portland General Electric Company; Notice of Termination of 34 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting of the 35 AFP: Japan sets concessions to give breakthrough reactor project to 36 US: NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting 37 Prague Daily Monitor: Water spill at Temelin, Austrians protest - 38 Scotsman.com News: Chernobyl Reactor's Shelter in 'No Danger of Coll 39 ITAR-TASS: Ukraine to build new sarcophagus over Chernobyl reactor 40 US: PRN: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Files Final Report on 41 Cumbria Online: ATOMIC PLANT STORY IS TOLD IN NEW EXHIBITION 42 US: Portsmouth Herald: Public has right to know about failded Seabro NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 43 US: [RADFOOD] A COOL solution 44 [du-list] New Australian Documentary on the horrifying effects 45 DU: A Scientific Perspective/ An Interview With LEUREN MORET, 46 US: Bill Introduced Into Congress to Obtain Scientific Certainty 47 US: Lone Star Iconoclast: Depeted Uranium Bill Introduced Into Congr 48 US: BELLACIAO: Depleted Uranium: A Scientific Perspective - 49 US: DenverPost.com: Flats expert spent career exposing radiation's e 50 ITAR-TASS: 2 containers with radioactive cobalt 60 found in Tbilisi. 51 US: Online Journal: Depleted, it ain't! So-called depleted uranium, NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 52 US: [NYTr] Groton Nuclear Sub Base a "Minefield of Pollution" 53 [NukeNet] Monju: Supreme Court Snubs Citizens 54 Guardian Unlimited: Court Upholds Japan's OK of Nuke Reactor 55 US: Herald Sun: Uranium mining boost 56 US: The State: Facility plans hit obstacle 57 Daily Yomiuri: Top court backs govt on Monju 58 Daily Yomiuri: Monju's safety main point of contention 59 Daily Yomiuri: Ruling gives fast breeder technology a major boost 60 Daily Yomiuri: Bring Monju reactor back on line ASAP 61 US: Al Jazeera: Closed down U.S. bases to be nuclear repositories 62 US: Xinhua: Australia's WMC expects increased production 63 US: Lincoln Journal Star: Compact still looking for nuclear waste di 64 AFP: Japan's top court gives green light to reopen signature nuclear 65 Japan Times: Top court rules in favor of trouble-prone Monju 66 ITAR-TASS: Over 23 tonnes of radioactive waste removed in Moscow reg 67 asahi.com: Monju nuke reactor ruled safe to run 68 Scotsman.com: Serious UK nuclear leak 'went unnoticed for nine month PEACE 69 IPS-English POLITICS: World Cannot Afford Failure on the 70 US: Salt Lake Tribune: NUCLEAR WEAPONS: The United States must lead US DEPT. OF ENERGY 71 Daily Californian: UC Joins Race for Los Alamos Lab - 72 Berkeley Daily Planet: LBNL Plans For Cleanup Challenged At Hearing 73 California Aggie: UC should overhaul Los Alamos labs’ policies 74 lamonitor.com: Richardson appeals to scientists to stay ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Guardian Unlimited: Row over Iran nuclear programme Simon Tisdall: World briefing Associated Press in Tehran Monday May 30, 2005 The Guardian Iran demanded an explanation from Pakistan yesterday for comments by Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, that Iran was "very anxious" to develop nuclear weapons. An Iranian foreign ministry spokesman told reporters yesterday that it was unlikely that General Musharraf made the comment during an interview with Germany's Der Spiegel on Saturday but called for an explanation from Islamabad. The spokesman said Iran was not seeking nuclear weapons and it was not Pakistan's business to make such comments. In an interview with Der Spiegel published on Saturday, Gen Musharraf was asked how Iran could be dissuaded from trying to make a nuclear weapon. He was quoted as responding: "I don't know. They are very anxious to have the bomb." The news weekly also quoted Gen Musharraf as saying a pre-emptive attack by the United States against Iran would be "a disaster". The Iranian foreign ministry spokesman said: "It's unlikely that Musharraf actually made such a comment. He knows better than anybody else that the Islamic Republic of Iran is not after nuclear weapons." In Islamabad, a foreign ministry spokesman said Gen Musharraf's comments were incorrectly reported. Last year Iran said it had bought nuclear material on the black market. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 2 RIA Novosti: RUSSIA TO SUPPLY NUCLEAR FUEL TO IRAN UNDER IAEA CONTROL - FOREIGN MINISTER MOSCOW, May 30 (RIA Novosti) - Russia is ready to supply nuclear fuel to Iran under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov said. Russia holds talks on the Iranian nuclear program with the European Union Troika (Great Britain, Germany and France) on the one side and with Iran on the other side, Lavrov said in an interview with the Kuwaiti news agency Kuna. Negotiators understand that Iran has a full right of peaceful nuclear energy development, the minister added. "We have a common goal - not to let anyone threaten nuclear non-proliferation and to prove that the Iranian nuclear program has only peaceful purposes," Lavrov said. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 3 AFP: "Some progress" in Iran nuclear talks - Bush - Tuesday May 31, 08:11 PM WASHINGTON (AFP) - US President George W. Bush said "some progress" had been made in trying to persuade Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions and diplomacy remained the approach in convincing North Korea to abandon its nuclear program. "We're working with the 'EU-3' to hopefully convince the Iranians to abandon their pursuit of such a program," Bush said at a White House press conference. "And it appears we're making some progress. "I've always believed that, obviously, the best way to solve any difficult issue is through diplomacy," the president said. "And in this case, France, Great Britain and Germany are handling the negotiations on behalf of the rest of the world, which is those nations which are deeply concerned about Iran having a nuclear weapon," he said. "Now, our policy is very clear on that, and that is that the Iranians violated the NPT agreement, we found out they violated the agreement, and therefore they're not to be trusted when it comes to highly enriched uranium or highly enriching uranium," the US president said. "And therefore our policy is to prevent them from having the capacity to develop enriched uranium to the point where they're able to make a nuclear weapon," he said. Bush added that a decision to allow Iran to apply for membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO) "seemed like a reasonable decision to make in order to advance the negotiations with our European partners." On North Korea, Bush stressed his commitment to diplomacy and the six-party talks in persuading Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear ambitions. "We've got a lot of work to do with the North Korean (leader Kim Jong Il) because he tends to ignore what the other five nations (China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the United States) are saying at times," Bush said. "But that doesn't mean we're going to stop, and can continue to press forward to making it clear that if he expects to be treated as a responsible nation that he needs to listen to the five nations involved," Bush said. "And it's important to have China at the table, for example, saying the same thing that the United States is saying, and that is that, 'If you want to be a responsible nation get rid of your weapons programs,'" Bush said. "It's important to have Japan and South Korea and Russia saying the same thing. "We want diplomacy to work," he added. "And we want diplomacy to be given a chance to work, and that's exactly the position of the government. And hopefully it will work. I think it will." "It's either diplomacy or military," Bush said. "And I am for the diplomacy approach. "And so for those who say that we ought to be using our military to solve the problem, I would say that while all options are on the table, we've got a ways to go to solve this diplomatically." Copyright © 2005 AFP AFP. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 ITAR-TASS: Russia ready to supply Iran nuclear power industry with fuel 30.05.2005, 14.10 MOSCOW, May 30 (Itar-Tass) - Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking on Monday in an interview with the Kuwaiti KUNA news agency, said that Russia “is ready to guarantee fuel supplies for the Iranian nuclear power industry in such a way that all this will be done under IAEA control”. “Specific forms of this readiness can be determined within the total package,” he noted. According to the minister, the talks on this problem “are underway on the basis of an understanding that Iran has the full right to peaceful development of the nuclear power industry”. “Teheran is interested in an access to modern non-nuclear technologies for the development of its economy,” he emphasized. “Iran wants to be an equal partner in various formats where regional problems (important for that country) are discussed.” “We believe that all these principles are quite justified and lay down sound grounds for achieving understandings,” the minister continued. “Particulars of how this will be realized, are still being agreed upon, and it is necessary in the interests of successful completion of the talks that decisions which will be taken by the IAEA Governing Board with respect to the Iranian programme, would be in force.” “This means,” he continued, “that the Iranian side will preserve the moratorium on all work, connected with uranium enrichment. This is very important in order to find a settlement on all issues, including how fuel for nuclear power stations will be supplied.” He noted that the talks are being held between three European countries (Britain, Germany and France) on the one side, and Iran, on the other. Russia works simultaneously with Teheran and “the European trio”, “since it wants to achieve one and the same goal: to bar a threat to non-proliferation and to remove suspicions that the Iranian peaceful nuclear programme (part of it) is used to implement military ends”. “The talks are far from completion for the time being,” the minister stated. “They have made some progress, but they should be continued.” © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 5 Korea Herald: Top nuclear negotiator travels to U.S. By Lee Joo-hee 2005.05.31 The Nation's No.1 English Newspaper Seoul's key foreign policy and security officials leave for Washington today to meet U.S. counterparts to discuss the North Korean nuclear standoff and to prepare for the June Korean-U.S. summit. Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-soon and Cheong Wa Dae's National Security Adviser Kwon Chin-ho make a four-day visit a week before the planned summit between Presidents Roh Moo-hyun and George W. Bush on June 10. Song is scheduled to meet State Department and National Security Council officials, including Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, his counterpart at the stalled six-party nuclear talks. Kwon will meet Stephen Hadley, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other officials, Cheong Wa Dae spokesman Kim Man-soo said. Kwon will focus on arrangements for the summit between Roh and Bush, who are expected to have an in-depth discussion on North Korea's nuclear problem and recent developments in the Korea-U.S. alliance. It is Roh and Bush's fourth round of summit talks. North Korea's nuclear standoff reached a new level earlier this month when the informal channel of contact between Washington and Pyongyang through the North's U.N. delegation was revived. Suspended inter-Korean relations also resumed when North Korea agreed to hold vice-ministerial talks in Gaeseong. Although the main purpose was for the North to get fertilizer aid, the talks became the watershed for a revival of many other inter-Korean exchanges, including ministerial-level discussions in Seoul June 21-24. North Korea also became more cautious toward the United States, agreeing to wait and evaluate its next step after Washington acknowledged it as a "sovereign state." But tension still prevails with recent reports from Japan speculating North Korea is preparing for an underground nuclear test and that the United States is considering other options that may include economic sanctions or referring the case to the U.N. Security Council. Pitching the anxiety level higher, U.S. Vice President Richard Cheney lambasted North Korean leader Kim Jong-il, calling him an irresponsible leader who doesn't take care of his people. In an interview with CNN's "Larry King Live," Cheney said he was concerned about the suspended six-party negotiations "partly because Kim Jong-il is ... I would describe (him) as one of the world's more irresponsible leaders." Cheney's personal attack on Kim reflected Washington's intention to continue mounting pressure against the communist state without offering a softer approach. North Korea has been boycotting the six-nation talks - comprising the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia - demanding Washington apologize for calling its leader a "tyrant" and being "hostile." Cheney said Kim was running a "police state" and one of the most heavily militarized societies in the world while his people lived in "abject poverty and stages of malnutrition," AFP quoted Cheney as saying in the interview. Cheney added that Kim did not care about his people at all and that he wants to throw his weight around and his nation to become a nuclear power. The vice president further warned that North Korea would not have normal relations with the rest of the world in terms of commerce, industry and trade if it becomes a nuclear state and urged China to be more active in bringing the North back to the six-party talks. Cheney's remarks are considered equal in terms of severity to the comments made by Undersecretary of State John Bolton two years ago, when he called Kim a "tyrannical dictator." Those comments prompted North Korean diplomats to refuse to talk with Bolton during the disarmament talks. (angiely@heraldm.com) ***************************************************************** 6 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: N. Korea Seen Unwavering in Nuclear Weapons Drive > Updated May.31,2005 13:58 KST North Korea is reported to have made a critical decision on its nuclear program last month. Quoting sources with the 6-way nuclear dialogue, Japan's Jiji News Agency said that North Korea's Vice Foreign Minister Kang Sok-ju notified Beijing of Pyongyang's nuclear resolve when he visited China early last month. The "critical decision" did not imply a nuclear test, but the Vice Minister did indicate the North would extract spent fuel rods from its reactor. In response, Chinese leaders reportedly urged Pyongyang to return to the 6-way talks, but the vice minister asserted that the North will not bow to such pressure and give up its nuclear ambitions. Arirang TV ***************************************************************** 7 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: U.S. 'to Boost WMD Intercept Network' Home> National/Politics Updated May.31,2005 20:57 KST The U.S. wants to boost an international cooperative initiative to stop shipment of weapons of mass destruction after a review session of the UN Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty failed to agree on a joint closing statement, JapanˇŻs Mainichi Shimbun reported Tuesday. As part of efforts to strengthen the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), Washington wants to step up cooperation with the Egmont Group, which was founded in 1995 to watch for money laundering by international criminal organizations and terrorist groups. Some 96 national and regional financial authorities including American and Japanese ones are part of the group. There are currently 60 nations participating in the PSI, which was first proposed by U.S. President George W. Bush, with a so-called core group including the U.S., U.K., Russia, Australia and Japan. South Korea and China are not part of the network because they say it could provoke North Korea if they joined. PSI nations agree to work together to search aircraft and vessels suspected of carrying weapons of mass destruction. Meanwhile, the New York Times online reported U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice planned to reveal early successes of the PSI in blocking the smuggling of WMDs to North Korea, Iran and Syria, during a meeting of diplomats from the PSI's approximately 60 member states on Tuesday. The paper said she would among other things announce a foiled attempt by ˇ°an Asian nationˇ± to acquire WMD technology. Rice will reportedly cite about a dozen cases where problematic weapons were intercepted either at ports during the container transfer process or when the U.S. told particular nations that WMD-laden freighters were about to leave their waters. However, the paper quoted unnamed U.S. officials as saying Rice would not tell members when, where or how the interceptions took place, since some nations feared retaliation from the states involved in the foiled WMD transactions. (englishnews@chosun.com ) ***************************************************************** 8 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Seoul Holds Closed-Door Meeting Held Ahead of Washington Summit > Updated May.31,2005 13:51 KST Washington on June 11, President Roh Moo-hyun held a closed-door meeting with key government officials Monday evening. Unification Minister Chung Dong-young, Foreign Affairs Minister Ban Ki-moon and National Security Advisor Kwon Jin-ho were among those who attended the preparatory meeting. President Roh reportedly urged the national security advisor, who is now on his way to Washington, to fine-tune positions on Pyongyang's nuclear row when he meets his U.S. counterpart Stephen Hadley and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Arirang TV ***************************************************************** 9 Xinhua: Bush says six-party talks will work www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-06-01 05:30:22 WASHINGTON, May 31 (Xinhuanet) -- US President George W. Bush said on Tuesday that he prefers to solve the nuclear issue of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) through diplomatic means and he believes the six-party talks will work. "For those who say that we ought to be using our military to solve the problem, I would say that, while all options are on the table, we've got ways to go to solve this diplomatically," Bush said at a White House press conference. While refusing to give a timetable for solving the DPRK nuclearissue, Bush said: "It's very important for our partners to understand that I believe the six-party talks can and will work. We're constantly in touch with our Chinese counterparts." Three rounds of the six-party talks have been held to try to resolve the DPRK nuclear issue. The six-party talks have been stalled since June last year as the DPRK accused the United Statesof adopting a hostile policy towards Pyongyang. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 Japan Times: Pyongyang eyes nuclear test Tuesday, May 31, 2005 By KEIZO NABESHIMA The issue of North Korea's nuclear-weapons development could reach a critical stage in June, one year after the suspension of six-party talks. U.S. intelligence says Pyongyang might conduct a nuclear test that month. Will the North return to the table and rejoin a process aimed at ending its nuclear program? Or will it test a nuclear weapon and bring the dialogue to a halt once and for all? The six-nation forum stands at a crossroads. In February, shortly after President George W. Bush entered his second term, North Korea declared that it possessed nuclear weapons and announced that it would "indefinitely suspend" the six-party talks. Pyongyang seeks direct talks with Washington to get a U.S. security guarantee for Kim Jong Il's regime. On May 13, a meeting between U.S. and North Korean working-level officials signaled Washington's willingness to accept the North Korean request for security assurances. The Bush administration has recognized North Korea as a "sovereign state," making it clear to Pyongyang that the United States has "no intention of attacking" that country. The question is how the Kim regime will respond to this U.S. policy. If it reacts negatively and stays away from the six-party talks, U.S. opinion, particularly in the Republican Party, will harden, lending further support to calls for tough action against the North, such as a referral to the U.N. Security Council -- a move expected to lead to economic sanctions. On the other hand, North Korea's return to the talks in itself will be no assurance of its willingness to abandon nuclear weapons. That's clear from past events. In either case, tensions in Northeast Asia will likely increase. It appears that North Korea's nuclear-weapons development has proceeded according to Kim's script. In 1993, Pyongyang expressed its intention of withdrawing from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), touching off a nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula. The following year the U.S. and North Korea signed the Framework Agreement to freeze the nuclear program. In 2002, though, Pyongyang admitted to uranium enrichment for the purpose of developing nuclear weapons. The North apparently had used the agreement as a cover for continuing its program. In January 2003, North Korea declared it would pull out of the NPT. That summer, two months after the first round of six-party talks, it said it had completed the reprocessing of spent fuel rods. Thus Pyongyang has shrewdly used the nuclear card, pushing its nuclear program while paying lip service to the six-party dialogue. The talks have been suspended since last June when the third round ended inconclusively. This month North Korea announced that it had unloaded an additional 8,000 spent fuel rods. Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, says North Korea already has enough plutonium to build up to six nuclear weapons. The newly unloaded fuel rods would make it possible to produce more. The Bush administration, whose preoccupation with the Iraq war has distracted it from the North Korean crisis, has effectively allowed North Korea to continue its nuclear-weapons development. With China and Russia, as well as South Korea, becoming increasingly reluctant to apply diplomatic pressure or impose economic sanctions on the North, America has found itself unable to take the initiative at six-party meetings. Pyongyang has, for all practical purposes, taken advantage of this situation. Events of the past decade make it clear that the Kim regime has no intention of giving up its nuclear ambitions. The nuclear-weapons program represents the regime's only bargaining chip to secure a U.S. guarantee of survival. Experts were once divided over whether North Korea was actually aiming to produce nuclear arms or using the nuclear program as a tool of brinkmanship. Few would disagree now that the North seeks to become a nuclear-weapons state. In fact, Pyongyang has said it wants to "increase its nuclear arsenal for defensive purposes." North Korea's nuclear-weapons development is an open challenge to -- indeed, a blatant violation of -- the Pyongyang Declaration signed in 2002 by Kim and Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. The declaration states the two countries will "cooperate in maintaining and strengthening the peace and stability of Northeast Asia" and "abide by all related international agreements with a view toward the comprehensive resolution of the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula." If North Korea goes ahead with a nuclear test and becomes a nuclear-weapons state, it will have a profound impact on international security. A nuclear-armed North Korea would pose a direct threat to Japan, which lies within the 1,300-km range of Nodong missiles already in position. As a result, Japan's defense and security system would come under drastic review. The U.S. military realignment plan here would also be affected significantly. The U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee has published a report analyzing the possible impact of a North Korean nuclear test and predicting the security responses it would likely provoke in the U.S. and its Asian allies. If North Korea were to be recognized as a nuclear-weapons state, the report warns, countries such as Japan, South Korea and Taiwan would move to obtain their own nuclear weapons, "leading to dramatic consequences for U.S. national security interests." Militarily, the report says, missile defense arrangements between the U.S. and its allies would be strengthened, while the U.S. is expected "to expand its permanently stationed forces at sea and on land, including possible nuclear deployment." It remains to be seen whether North Korea will conduct a nuclear test. China, the largest provider of supplies to North Korea, opposes such a test. If the North goes ahead with a test explosion, it would lose the support of China -- support that is badly needed in its negotiations with the U.S. The question is whether China will be able to hold back North Korea in keeping with the international strategy of maintaining a "nonnuclear Korean Peninsula." As the presiding member of the six-party talks, China now faces a critical test of its diplomatic strength. Keizo Nabeshima, former chief editorial writer for Kyodo News, writes on political and international affairs. The Japan Times: May 31, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 11 Korea Times: Inconsistency in Bush's NK Strategy? Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion I am writing in response to Philip Dorsey IglauerˇŻs Times Forum article ˇ°BushˇŻs Fitful Strategy on NKˇ± which appeared on Tuesday, May 24. While I am not in full support of every aspect of BushˇŻs policy toward the DPRK, I would not characterize the Bush strategy as ˇ°fitful,ˇ± ˇ°zigzagging,ˇ± or ˇ°whimsical.ˇ± Mr. Iglauer states in his second paragraph that ˇ°After more than four years of refusing direct one-on-one negotiations with Pyongyang, BushˇŻs people did exactly that, when U.S. officials met with North Korean officials at the DPRKˇŻs United Nations offices in New York.ˇ± It appears that this is Mr. IglauerˇŻs only example used to explain inconsistency in the Bush teamˇŻs policy. However, what this should tell us is that there were four years of consistent policy of refusing to engage in bilateral talks, which Mr. Iglauer inadvertently points out. Whether this refusal was good policy or not is another matter. What is important is that this recent bilateral contact can hardly be characterized as the mark of meandering policy. Washington is concerned about the prolonged stagnation in the six-party process and would like to see North Korea come back to the negotiating table. The meeting in New York was one effort to persuade the North to return to the six-party talks as Mr. Iglauer confirms in his article. There is a difference between inconsistency in policy and adjusting policy as changing circumstances might require. The meeting in New York should be seen as the latter. With the six-party talks stalled for nearly a year now and new concerns that Pyongyang might be preparing to test a nuclear bomb, the nuclear issue has taken on a greater sense of urgency. Therefore, some kind of breakthrough is needed. Certainly, more examples need to be provided by Mr. Iglauer than simply one bilateral meeting in four years between Bush administration officials and North Korean authorities to demonstrate that WashingtonˇŻs policy is ˇ°fitfulˇ± or that ˇ°Bush has repeatedly changed his mind.ˇ± The Bush administration has from the beginning made its demands and conditions very clear. There have been adjustments, some of which were positive, particularly in the third round of six-party talks last June at which then head U.S. negotiator James Kelly showed some flexibility and provided a more detailed proposal (dropping the use of CVID, outlining what North Korea could do in the short run and what it would get in return, pledge from North Korea to eliminate nuclear program after preparatory period of three months) to Pyongyang in hopes of achieving some progress. However, what Kelly got in response was an on-the-sidelines threat from the DPRK chief delegate that North Korea would test a nuclear weapon unless Washington accepted an initial ˇ°freezeˇ± on its nuclear program and dropped its hostile policy. With revised and often confusing statements over its nuclear program, obfuscation, buying time, stalling, and blatantly aggressive rhetoric meant to intimidate, Pyongyang seems to more aptly fit the description of having ˇ°the strategic consistency of a preteen schoolgirl.ˇ± Mr. Iglauer says that the Bush administration engages in ˇ°childish and unproductive name-calling,ˇ± that BushˇŻs ˇ°original strategyˇ± was ˇ°calling them bad namesˇ± and that he has ˇ°provoked Pyongyang with his tough talkˇ¦ˇ± While some comments from Bush and his team are certainly signs of uncouth statesmanship, let us not forget that long before the DPRK was labeled a part of the ˇ°axis of evil,ˇ± North Korea has been consistently demonizing the United States as the personification of evil for over 50 years. One only needs to thumb through North Korean school textbooks, novels, newspapers or listen to reports from KCNA on a daily basis for a plethora of insulting language and diatribes against the United States and its leaders. A state run propaganda machine in North Korea spews out some of the harshest and most insulting rhetoric around. Yet for some reason this does not warrant the kind of censure from the international community as Bush calling Kim Jong-il a ˇ°pygmyˇ± does. Certainly, there is much to be desired in the Bush administrationˇŻs North Korea policy but we should not let Pyongyang off the hook so easily. Its behavior is far from ideal. We cannot become apologists for North Korea just because it might be perceived as the underdog in this whole affair or because we simply do not like BushˇŻs policy. Yet, it seems that many of those who are so quick to criticize a misstep by the Bush administration are simultaneously coddling North Korea as if it were not part of the problem at all. 05-30-2005 17:22 ***************************************************************** 12 Korea Times: Roh to Present Nuclear Solution to Bush Hankooki.com > The Korea Times By Ryu Jin Staff Reporter President Roh Moo-hyun will have an in-depth discussion with U.S. President George W. Bush at next week's summit on a proposal South Korea believes could be acceptable to all the nations in the six-party talks, Seoul's top diplomat said Monday. Ban Ki-moon, minister of foreign affairs and trade, at the same time warned that improper remarks made by Japanese leaders, such as one by Vice Foreign Minister Shotaro Yachi last week, would further harm the already soured relations between South Korea and Japan. While attending a panel discussion hosted by local broadcasters, Ban said the Roh-Bush summit, scheduled for June 10 in Washington, would focus on ways to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue in a peaceful manner and strengthen the South Korea-U.S. alliance. ``The two leaders will have an in-depth discussion on the proposal for resolving the issue, based on various incentives that had already been proposed to North Korea in the last round of six-party talks last June,'' Ban said. North Korea and the U.S., along with South Korea, China, Japan and Russia, have held three rounds of talks in Beijing to resolve the nuclear standoff, which flared up in October 2002. But the multilateral forum has thus far seen little progress, and the North refuses to attend another round. Washington has become more and more impatient with Pyongyang, as the nuclear talks have been stalled for almost a year, with some hardliners suggesting ``other options,'' such as economic sanctions, against the poverty-stricken country. ``Other options could be considered only when a diplomatic solution is no longer possible,'' Ban said in response to questions. ``But, at this stage, they would not be discussed in the Roh-Bush summit.'' At a cross-border meeting earlier this month, South Korea told North Korea that it would present an ``important proposal'' once the North returns to the negotiation table, hinting at a comprehensive set of incentives, including large-scale economic aid and security assurances. Ban has recently explained that the South Korean government has been drawing up a new proposal that can satisfy both North Korea and the U.S. So the six-party talks, once resumed, could see ``substantial progress,'' he said. Key security and foreign affairs officials, including National Security Adviser Kwon Chin-ho and Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-soon, who leads Seoul's delegation to the six-party talks, will fly to Washington on Tuesday to prearrange the agendas for the Roh-Bush summit. Commenting on Seoul-Tokyo relations, Ban said the recent remarks by Japanese Vice Foreign Minister Yachi would negatively impact the summit between Roh and Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, slated for late next month. However, he added the scheduled summit would go ahead as planned because, despite the repeated provocations, the country needs to cooperate with Japan over important issues such as the North Korean nuclear problem. ``Our basic position is that friendly relations and policy cooperation between the two nations should be sought continuously, despite discord over historical and territorial issues,'' he said. Yachi triggered a controversy here in Seoul after it was found that he had told visiting South Korean lawmakers earlier this month that the U.S. is reluctant so share classified intelligence on North Korea as it does not fully trust South Korea. He offered a carefully worded apology last Friday after South Korea had lodged a strong diplomatic protest over the remarks. Seoul said the comments undermined the South Korea-U.S. alliance, and rejected the apology for what it believes falls short of expectations. jinryu@koreatimes.co.kr 05-30-2005 19:46 Ban Ki-moon Minister of foreign affairs and trade ***************************************************************** 13 Minjok-Tongshin: DPRK Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Slams Rice's Remarks Ă°Ł 2005.05.31 23:27:23 The Pyongyang Times 2005-05-30 - The DPRK Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman answered KCNA on May 14 as regards a spate of vituperation made by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice against the DPRK. In her interview with CNN on May 12 Rice lied that the DPRK violated the 1994 DPRK-US Agreed Framework even before the ink of its signature dried, and asserted that its system is a ˇ°terrible regimeˇ± and it should be ˇ°reformedˇ±. As far as the DPRK system is concerned, it is true socialism of Korean style which was chosen by the Korean people themselves and has been glorified by them. Its nature remains unchanged no matter how viciously Rice defiles it. Her reckless remarks revealed that her loud-mouthed recognition of the ˇ°sovereign stateˇ± and the like were nothing but a ruse to conceal the US attempt at bringing down the DPRK system and mislead the public opinion. While talking about the peaceful settlement of the nuclear issue, she made threatening remarks that the US has still all options on the table and keeps a strong deterrent to the DPRK. This fully revealed the US attempt to invade the DPRK in contradiction to the Bush groupˇŻs oft-repeated utterances that the US has ˇ°no intention to invadeˇ± it. The Bush administration is the worldˇŻs infamous tyranny that must be radically reformed. No one can deny that the world has turned into a sea of blood and gotten into a turmoil since BushˇŻs neo-conservative group took power. It was none other than the Bush administration that scrapped the DPRK-US Agreed Framework. Here are some instances to cite. The DPRK has honoured all its commitments such as freezing all its nuclear activities and fully ensuring the surveillance by IAEA inspectors according to the AF. But the Bush administration has not properly fulfilled any of its commitments under the AF but violated all of them after it came to power. Paragraph 1 of the AF commits the US to providing light water reactors (LWR) to the DPRK by 2003. But only their groundwork has been carried out in ten years. Under this paragraph the US is also obliged to supply heavy oil to the DPRK every year until the construction of LWRs is completed. But it totally suspended the supply of fuel oil after circulating the rumour about the ˇ°enriched uranium programmeˇ± of the DPRK. Paragraph 2 calls on the DPRK and the US to move towards fully normalizing bilateral political and economic relations. The US, however, has persistently pursued hostile policy and economic sanctions against the DPRK and went so far as to dub it as part of an ˇ°axis of evilˇ±. Paragraph 3 commits the US to giving its formal assurances that it will neither use nukes nor make any nuclear threat to the DPRK. Instead, it designated the DPRK as a target of preemptive nuclear strike. Paragraph 4 requires the DPRK to accept nuclear inspection after the US full delivery of non-nuclear parts, including LWR turbines and generators. Nevertheless, the US had never honoured any of its commitments but pressured the DPRK to accept the nuclear inspection. In the long run, all the paragraphs of the DPRK-US Agreed Framework were scrapped due to the US non-compliance of all its commitments for ten years and the fabrication of ˇ°enriched uranium programmeˇ± it cooked up to evade its responsibility. This fact is admitted by anyone with intelligence and reason. RiceˇŻs remarks prove that she is either a woman ignorant of the DPRK-US history or an impudent liar. We cannot but be confused by such incoherent remarks made by the Secretary of State of the ˇ°superpowerˇ±. Copyright © 1999-2005 Minjok Tongshin ***************************************************************** 14 US Media Deny DU Genocide Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 10:31:01 -0500 (CDT) Forwarded with Compliments of Government of the USA in Exile (GUSAE): Free Americans Resisting the Fourth Reich on Behalf of All Species. NOTE: This is a commendably firm piece--e.g., its support for the Nuremberg admonition that we "have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring." -- kl, pp From: Donna C Date: May 28, 2005 4:48:18 PM GMT+07:00 http://www.onlinejournal.com/Media/052705Nichols/052705nichols.html US Media Censor Uranium Weapons Stories: Depleted Uranium Turns to Poison Gas By Bob Nichols Project Censored Award Winner & Online Journal Contributing Writer May 27, 2005-A dedication in 2120 might say: Dedicated to the memory of the Iraqi people. Many people believe Iraq was the birthplace of civilization some 5,000 years ago. Iraq was destroyed and radioactively contaminated in an early 21st Century Oil War by a fascist world power, now extinguished. Dedication to the Iraqi People in 2005: Iraq is uninhabitable. The wars in Central Asia all were nuclear wars fought with radiation-dispersing American weapons. None of the Bushista NeoCons running this miserable genocide in Central Asia care one whit. In fact, it is what they ordered from the US military's list of services. Mostly, the remaining 300 million "good Americans" do not care, do not know and do not want to know. Those Iraqis not yet radiologically contaminated must leave Iraq as soon as possible. Before they too get radiation poisoning, their genetic line is kaput, they die and become just so much radioactive sand in the deserts of Iraq. The only hope of the US-UK troops in Iraq is that they get out before they take a fateful breath in the wrong place, at the wrong time. The not yet dead say there is a very slight metallic taste at the time. Meanwhile the 140,000-pound A1M1 Death Machine Tanks keep dispensing Poison Uranium Oxide Gas that lasts forever in the Occupied Territories of Iraq, as per the Bushista NeoCons' instructions. That's the bottom line. The US military, funded by the US taxpayer who borrowed up to 80 percent of the world's savings at one time, killed the Iraqi people. The Iraqis don't even know it yet. Most scientists and just plain people are afraid to look them in the eye and tell them the truth. Censorship at Work (America, Land of War Criminals) Radiation poisoning is a miserable way to die. It means adult diapers, unbearable and unimaginable pain and morphine as a goddess, if you can get it. Poisonous, radioactive, ceramic uranium oxide gas colors everything else. There is no treatment and there is no cure. Radiation poisoning is a death sentence, courtesy of the US Political Class delivered on target and on time by the US military, the most lethal military in the history of the world. . See for yourself how people are faring in the shadowy world of government censorship, lies payola and grim everyday officially-sanctioned propaganda. You and your family are subject to these NeoCon lies daily. If you are an American, chances are you believe them. You are wrong, dead wrong. You could not possibly be more wrong. Google these phrases at www.google.com: depleted uranium On May 14, 2005, it received 971,000 Internet page hits. Lie: "Depleted Uranium is really OK! After all, the Pentagon would not call it depleted if it wasn't, would they?" ceramic uranium oxide gas + battlefield Truth: This stuff is deadly. It is Bad, Radioactive and Kills people-forever. It is not okay a year from now. It is not okay, ever. Its use is always a war crime. Only 19 Google Net page hits. May 14, 2005, the Google count was a minuscule 19 Hits. It's on fewer than 19 websites. Nineteen is hardly any at all. That's it! Total for the world as reflected by Google. But, still, I'm right and you are wrong. Again, that's 971,000 vs 19 hits. That's a totally overwhelming advantage. Yet, the US military and intelligence agencies keep investing more and more resources and money to counter the miserable little 19 stories, articles and references to the genocidal product "ceramic uranium oxide gas" used by the US military in Bosnia, the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq-in other words, Central Asia. Why are they worried? In the world of "Big Media" what effect can a mere 19 articles have against the Tsunami of 971,000 page hits? Well, a lot, actually. Now Google the phrase Zyklon B That is the poison gas the Nazis used to kill millions of concentration camp victims during the Holocaust of World War II. WW II lasted from 1939 to 1945. You see, the United States Political Senior Class joyfully joined, 60 years later, the German Nazis of World War II in the decision to use genocide as an official government policy (OGP.) This was not done by mistake. No, these modern day butchers knew exactly what they were doing. What's genocide? Dictionary.com defines it as: The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group. Weaponized Ceramic Uranium Oxide Gas betrays the motives of its users in the US military and its advocates in politics, government and society. Just as surely as the Nazi's poisonous hydrogen cyanide gas does for an impartial war crimes investigator. Genocide is the kind of international crime that has a big downside, if knowledge of it gets out of a tightly-controlled orbit of enthusiastic and dedicated cult-like supporters. Of course, the CIA can easily control the big media to manage the spin. It's pretty simple, they do so every day. William Colby, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, once stated "The CIA owns anybody of consequence in the national media." It is obvious on its face. Folks, the CIA cannot control you, though: Tell your neighbors about the US military's Kill Everything Uranium Weapons. It's known unofficially as the "Kill'em All Policy." also: "Waste Them," "Whack Them," and "Nuke 'em." Once set free in the political environment that is the kind of searing truth that burns out corruption: the infection, pus, and bloody raw wounds of a democracy turned fascist. Currently in the deepest, darkest, blackest part of the fascist theocratic government in the United States, the slavishly obedient US military sees little reason to revolt and say "No!" to the well-known genocidal policies of the senior politicians. Even though poisonous uranium gas sickens and kills their own troops, the officer corps goes along with it as necessary because the civilian political leadership wants it that way. It is also, as a practical matter, an efficient method for eliminating ailing vets that cost billions of dollars in budgetary appropriations for the Veterans Administration. They are just following the advice of US foreign policy guru Henry Kissinger. In 1973, in General Alexander Haig's presence, then National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, referred pointedly to military men as "dumb, stupid animals to be used" as pawns for foreign policy.[10] Kissinger set the public stage for the war managers to sacrifice the gullible, but patriotic and "stupid," American troops to the use of weaponized uranium oxide gas. American General Norman Schwarzkopf from the First Gulf War stated they were not told anything about harmful uranium munitions. As seen in the overwhelming comparison of 971,000 articles to 19 articles, the "depleted uranium" metal the US military and government actively encourages the meek and submissive academic sector to study is most often called "mildly radioactive." The same metal in most of the rest of the world is "highly radioactive." The "big media's talking heads" simply do as they are told, read what they are handed and collect their millions in payola bribes; and, of course, they smile-a lot. In short, the lying big media have you and your family controlled perfectly. That makes the Professional Hairdo News Readers on your tube guilty of being accessories to genocide and accessories to mass murder. These media celebrities should utterly disgust everyday Americans, anywhere, anytime. Wait just a few minutes and everywhere in America, you will see their bright shiny faces on the boob tube. The men are strong, confident and well fed. The women look gaunt, anorexic and coping. In the ivy-covered halls of academia, the US government has thousands of frightened scientists busy studying the wrong radioactive metal, on purpose. The War on Central Asia is a large well-organized industrial killing operation. God forbid the overeducated, worthless clowns should study the poison uranium gas that is actually crippling and killing our own troops on the ground in Iraq, and Iraqi men, women and children. Yes, you see: poisonous radioactive ceramic uranium oxide gas and dust is altogether different from the elemental uranium block of metal from which the more lethal version is derived. This metal [uranium] humbly makes itself available for the having, by anyone with the gumption to dig it out of the ground and "process" it one time. No big deal, eh? Your watch dial might even glow with a cousin metal. It has a pretty, soft glow, doesn't it? Guess what? Glowing watch dials have absolutely nothing to do with the lethal, crippling and killing radioactive uranium oxide gas used everywhere by Americans on battlefields in the last 15 years. And, that is the only place you will find this kind of uranium gas-in the air on battlefields. Killing is all it is good for. Killing for an eternity. The US military uses millions of pounds of the weaponized version of it promiscuously in Iraq and Central Asia by order of senior American politicians. That's a trick of the propagandists' art. See how easy you were to get off the track? Stay focused. These monsters are really good at diverting your attention. It's officially called "misdirection" in propaganda classes. The real subject is "ceramic uranium oxide gas" + battlefields. Remember! When you talk to your neighbors tell them that is what all the fuss is about. Guarantee you, when your neighbor Googles it, they are going to find one of the 19 articles. In this case, being right is not a consolation prize. It just means more threats and harassment for authors who dare to write and speak about its use as a war crime. Since 1943 American war planners have known "The amount necessary to cause death to a person inhaling the material is extremely small. It has been estimated that one millionth of a gram accumulating in a person's body would be fatal. There are no known methods of treatment for such a casualty." [9] This is from a Declassified document from the secretive Manhattan Project. I invite you to try an experiment. Spend a while contemplating the following two questions. Write to me with your conclusions. Send them to: bobnichols@cox.net 1. What kind of a person purposefully selects a genocidal weapon for use in Central Asia, then orders massive quantities of it used in battle? 2. What kind of person orders a government and military cover-up of the resulting slow genocide? The only statements throughout history that speak to the very issue we all face in the world today are these few sentences from the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal at the end of World War II: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience . . . therefore have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring."-Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, 1950 Since the obliging and compliant Congress will not stand up to the president as they are supposed to, we have a serious problem in this country. I would not want any weak-minded souls to think I do not respect the processes of government created by the likes of Thomas Jefferson and his friends before 1776. Read all they wrote and said. The Nuremberg statement is now international law and by extension, U.S. law. It is now the duty of all loyal American citizens that the fascist government controlling the United States and the US military can no longer be allowed to exist; it must be replaced. The world, and international law, holds all Americans accountable, and the price to pay is dear. As you think about the "problem" we have in the United States I send you this greeting: "Welcome to hell." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The following sources were consulted for this article: Listen to the former director of the Pentagon's Depleted Uranium Project Dr Doug Rokke Ph.D., former Nuclear Weapons Lab Scientist Leuren Moret, former Army Sgt Dennis Kyne, human rights and war crimes lawyer Karen Parker, Canadian nuclear celebrity Susan Riordan, well-known nuke power plant investigator Russell Hoffman and Project Censored Award Winning Writer Bob Nichols discuss these thought provoking questions and more on the following recent World Wide Talk Radio Program: Depleted Uranium: Cause and Effect 4 Hour Special on The -X" Zone Radio Show and TalkStar Radio Network 1. Nichols, "There Are No Words" 2. Nichols, "My God! My Country Is Using Poison Gas In Iraq" 3. Russell Hoffman, "Poison Fire, USA" 4. Moret, Depleted uranium: Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets 5. World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference 6. International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan written opinion of Judge N. Bhagwat 7. Gsponer and Hurni, "Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons: The Physical Principles Of Thermonuclear Explosives, Inertial Confinement Fusion, And The Quest For Fourth Generation Nuclear Weapons" 8. Ingri Cassel "An Interview with Amy Worthington" 5-15-2005 9. Declassified documents, the Manhattan Project, 1943 Memo to Gen. Leslie Groves. 10. Kissinger's quote regarding military men comes from Chapter 14, which extensively discusses Al Haig, Kissinger and other Nixon staff advisors' negotiations and differences over national security issues during the 1969-1974 period. The exact, direct quote marks begin with the word 'dumb' and terminates after the word 'used'. SOURCE: Bob Woodward & Carl Bernstein, The Final Days, second Touchstone paperback edition (1994), Chapter 14, pp. 194-195. Copyright by Bob Nichols. Bob Nichols is a Project Censored Award Winner and lives in Oklahoma where 20 percent of the people cannot read. He is a contributor to Online Journal, AxisofLogic.com, DissidentVoice.com other online publications and the "San Francisco Bay View" newspaper. Nichols is a former employee of the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant. Nichols can be reached by email at bob.bobnichols@gmail.com. The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Online Journal. Email editor@onlinejournal.com Copyright ) 1998-2005 Online Journal. All rights reserved http://www.onlinejournal.com/Media/052705Nichols/052705nichols.html ===================================================== ***************************************************************** 15 [southnews] DU Bill introduced Into US Congress Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 01:10:27 -0500 (CDT) ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Ever feel sad or cry for no reason at all? Depression. Narrated by Kate Hudson. http://us.click.yahoo.com/LLQ_sC/esnJAA/E2hLAA/7gSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Depeted Uranium Bill Introduced Into Congress The Lone Star Iconoclast May 30, 2005 WASHINGTON, D.C. Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA), a medical doctor, on May 17 introduced legislation with 21 original co-sponsors in the House of Representatives that calls for medical and scientific studies on the health and environmental impacts from the U.S. Militarys use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions in combat zones, including Iraq. The McDermott bill also calls for cleanup and mitigation of sites in the U.S. contaminated by DU. The need is urgent and imperative for full, fair and impartial studies, McDermott said. We may be endangering the health and lives of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians. All weve gotten so far from the Pentagon are assurances. We need facts backed by science. We dont have that today. Because of its density, the military uses DU as a protective shield around tanks, and in munitions like armor piercing bullets and tank shells. DU tends to spontaneously ignite upon impact, disintegrating into a micro-fine residue that hangs suspended in the air where it can be inhaled and falls to the ground to leach into the soil. DU is a by-product of the uranium enrichment process; it is chemically toxic. and DU has low-level radioactivity. About 300 metric tons of DU munitions were fired during the first Gulf War, and about half that amount has been used to date in the Iraq War. Ive been concerned about DU since veterans of the first Gulf War began to experience unexplained illnesses, commonly called Gulf War Syndrome that remain mysterious, McDermott said. McDermott added that there are reports from Iraqi doctors and others today of seemingly unexplained serious illnesses including higher rates of cancer and leukemia, and even birth defects. We pretended there was no problem with Agent Orange after Vietnam and later the Pentagon recanted, after untold suffering by veterans. I want to know scientifically if DU poses serious dangers to our soldiers and Iraqi civilians. The Depleted Uranium Munitions Study Act of 2005 has 21 original co-sponsors, all Democrats, including: Reps. Charles Rangel, Pete Stark, Sherrod Brown, Peter DeFazio, Maurice Hinchey, Raul Grijalva, Jan Schakowsky, Robert Wexler, Sam Farr, Tammy Baldwin, Robert Andrews, Bob Filner, Jay Inslee, Jose Serrano, Lynn Woolsey, Earl Blumenauer, Bart Stupak, Mike Honda, Tom Udall, Barney Frank and Ed Markey. www.iconoclast-texas.com/News/22news04.htm ____________________________________ Analysis Depleted, it ain't! So-called depleted uranium, that is! By Bob Nichols Project Censored Award Winner & Online Journal Contributing Writer OKLAHOMA CITY, Red State of Delusion, May 31, 2005The term "Depleted Uranium" is misleading, on purpose. So-called "depleted uranium" (DU) results from making hydrogen bombs. The CIA tries to deceive us all, all the time. They have succeeded for 55 years. George Lakoff blows the lid off the "Big Lie" about uranium weapons use. Processing natural uranium removes about half of the bomb making material. It is then called "depleted uranium" by the powers that be, because it can no longer be used to make H-Bombs; but it is used to make uranium bullets, shells, land mines and regular bombs instead. The so-called "depleted uranium" is 88 percent as radioactive as the original uranium. There is a huge amount, about 1.5 billion pounds, of "depleted uranium" at H-bomb factories in the US. The word depleted does not mean the uranium is safe or okay to use, it means it has been used to make H-Bombs, that's all. A less deceptive name would be George Lakoff's "Radioactive Weaponry." Or "12 percent depleted uranium;" but Lakoff's term "Radioactive Weaponry" better describes what the US military is currently widely using in Iraq and Central Asia. Copyright by Bob Nichols. Bob Nichols is a Project Censored Award Winner and lives in Oklahoma where 20 percent of the people cannot read. He is a contributor to Online Journal, AxisofLogic.com, DissidentVoice.com other online publications and the "San Francisco Bay View" newspaper. Nichols is a former employee of the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant. Nichols can be reached by email at bob.bobnichols@gmail.com. ____________________________________ An imperialist nation America has become an imperialist nation with soldiers in coercive use all over the world. As a result of the resistance of the people of Iraq and the desire to enlarge our area of influence in the Middle East, American leaders are desperate for more warm bodies. A draft, having been planned for about a year, will soon be in the news. Unfortunately, the care of those injured abroad is at present being cut. According to the American Free Press, our supreme military commander is chopping millions of dollars from the money allotted for the care of those injured in combat. Anthony Principi, head of Veterans Affairs, resigned over the growing scandal involving the highly toxic depleted uranium used in bullets and missiles in the recent military actions. According to Arthur Bernklau, executive director of Veterans for Constitutional Law, This malady (from uranium munitions) that thousands of our military have suffered and died from, has finally been identified as the cause of this sickness, eliminating the guessing. Out of the 580,400 soldiers who served in the first Gulf war, of them 11,000 are now dead! By the year 2000, there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. This astounding number of disabled veterans means that a decade later, 56 percent of those soldiers who served have some form of permanent medical problems. We support our troops by exposing them to nuclear radiation and by cutting the allotment for their care when injured. Jay McKean Roberts http://www.billingsnews.com/story?storyid=17254&issue=263 The archives of South News can be found at http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/southnews/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: southnews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 16 Independent: The real Star Wars: Bush revives missile defence plan www.independent.co.uk The saga of America's ambition to put weapons in space has been as protracted as George Lucas's film franchise. Now George Bush has a new plan - at a stellar cost of $58bn. Rupert Cornwell reports 30 May 2005 At the Uptown theatre on Connecticut Avenue, the last great movie palace in Washington DC, there is hardly a spare seat in the house for showings of The Revenge of the Sith, the latest instalment of the fictional Star Wars. But as George Lucas's epic draws to an end, in the real world, the so-called "star wars" is only getting going. It started as a dream of Ronald Reagan, the Strategic Defence Initiative he presented to a disbelieving world on 23 March 1983, a Cold War vision of a space-based shield that might protect the US from an attack by Soviet long-range ballistic missiles. Critics nicknamed it star wars and said it could never work. A decade later, with the Soviet Union consigned to history, Bill Clinton attempted to do the same to SDI. Within the next few weeks, however, George Bush, a champion of missile defence from the start of his presidency, is expected to sign a national security directive moving the US a big step closer to putting weapons in space. Not so, insists the Air Force Space Command, the prime mover behind the initiative. The goal, a spokeswoman insists, is "free access in space, not weapons in space". But the evidence suggests otherwise. In the early 1990s, the Clinton administration cancelled every Pentagon programme that smacked of an offensive use of space. And in its anxiety to preserve the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, the historic cornerstone of arms control agreements with the Soviet Union, and later Russia, it also put SDI on the slowest of back-burners. Today, however, the ABM treaty has gone, 11 September has turned national security into a paranoia, while North Korea is reportedly close to developing a missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead to hit Alaska. The largely pacifist Clinton policy of 1996 is about to be replaced by a far more forceful doctrine, designed to prevent what Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defence, once called "a space Pearl Harbour". Space is already put to military use - and not only by the US - with satellites that gather data, speed communications, and conduct electronic eavesdropping. But these are not weapons in the accepted sense of the word; their purpose, it can be argued, is defensive and non-violent. Whether they are realistic or pure Strangelovian fantasy, the ideas now being kicked around by the Pentagon are a different matter altogether. Killer satellites, which the US has been developing and that would disrupt or destroy in space an enemy's satellites are just the start. There is the CAV, the Common Aero Vehicle, a hypersonic craft launched in mid-air and swooping from space to hit targets up to 3,000 miles away with conventional weapons. Another mooted weapon is the Hyper-Velocity Rod Bundle, nick-named "rods from God," consisting of tungsten bars weighing 100kg or more, deployed from a permanently orbiting platform and able to hit terrestrial targets, including buried targets, at 120 miles a minute, 7,200 mph, with the force of a small nuclear weapon. A third weapon under study is a space-based laser, code-named Eagle, that employs space-based relay mirrors to direct the rays against ground targets. A fourth programme would use intense radio waves aimed from space to disable enemy communications systems. Welcome to the age of the so called "death star". Not quite George Lucas, but near enough. Yesterday's New York Times reported the Bush administration is also working on plans for American civilian planes to shoot down missiles that threaten them. The paper said that technicians were adapting three Boeing 767s with a device that would find and disable shoulder-fired missiles. The best guess is that the Pentagon has already spent $22bn (Ł13bn) on space weapons research - although no one can be sure since much of it is financed out of a classified black budget. Some specific programmes are said to have been cancelled. Equally likely, they may merely have been renamed. A more pertinent question is why all the focus on space weapons, given the meagre results of two decades of work on missile defence. Since 1983, the US has spent $92bn, and over the next six years plans to invest $58bn more, to develop a downscaled version of the space shield which was envisioned by Ronald Reagan. But there is no guarantee even this will work. The first eight interceptor missiles have been installed at Fort Greely in Alaska and Vandenberg Air Force base in California. Hopes of declaring the system operational by the end of 2004 were dashed by failed launches in December and February. Canada, meanwhile, has infuriated Washington by saying "thanks but no-thanks" to a US offer to participate. Analysts say the ultimate cost is certain to exceed $150bn. But since 11 September, the US has been on a military spending binge. Just last week, Congress approved overall Pentagon spending, including on Iraq, of $491bn for fiscal 2006 - more than the combined defence budgets of the 15 next largest military powers. But in the open ended "war on terror", nothing is ever enough. Far from souring the administration on missile defence, the earthly problems in Alaska and California have propelled US planners to switch their focus to space, even though an effective space-based system could cost up to $1,000bn - at a time when US counter-terrorism officials admit that the real threat is not a nuclear attack from the heavens, with missiles fired by a rogue state, but by a device brought into the country in a suitcase or cargo container. In its space capability, as in every military field, the US is far ahead of any competitor. But as General Lance Lord, the head of Space Command, warned in September 2004, the US could be challenged by ground-based lasers, micro- satellites or disruption. "You don't need a peer competitor to compete in space. We may not have seen anybody today, maybe not tomorrow, but perhaps the day after that. I don't want it to be like 1957, when this nation woke up after sputnik was launched and said, "Oh my goodness, we're behind." Such is today's neurosis. The mind set is the linear successor of the imagined but non-existent missile gap with the Soviet Union in the 1960s. It is also an expression of the Bush doctrine justifying pre-emptive (or rather, preventive) wars, to stop a rival from threatening the United States or challenging it in military might. "We must establish and maintain space superiority," General Lord told Congress this year. "Simply put, it's the American way of fighting." And, critics say, it is the American way of making much of the rest of the world resent, dislike, and fear it. They compare US behaviour over space to its approach to the spread of nuclear weapons - and point to the latest review conference of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty to illustrate the diplomatic consequences. The 180-country gathering in New York earlier this month failed, not least because of perceived US hypocrisy. Do as we say, not as we do, was the message from Washington as it excoriated Iran over its suspected nuclear ambitions, while refusing to ratify the nuclear test ban treaty, and openly examining a new type of weapon , the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, (RNEP) to attack underground targets. A go-ahead by Mr Bush for space weapons would be interpreted in exactly the same way. Yet Washington seems oblivious, or uncaring of the consequences. As with the RNEP (which, experts say, would have to be a massively contaminating weapon to be effective) the military gains of bringing arms to space are small and the diplomatic downside huge. US officials say the new weapons could hit anywhere on earth in 90 minutes. Had the US been in a position to launch a weapon from space, they argue, instead of a cruise missile from a distant ship, the August 1998 strike against Osama bin Laden might have been a direct hit instead of a near miss. But that ignores the cost, the military risks and the damage to international relations. Richard Garwin, a top US electronic weapons scientist, has estimated that a laser strike from space would cost $100m per target, compared with $600,000 for a Tomahawk cruise missile. Theresa Hitchens, the vice-president of the Centre for Defence Information, warns that a space arms race could increase the risk of war - what if an American satellite breaks down, the Chinese are wrongly held responsible, and one of their satellites is destroyed in retaliation? And why the rush, she argues, given that the status quo overwhelmingly favours America. Just possibly, General Lord may be right: one distant day, space superiority may be the only thing standing between the US and Armageddon. Right now, however, it controls 95 per cent of the world's military satellites and accounts for two-thirds of the commercial space industry. And more fundamentally still, nobody owns space, not even the US, for all its current dominance of the technology. The only international treaty in the field is a 1967 agreement, ratified by 91 countries, that bans the deployment of weapons of mass destruction in outer space. So why not celebrate the 22nd anniversary of the Reagan dream and draw up a new treaty banning all weapons from space, making sure that the fictional star wars can never come true? As the fate of the ABM treaty, the International Criminal Court, the Kyoto agreement, the nuclear test ban treaty make clear, Washington hasn't got much time for treaties right now. But things change fast. The US might have no rival now, but a major offensive foray into space sooner or later would almost certainly draw Russia, India or a fast-developing China into a space arms race. "No other nation on earth is going to accept the US developing something they see as the death star," Ms Hitchens says. "It's not going to happen. People are going to find ways to target it, and it going to create a huge problem." ©2005 Independent News &Media (UK) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 17 [NYTr] NPT Conference: A Shameful Failure Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 12:17:06 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [The Moonie-owned Washington Times gives unusually high-profile play to the "withering" comments by Iran's representative about the USA's behavior.] UPI/The Washington Times - May 27, 2005 http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20050527-065122-7167r.htm U.N.'s NPT confab fails By William M. Reilly UPI United Nations Correspondent United Nations, United States, May. 27 (UPI) -- The U.N. conference on the nuclear non-proliferation treaty failed to reach substantive agreement among participants Friday, with the United States singled out for most of the blame. Washington was faulted for using procedural challenges to smokescreen its own nuclear policies and to avoid discussion of them and Beijing for apparently wanting to shield North Korea from criticism. At the final day of the Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, chairmen of the three main committees said their panels and their subsidiary bodies, said they were unable to reach consensus and their reports were largely of a technical nature. The panels deliberated on nuclear disarmament and security assurances, safeguards and regional issues, including establishment of a nuclear weapon-free zone in the Middle East, and implementation of the treaty's provisions related to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said the participants "missed a vital opportunity to strengthen our collective security against the many nuclear threats to which all states and all peoples are vulnerable." "This is the most acute failure in the history of the NPT," Thomas Graham, a negotiator for the United States at the 1995 NPT review, said Thursday, anticipating Friday's outcome. "By refusing even to discuss the commitments it made at past meetings, the United States has turned the world of nuclear proliferation into the Wild West, with a complete disrespect for the rule of law," said Alice Slater, founder of Abolition 2000 a non-governmental organization seeking the elimination of nuclear weapons at the session's windup. The Drafting Committee held just one meeting, Wednesday, in which it considered and agreed to recommend to the conference for adoption a draft final document which carried no conclusions or recommendations. It was approved by consensus. Perhaps its most substantive information was a list of the 150 states parties to the NPT participating, and that 119 research institutes and non-governmental organizations also attended. Obviously missing from the list of 150 nations were India, Israel, North Korea and Pakistan. Israel has long been believed to have developed nuclear weapons as India and Pakistan have boasted, while North Korea withdrew from the pact. Iran remains a member of the NPT, although insisting its nuclear research is for peaceful use. Conference President Sergio de Queiroz Duarte of Brazil, said he regretted the meeting had been unable to achieve consensus in either the main committees or their subsidiary bodies and, therefore unable to deliver any recommendations. Ambassador Paul Meyer of Canada said the conference had let the pursuit of short-term, parochial interests override the collective long-term interest in sustaining the treaty's authority and integrity. It had seen precious time that might have been devoted to exchanges on substance and the development of common ground "squandered by procedural brinkmanship," he said, without referring directly to the United States. Meyer said the conclave had witnessed intransigency from more than one state on the pressing issues of the day, coupled with "the hubris that demanded the priorities of the many be subordinated to the preferences of the few." He added "the community had been weakened by the refusal of the delinquent to be held to account by its peers," an apparent reference to Iran, and "by the defection from that community of a state, without suffering any sanction," an obvious reference to the Democratic Republic of Korea. The Ottawa envoy said that, if there was a silver lining in the otherwise dark cloud, it lay in the hope that leaders and citizens would be so concerned by its failure that they mobilized behind prompt remedial action. Yoshiki Mine, the envoy from Japan, the only state to have suffered a nuclear attack, said states should take the undesirable result seriously and renew their determination to explore ways to maintain and strengthen the credibility and authority of the NPT regime. He called on North Korea to completely dismantle all of its nuclear programs including its uranium enrichment endeavors. Japan, Mine said, would continue to work with other partners to peacefully resolve the issue through the six-party talks. Iran's nuclear issue was no doubt a matter of concern for the international community, he said, adding that Japan considered it extremely important that Iran, through its negotiations with European Union members to provide sufficient "objective guarantees" that its nuclear program was exclusively for peaceful purposes. As the final speaker Friday, Iran's Ambassador Javad Zarif let loose on Washington with both barrels delivering a withering attack of U.S. nuclear policies and its behavior at the conference. "Serious is the intention and actions rigorously pursued by the world's remaining superpower without the slightest concerns of the rest of the international community," he said. He said the United States adopted its nuclear posture by stressing the essential role of nuclear weapons as an effective tool for achieving security and in foreign policy objectives; developing new nuclear weapons system and constructing new facilities for producing new nuclear weapons, resuming efforts to develop and deploy tactical nuclear weapons despite commitments to reverse this process and effectively reduce them, targeting non-nuclear weapons states party to the treaty "and planning to attack these states." Zarif, who took part in the recent EU-Iran talks was critical of the United States for abrogating the anti-ballistic missile treaty, rejecting the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, continuing deployment of nuclear forces in other territories, providing a nuclear umbrella for non-nuclear weapon states and signing an agreement of cooperation with Israel to provide scientists access to its nuclear facilities. "The extremist attitude," he said, "seems to indicate that no lessons have been learned from the nightmares of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (in Japan). If history is any guide nuclear arms, ladies and gentlemen, are in the most dangerous hands." * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 18 Annan Urges World Leaders To Break Nuclear Deadlock Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 16:01:18 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on pascal.ctyme.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_ORG, OPPORTUNITY_2,SPF_HELO_PASS,SP_HAM_SUPER,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.3 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com ANNAN URGES WORLD LEADERS TO BREAK NUCLEAR DEADLOCK New York, May 31 2005 4:00PM United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has challenged world leaders to “move beyond rhetoric” and break the years-long deadlock over how to tackle nuclear arms and their proliferation. After the 2005 review of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) ended last week without substantive agreement, the Secretary-General said in an opinion piece in yesterday’s International Herald Tribune that a vital opportunity was missed to repair “cracks” in each of the 35-year-old accord’s pillars – non-proliferation, disarmament and peaceful uses of nuclear technology. “Regrettably, there are times when multilateral forums tend merely to reflect, rather than mend, deep rifts over how to confront the threats we face,” he writes. Despite the NPT’s near universal ratification – with 188 States parties -- the month-long review conference wrapped up last Friday at UN Headquarters in New York with little movement on substantive issues. In his opening address to the conference, Mr. Annan warned that negotiations would stall if some delegates focused on some threats instead of addressing them all. A number of countries underscored proliferation as a grave danger, while others argued that existing nuclear arsenals imperil us. The spread of nuclear fuel-cycle technology posed an unacceptable proliferation threat to some, but others countered that access to peaceful uses of nuclear technology must not be compromised. Despite the diplomatic stalemate, he says the conference’s failure to come to any agreement will not break the NPT-based regime. The vast majority of countries that are parties to the treaty recognize its enduring benefits. “But there are cracks in each of the treaty's pillars…and each of these cracks requires urgent repair,” Mr. Annan says. He points out that since the review conference last met in 2000, North Korea has announced its withdrawal from the treaty and declared itself in possession of nuclear weapons. Libya has admitted that it worked for years on a clandestine nuclear weapons program. And the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has found undeclared uranium enrichment activity in Iran. “Clearly, the NPT-based regime has not kept pace with the march of technology and globalization,” he writes, adding that whereas proliferation among countries was once considered the sole concern of the Treaty, revelations that the Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan and others were extensively trafficking in nuclear technology and know-how exposed the vulnerability of the nonproliferation regime to non-State actors. “When multilateral forums falter, leaders must lead,” Mr. Annan says, noting that countries will have a unique opportunity to renew their efforts in September, when more than 170 Heads of State and Government convene in New York to take decisions on UN reform and adopt a wide-ranging agenda to advance development, security and human rights. “I challenge them to break the deadlock on the most pressing challenges in the field of nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament,” Mr. Annan writes. “If they fail to do so, their peoples will ask how, in today's world, they could not find common ground in the cause of diminishing the existential threat of nuclear weapons…solutions are within are reach; we must grasp them.” 2005-05-31 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml ***************************************************************** 19 [du-list] BBC Ignores Evidence of War Crimes Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 17:22:30 -0700 1- BBC Ignores Evidence of War Crimes 2- Eyewitness Iraq: Daily life in Baghdad -- BBC Ignores Evidence of War Crimes by David Edwards and David Cromwell May 24, 2005 ZNet http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=7936 "Professional journalism relies heavily on official sources. Reporters have to talk to the PM's official spokesperson, the White House press secretary, the business association, the army general. What those people say is news. Their perspectives are automatically legitimate... This is precisely the opposite of what a functioning democracy needs, which is a ruthless accounting of the powers that be." (Robert McChesney, professor of communications, University of Illinois) Scores of readers responded to our Media Alert, 'BBC Silence on Fallujah' (May 17, 2005), in which we highlighted the evasions of BBC news director Helen Boaden in her Newswatch article. An earlier media alert, 'Doubt Cast on BBC Claims Regarding Fallujah' (April 18, 2005) noted that Boaden's Newswatch article failed to address the many specific and detailed allegations of atrocities committed by US forces in their assault on Fallujah last November. Moreover, statements made to us by Human Rights Watch had cast doubt on Boaden's firm assertion that HRW could "compellingly" rule out the use of banned weapons by US forces in Fallujah. Both of these points, we argued, surely merited a reply from the BBC. We received the following response from Helen Boaden on May 19: Dear Mr Cromwell and Mr Edwards, In your original complaint, you criticised the BBC for failing to support your [sic] contention that US forces in Falluja used banned weapons and committed other atrocities. Our correspondent in Falluja at the time, Paul Wood, did not report any of these things because he did not see any of these things. Later, in the normal course of discussions on a range of issues with Human Rights Watch, he asked if they had heard of the allegations and what they thought of them. A senior researcher at Human Rights Watch said he was aware of the claims, had made some inquiries, but did not have any evidence to substantiate the allegations. We did not state, because it is not the case, that Human Rights Watch had carried out a full investigation of these stories, travelling to Falluja to interview eye-witnesses and gathering other testimony. We were making the point that if these allegations were credible, you would expect to see them taken up by the many, reputable international human rights organisations which monitor Iraq. The fact that they have not is one more reason for us to be cautious about this story. Equally, we at the BBC do not know for certain that banned weapons were not used in Falluja. We keep an open mind, continue to research the issue and - as with any story - we would broadcast it if and when we stand it up. Far from covering up American use of banned weapons in Iraq, you can be certain that if we had proof of this, it would be leading every bulletin. We stand by our reporting of Falluja. You are welcome to post this response on your website. Yours sincerely Helen Boaden, Director, BBC News We are grateful to Helen Boaden for taking the time and trouble to respond - no doubt under pressure from a large number of emails. We responded on May 24: Dear Helen Boaden, Thank you for your reply of 19th May. We are grateful that you have responded, but we are concerned that you continue to evade the points that have been put to you. Could you possibly please first of all retract your renewed assertion that claims of banned weapons use by US forces have been made +by+ Media Lens? That is incorrect. We are asking the BBC to report such claims; an entirely different matter. Your argument is that: "Our correspondent in Falluja at the time, Paul Wood, did not report any of these things because he did not see any of these things." Is this really the best that the BBC can do? What about the testimony from other sources that Paul Wood, and other BBC reporters, could have obtained by interviewing refugees, Iraqi doctors or human rights groups in Iraq? Or even by inspection of media reports elsewhere, some of them mainstream outlets? The argument that Paul Wood reported no atrocities or abuses because he personally saw none, is unlikely to impress the growing proportion of the BBC audience turning to the internet for news. Nor will it impress BBC viewers and listeners who read newspapers. You, and Paul Wood, appear to be unaware of the fact that US marines have, in fact, already +admitted+ that they have used an upgraded version of napalm. A weapon which uses kerosene rather than petrol was deployed when dozens of bombs were dropped near bridges over the Saddam Canal and the Tigris river, south of Baghdad. Andrew Buncombe reported in the Independent on Sunday: "'We napalmed both those bridge approaches,' said Colonel James Alles, commander of Marine Air Group 11. "'Unfortunately there were people there... you could see them in the cockpit video. They were Iraqi soldiers. It's no great way to die. The generals love napalm. It has a big psychological effect.'" (Buncombe, 'US admits it used napalm bombs in Iraq,' Independent on Sunday, August 10, 2003) Allegations about the use of weapons that have "melted" people have appeared in the US press. For example, the Washington Post reported that: "Some artillery guns fired white phosphorous rounds that create a screen of fire that cannot be extinguished with water. Insurgents reported being attacked with a substance that melted their skin." (Jackie Spinner, Karl Vick and Omar Fekeiki, 'U.S. Forces Battle Into Heart of Fallujah,' Washington Post, November 10, 2004) Why has the alleged use of such weapons, reported in major press outlets, not been covered by the BBC? Or consider the testimony of human rights workers such as Michele Naar-Obed based in Duluth, Minnesota. Naar-Obed was a participant on a recent peace delegation to Iraq, her third visit. Her aim is to offer a perspective that is all too often lacking in mainstream news media: "It's the perspective from the ordinary Iraqi who doesn't live inside the 'green zone,' from the ones who have watched their country laid waste by dictatorship, violence, bombs, depleted uranium and occupation and the ones whose hopes and dreams held common by most human beings have turned into nightmares." (Naar-Obed, 'Nonviolence gaining tiny foothold in Iraq,' Duluth News Tribune, March 13, 2005) She noted: "our delegation heard reports from refugees, human rights workers, sheiks and imams about the November 2004 invasion of Fallujah. We learned of execution-style killing of men handcuffed and blindfolded, of women and children killed while holding white flags and of bodies burned and grossly disfigured. Doctors are convinced chemical weapons or, at the very least, napalm was used. Men between 16 and 50 years were not allowed to leave the city even if they weren't part of the 'insurgency.' U.N. representatives confirmed these reports and told us they have spent weeks negotiating access into Fallujah to begin investigation and have been denied." Why have such reports of alleged atrocities, as related by Iraqi refugees, doctors and human rights workers, and confirmed by UN representatives, not been covered by the BBC? There have also been reports of cluster bombs being dropped in Iraq, including Fallujah. BBC Worldwide Monitoring picked up this report by one London-based Arabic news agency: "US military aircraft bombarded a number of neighbourhoods that had fallen into the hands of gunmen such as the Al-Askari neighbourhood, which was the target of a fierce aerial attack. B-52 bombers capable of dropping bombs weighing up to a tonne were used for the first time in recent battles and dropped a number of shells and cluster bombs on the city." (Quds Press news agency, 'Iraqi gunmen claim to regain control of Al-Fallujah districts,' December 12, 2004) On February 22, 2005, BBC Worldwide Monitoring picked up an article in the Iranian press by a Dr Kabak Khabiri entitled: "America's attack on Fallujah and the Geneva Convention". The BBC Monitoring Report noted that Dr Khabiri "outlined America's 'war crimes' in Iraq in general and in Fallujah in particular, and said almost all the methods used by the US forces in their military operations clearly contravened the Geneva Convention. The examples given by Dr Khabiri include: attacks on civilians and residential areas; the use of depleted uranium bombs; and torturing prisoners of war and individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism. The article says the US administration has never expressed any regret about the actions of its military forces in Iraq, and instead it has defended these methods. It states that the international organisations and conventions had regrettably no power to face the blatant violations." (BBC Worldwide Monitoring, February 22, 2005) BBC Worldwide Monitoring is relaying reports about depleted uranium, cluster bombs, fire bombs, poisonous gas and other atrocities committed against Iraqi civilians. So why does the BBC never refer to them in its news bulletins? Demolishing Human Rights You refer once again to an unnamed "senior researcher" at HRW who had "made some inquiries, but did not have any evidence to substantiate the allegations." As we have already mentioned to you, Joe Stork of HRW in New York told us: "we [HRW] have not been able to investigate Falluja-related allegations regarding possible use of prohibited weapons, and therefore we are not in a position to comment on allegations that they have been used. In that regard, I am mystified by the PW [Paul Wood] story citing HRW as saying that we 'had made some investigations and found no evidence' [i.e. your Newswatch article]. Perhaps Paul can shed some light here." So far, neither you nor Paul Wood have shed light on this discrepancy in HRW testimony. Therefore, the BBC's firm assertion that HRW found no evidence of use of banned weapons in Fallujah after conducting "some inquiries" is simply inaccurate. It is surely incumbent upon the BBC to investigate the discrepancy in HRW statements, and to correct the false impression generated by your Newswatch article and Paul Wood's reporting. Even more damaging to your expressed commitment to "responsible journalism" is the BBC's failure to convey the sheer scale of the horror inflicted upon Iraqi civilians. Dahr Jamail, an unembedded journalist in Iraq, reported of the US assault on Fallujah in November 2004: "The military estimates that 2,000 people in Fallujah were killed, but claims that most of them were fighters. Relief personnel and locals, however, believe the vast majority of the dead were civilians." (Jamail, 'An Eyewitness Account of Fallujah,' December 16, 2004, ) In an article in the Guardian, Jamail noted that refugees from Fallujah told him that "civilians carrying white flags were gunned down by American soldiers. Corpses were tied to US tanks and paraded around like trophies." (Jonathan Steele and Dahr Jamail, 'This is our Guernica,' The Guardian, April 27, 2005) Why do BBC news editors consider Dahr Jamail's reporting unworthy of interest? American documentary film-maker Mark Manning recently returned from Fallujah after delivering medical supplies to refugees. Manning was able to secretly conduct 25 hours of videotaped interviews with dozens of Iraqi eyewitnesses - men, women and children who had experienced the assault on Fallujah first-hand. In an interview with a local newspaper in the United States, Manning recounted how he: "... was told grisly accounts of Iraqi mothers killed in front of their sons, brothers in front of sisters, all at the hands of American soldiers. He also heard allegations of wholesale rape of civilians, by both American and Iraqi troops. Manning said he heard numerous reports of the second siege of Falluja [November 2004] that described American forces deploying - in violation of international treaties - napalm, chemical weapons, phosphorous bombs, and 'bunker-busting' shells laced with depleted uranium. Use of any of these against civilians is a violation of international law."(Nick Welsh, 'Diving into Fallujah,' Santa Barbara Independent, March 17, 2005, ) Why do BBC news editors consider Mark Manning's documentary evidence of US atrocities unworthy of interest? A report on Fallujah presented recently to the 61st session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights by the Baghdad-based Studies Center of Human Rights and Democracy appealed to the international community: "What more tragedies are the international bodies waiting for in order to raise their voices demanding to stop the massacres and mass killings of the civilians?" The report warns that "there are mass graves in the city" and "the medical authorities and the citizens could not find the burial ground of 450 bodies of the citizens of Fallujah that the American occupation forces have photographed and buried in a place that is still unknown." (SCHRD, 'Report on the current situation in Fallujah,' March 26, 2005, ) Why do BBC news editors consider the testimony of Baghdad-based human rights groups, such as SCHRD, unworthy of interest? There are other reports of atrocities carried out by US forces. Take, for example, a newspaper interview with two men from Falluja - physician Mahammad J. Haded and Mohammad Awad, director of a refugee centre - in the German daily Junge Welt, on February 26, 2005. Mr Awad said: "I saw in Falluja with own eyes a family that had been shot by U.S. soldiers: The father was in his mid-fifties, his three children between ten and twelve years old. In the refugee camp a teacher told me she had been preparing a meal, when soldiers stormed their dwelling in Falluja. Without preliminary warning they shot her father, her husband and her brother. Then they went right out. From fear the woman remained in the house with the dead bodies. In the evening other soldiers came, who took her and her children and brought them out of the city. Those are only two of many tragedies in Falluja." (International Action Center, 'Fallujah was wiped out,' ) To conclude: Would you please issue a clarification of your account of the BBC's dealings with Human Rights Watch on your Newswatch site? Would you please address the issue of brutal force and atrocities against civilians by US forces on your Newswatch site, and in the main BBC news bulletins? The BBC's silence on these matters is a serious dereliction of your public service requirements. It is all the more stark when weighed against your channelling of US-UK propaganda (the infamous 45-minute warning, the 'dodgy' dossiers, the supposed presence of WMD in Iraq, the US-UK quest for a "diplomatic settlement" etc.) in the run up to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 and the subsequent occupation. The BBC was leading news bulletins with these erroneous items, month after month, despite the glaring lack of proof of their authenticity. Contrast this with your assertion that: "you can be certain that if we had proof of [US war crimes], it would be leading every bulletin." Why have you, in fact, overlooked the ample evidence of such atrocities? We look forward to a reply that substantively addresses the above points. Best wishes, David Cromwell & David Edwards SUGGESTED ACTION The goal of Media Lens is to promote rationality, compassion and respect for others. When writing emails to journalists, we strongly urge readers to maintain a polite, non-aggressive and non-abusive tone. Write to Helen Boaden, director of BBC news Email: helenboaden.complaints@bbc.co.uk Ask why the BBC is failing to cover the many reports of alleged US war crimes in Fallujah and elsewhere in Iraq. Copy your emails to the following: Pete Clifton, BBC news online editor Email: pete.clifton@bbc.co.uk Mark Thompson, BBC director general Email: mark.thompson@bbc.co.uk Michael Grade, BBC chairman Email: michael.grade@bbc.co.uk Please send copies of all emails to us at: Email: editor@medialens.org You may also wish to consider lodging an official complaint about the Newswatch article at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints . All complaints are guaranteed a BBC response and, if the complaint is upheld, will appear in publicly available BBC complaints reports. Visit the Media Lens website: http://www.medialens.org ---- Eyewitness Iraq: Daily life in Baghdad May 24, 2005 Seven Oaks Magazine by Dahr Jamail http://www.sevenoaksmag.com/features/63_feat2.html It’s coming apart at the seams now in Iraq. We saw on the news today that members of the Mehdi Army in the south, the militia of Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, exchanged gunfire with members of the ING (Iraqi National Guard) who in the south are primarily, if not entirely, composed of members of the Badr Army, also a Shia group. So now we have Shia fighting Shia. Meanwhile, in Baghdad, things are just as bad. Abu Talat, my friend and interpreter, was speaking with his family who live in the al-Adhamiya district of the capital city. Just across the Tigris River from Adhamiya, which is predominantly Sunni, is the predominantly Shia Khadamiyah neighborhood. A car bomb detonated inside Khadamiyah which killed at least one ING, so people in that area began firing bullets across the Tigris into Adhamiyah. According to two sources in Adhamiyah, they confirmed there was heavy damage to several houses-broken windows, bullet pockmarked walls, etc. When people inside Adhamiyah began returning fire, a US warplane bombed a small mosque on the Adhamiyah side of the Tigris, for yet unknown reasons. Abu Talat was talking via IM with his wife as she nearly fainted because bombs and gunfire were so near their home. “What can I do,” Abu Talat asked me from a nearby computer at an internet café, “My family is in great danger and what can I do to help them?” I stared at him dumbly…there was no response. I helped find phone numbers of friends and other family members of his around Baghdad to try to go check on his family. He called them five times, constantly monitoring their situation while he was crying. Between calls he set the phone down to hold his head in his hands. Abu Talat later spoke with his sister, who informed him that Iraqi soldiers were raiding houses in her neighborhood and detaining men of “fighting age,” which if we go by the US military definition of such when they do home raids, means men roughly between the ages of 15-50 years. “They almost took my nephew,” Abu Talat told me in frustration, “But thanks to his father telling them that his son is a doctor and never leaves the home nowadays, they let him be.” Abu Talat had his two young sons go with his wife over to a relatives home so they would not be detained. One of his sons, Ahmed, is merely 14 years old. Ahmed is a soft-spoken, gentle boy who wouldn’t hurt a fly. When I was in Baghdad in February, one day we were taking tea in the home of Abu Talat. Ahmed came out and began shining the shoes of his father. “You don’t need to do this in front of Dahr,” said Abu Talat to his youngest son. “You are my father, and I am your son,” replied Ahmed, “I wish to shine your shoes. Dahr understands that this is what a son does for his father.” Abu Talat beamed and held up his hands with a huge smile on his face. My friend Aisha who is here, also an Iraqi, has a friend who lives in Adhamiyah. “He just left the day before this all happened to bring his sick son to Amman for cancer treatment,” she tells me while we sit under palm trees and a nearly full moon later that evening while having dinner with her mother. Her friend believes his son has depleted uranium (DU) poisoning. “He learned that one of the rooms of his home was destroyed by a missile shot from an American helicopter,” she added while shaking her head. Things quieted down in Baghdad after the events of the 20th, as well as the next day, relatively. However, today Abu Talat came over to me in a panic and asked for Ahmed’s mobile number. “He’s just been shot at,” he tells me as I feel the panic with my friend and begin finding the number of his son. Ahmed was walking down the street when two men demanded his ring and his mobile. When Ahmed started yelling “Thieves, Thieves,” they kicked him to the ground and shot their pistols over his head. At gunpoint, the two men commenced to loot him. Abu Talat received the information from his oldest son, then called home to find that his youngest son was home crying, but alright. “He has his exams tomorrow and now he is sleeping,” Abu Talat explains with tears in his eyes, “He is alright but terribly shaken.” This is the life in Baghdad today. This is the life of having a dear friend whose family is living in peril and his attempts to remain in contact with them from Amman. This is one family in a city of 5.5 million Iraqis, struggling to survive the brutal, chaotic, lawlessness caused by the Anglo-American occupation that has destroyed their country. Dahr Jamail is an independent journalist working in Iraq. All of his dispatches can be read at his website,http://dahrjamailiraq.com/index.php. -- Posted for educational and research purposes only, ~ in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 ~ NucNews Links and Expanded Archives - http://nucnews.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers. At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide! http://us.click.yahoo.com/EA3HyD/3MnJAA/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/ ***************************************************************** 20 IPS-English /REPEAT/POLITICS: World Cannot Afford Failure on Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 14:22:11 -0700 ROMAIPS AP WD IP /REPEAT/POLITICS: World Cannot Afford Failure on the Nuclear Front Analysis - By Praful Bidwai NEW DELHI, May 31 (IPS) - With the seventh Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) ending in abysmal failure late last week at the United Nations, the worst fears about a tiny number of influential states holding the rest of the world a hostage to their narrow interests have materialised. The conference, the second review since the NPT was indefinitely extended 10 years ago, could not even adopt a consensus document when it ended on Friday. Said Rebecca Johnson, an independent expert and director of the Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy, a non-governmental organisation which closely monitored the meeting: ''From start to finish, this conference did little more than go through the motions, and was one of the most shameful exhibitions of cynical time-wasting ...'' During the four week-long deliberations, delegates from 153 countries wrangled over procedure and could not even agree to an agenda for 10 days. They lost precious opportunities to address major issues - for example, steps towards global elimination of nuclear weapons and preventing their use, acquisition and spread. Finally, they only agreed to a procedural declaration, which enumerated the participants and meetings and indicated how they would cover the financial costs. That ended the conference. This dismal outcome betrays the hope -- and the widespread popular aspiration -- that the world's nations would deliver on the solemn commitments they made 35 years ago by adopting the NPT: to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and to abolish them. The failure is all the more grave because it comes one-and-a-half decades after the Cold War's end -- which robs nuclear weapons of even the fig leaf of a rationale -- and after disclosures about the transgressions by North Korea and Iran of existing nuclear control regimes. The NPT was founded on a grand bargain. The bulk of the world's states would foreswear nuclear weapons and accept a regime of physical inspections to ensure that nuclear materials are not diverted to military programmes. In return, the five nuclear weapons-states (NWSs) would earnestly initiate negotiations to eliminate them, and meanwhile, transfer no nuclear material/technology to non-NWSs. The vast majority of the world's non-NWSs have abided by the bargain. But the NWSs have failed to move towards disarming their nuclear arsenals, and indulged in clandestine transfers of nuclear materials and know-how to allies such as Israel. In the process, and by again refusing to commit themselves to disarmament at the latest conference, the NWSs risk undermining that bargain - to the detriment of the entire world. Thus, at least three new nuclear powers have emerged (Israel, India and Pakistan, none of them NPT signatories), and possibly a fourth one (North Korea). At the latest conference, the NWSs refused critical scrutiny of their record since the 2000 review, in which they accepted disarmament as an obligation and made an ''unambiguous'' commitment to nuclear elimination. Instead, they paid lip-service to disarmament as a ''moral'' and ''political'' goal. However, the International Court of Justice clarified in a landmark judgment in 1996 that nuclear weapons are incompatible with international law, and the NWSs are legally obliged to complete talks for their total elimination. The United States was the worst offender here. Argues Daryl Kimball of the Washington-based Arms Control Association: ''The arrogant and clumsy U.S. strategy (which was the brainchild of former Under Secretary of State John Bolton) has most certainly reinforced the view of the majority of countries that the U.S. and (other NWSs) do not intend to live up to their NPT-related disarmament commitments.'' Thus, the conference did not support U.S. proposals on strengthening the NPT's non- proliferation elements. Worse, there has been a weakening of other states' will to fulfill their treaty obligations. The U.S. strategy is driven by several considerations: paranoid fears, especially after Sept. 11, about security and North America's vulnerability to weapons of mass destruction (WMD); the profoundly mistaken Bush administration's view that nuclear weapons are essential to contain WMD threats; pressure from the military-industrial complex for raising defence spending and creating new uses for nuclear weapons; and the U.S. aspiration to remain the world's sole superpower with an unparalleled nuclear might. Washington is planning to modify existing bomb designs to make ''bunker-busters''. It has accelerated deployment-oriented research on space-based ''Star Wars'' weapons. And it accepts no constraint on its nuclear programme, even as it advocates aggressive means to control the spread of WMDs. One example is the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), under which signatories co-operate to halt dangerous shipments, especially to ''rogue states''. But this has two major limitations. The PSI has recruited just 21 active participants. And it leaves out of the net ''friendly'' or ''cooperative'' regimes like Pakistan, which are useful to Washington's ''war on terrorism'' -- despite damning evidence of proliferation by the AQ Khan network. The U.S. has no coherent strategy to deal with the crises caused by disclosures about North Korea and Iran's nuclear activities. It threatens military "action" against them and has reportedly drawn up plans for strikes. Yet, it does not seem to have calculated the enormous costs of such action. While Washington has hesitantly engaged North Korea in talks, it has not offered the right economic concessions to roll back its nuclear programme. As for Iran, it has left the negotiations to Britain, France and Germany. President George W. Bush confesses the the U.S. sanctions strategy has not worked: ''We've sanctioned ourselves out of influence with Iran.'' Yet, Washington has proved blind to its own limitations. ''U.S. policy is driven by a peculiar hubris,'' says Achin Vanaik, professor of political science at Delhi University. ''This views (North) America as exceptional; it can do no wrong. (North) American nuclear weapons are good nukes, they will be used to good ends; others' nukes are bad. This exceptionalism is widely shared across the political spectrum.'' While the most culpable state, the U.S. alone cannot be blamed for the conference's failure, none of the other four NWSs showed any leadership to end the impasse. They hid behind Washington's skirts. India, Pakistan and Israel adopted a cynically distant attitude to the conference although they said they oppose proliferation. Iran too adopted a devious strategy to keep its nuclear option open. This meant averting discussion of the nuclear fuel cycle question, and the issue of withdrawal from the NPT. What happens when countries develop nuclear technology to the threshold of a weapons capability, and then decide to withdraw from the treaty to become a nuclear power? The NPT Review Conference failed to address these vital issues of global concern. It was equally silent on the early entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty - one of the 13 steps agreed in 2000. It was plain, says Acronym Institute's Johnson that the participating ''governments lacked the political will and backbone even to have an honest debate about these issues.'' The world could end up paying a very heavy price if the NPT consensus breaks down. Unless the NWSs lead by example, they will fail to persuade the 30 to 40 states that can have the potential to acquire nuclear weapons (if they try hard enough), not to do so. Meanwhile, the world remains insecure and vulnerable to mass destruction from the 27,000 nuclear weapons still in place, thousands of them on hair-trigger alert. It simply cannot afford a failure on the nuclear front. (END/IPS/AP/WD/IP/PB-RDR/SI/05) = 05310431 ORP002 NNNN ***************************************************************** 21 Bellona: Multipurpose Akula-class nuclear submarine under repairs in Severodvinsk Akula-class nuclear submarine K-317 ”Panther” was placed in the dock of Sevmash plant in Severodvinsk, Arkhangelsk region, Sevmash’s press-secretry Mikhail Starozhilov said to ITAR-TASS. 2005-05-30 19:10 He added that it was not clear what kind of repairs would be done on the submarine as the Russian navy officials were not clear about the financing. K-317 had spent several years in the harbour near the plant due to the navy financial difficulties. Nuclear submarine K-317 “Panther” project 971, Akula class, entered active service in December 1990 and was based at Gadzhievo base. The “beast” division of the Northern fleet consists of six Akula-class submarines: Snow Leiopard [Bars] , Panther [Pantera], Wolf [Volk], Leopard, Tiger [Tigr], Boar [Vepr]. Seven submarines of this class are also based at the Pasific Fleet. The Project 971 attack submarine multi-purpose submarine is capable of strikes against groups of hostile ships and against coastal installations. Some 110 meters long, the Akula is double-hulled with considerable distance between the outer and inner hulls to reduce the possible damage to the inner hull. The hull is constructed of low magnetic steel, and divided into eight compartments, and features a distinctive high aft fin. The Project 971, using a steel hull, was initiated in 1976 when it became evident that existing industrial infrastructure was inadequate to mass produce the expensive titanium hulls of the Project 945 Sierra class. The main machinery consists of a VM-5 pressure water reactor rated at 190MW with a GT3A turbine developing 35MW The propulsion system provides a maximum submerged speed of 33 knots and a surface speed of 10 knots. The submarine is rated for a diving depth to 600m. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 22 Salt Lake Tribune: Dyer: Situation probably not as bad as it seems Opinion Article Last Updated: 05/29/2005 11:24:23 PM Gwynne Dyer LONDON - "If we could get out of this conference without a major blowup, we would be doing well," said Matt Martin, deputy director of the British-American Security Information Council, when the review conference on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty opened on May 2. There was not even a final document when it closed on Friday, but nobody actually stormed out vowing never to return, so maybe we are doing well. Not nearly well enough, however. These review conferences have been held every five years since the NPT came into effect in 1970, and the last one, in 2000, seemed to be making real progress. It agreed on "Thirteen Steps" to prevent the further spread of nuclear weapons and to hold the existing nuclear-weapons powers to their commitment to eliminate their nuclear arsenals in the long run. But that was then, and this is a very different time. President George W. Bush, elected only six months later, promptly canceled the United States' signature on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and started pushing various nuclear war-fighting technologies like new mini-nuclear weapons for bunker-busting. He dismissed the "Thirteen Steps" as merely an "historical document," and reneged on the U.S. pledge to sign a verifiable accord ending the production of new fissile material for nuclear weapons (though you would have thought that the current U.S. supply was enough to last it for a hundred years). North Korea, panicked by its inclusion in President Bush's "axis of evil" in early 2002 and by loose talk in Washington about "regime change," pulled out of the non-proliferation treaty and began claiming that it had, or would soon have, nuclear weapons. Whether that is true remains open to question, but the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 confirmed Kim Jong-il's belief that only nuclear weapons could reliably deter a U.S. attack. In February, North Korea flatly stated that it had nuclear weapons and refused to return to the six-power talks that were intended to persuade it to drop its nuclear plans. Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, called Pyongyang's actions "a cry for help," adding that "North Korea has, I think, been seeking a dialogue with the United States . . . through their usual policy of nuclear blackmail, nuclear brinkmanship, to force the other parties to engage them." They are hopelessly inept at diplomacy, in other words, but basically they want a deal. It's probably true, but nobody in power in Washington believes it. Nor do they believe Iran's assurances that its uranium enrichment program is purely to fuel peaceful nuclear power reactors. After all, the Iranians have lived under the threat of Israeli nuclear strikes for around 40 years, and latterly their inclusion in Mr. Bush's "axis of evil" has led them to fear a direct American attack as well. So the United States has been itching to drag Iran before the U.N. Security Council and impose sanctions on it. And meanwhile, the Bush administration continues to pursue its goal of a new generation of mini-nukes (despite Congress' rejection of the project last year) under cover of the so-called Reliable Replacement Warhead program. Britain plans to replace its existing Trident missiles and probably its nuclear warheads as well. And neither country will allow Israel's unacknowledged nuclear weapons to be discussed in non-proliferation talks. It's a mess, with plenty of blame all round, and it meant that the 2005 NPT review conference was bound to fail. The non-nuclear countries of what used to be called the Third World insisted that the priority was for the existing nuclear powers to start living up to their promises to eliminate nuclear weapons from their arsenals. The main Western nuclear powers swept that aside, saying that the priority was to prevent further proliferation of nuclear weapons. They were both right, of course, but they were unable even to agree on an agenda until the third week of the conference, and it closes with absolutely nothing accomplished. How bad is that? Although America and Russia continue to possess more than 90 percent of the world's nuclear weapons between them, the actual number of warheads in their arsenals has fallen by more than half in the past 15 years, and is scheduled to shrink by many thousands more in coming years as they rationalize their stockpiles. The more "usable" mini-nukes beloved of Bush administration strategists have not yet been authorized by Congress, and would take more years than the administration has left to design and build. Even if Iran and/or North Korea should acquire a token number of nuclear weapons for deterrent purposes, neither regime has shown the urge for self-immolation that would be needed for it to launch those weapons, in the certain knowledge that instant annihilation would follow in the form of a prompt and overwhelming nuclear counter-strike. And even if they did get nuclear weapons, it is not clear why other countries in their region would feel compelled to follow their example. The situation is not good, but it is probably less bad than it seems. Gwynne Dyer's latest book is Future: Tense - The Coming Global Order, published by McClelland and Stewart. © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 23 Japan Times: A blow to the NPT Tuesday, May 31, 2005 EDITORIAL Thirty-five years ago, governments acknowledged the threat posed by the spread of nuclear weapons and agreed on a Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). Negotiations were spurred by the fear that the number of nuclear powers was set to expand exponentially; rather than a world of five nuclear "haves," there might be dozens. The NPT worked: Today, there are still only five nuclear-weapons states, and there are just three "gray states" that are believed to have weapons outside the NPT framework. In recent years, the treaty's loopholes have become increasingly apparent. Fortunately, the NPT has a mechanism that allows for periodic review. The most recent such conference just concluded. Unfortunately, it was a failure. Deep divisions among treaty signatories prevented any action to plug those holes. The collapse of the review conference does not herald the end of the NPT, however. It does mean that concerned governments must redouble efforts to find consensus on ways to strengthen the global nonproliferation regime. It is estimated that there are over 30,000 nuclear weapons scattered throughout the world. Five countries have the overwhelming majority of those weapons: the United States and Russia have most of those, but China, Britain and France are also among the NPT nuclear-weapons states. Three other states -- India, Pakistan and Israel -- are widely assumed to have arsenals of their own. North Korea and Iran are trying to build their own nuclear weapons. The NPT aims to reconcile three sets of interests. It is intended to halt the stem of nuclear weapons and related technologies, to facilitate the spread of peaceful nuclear technologies and to bring about the eventual elimination of existing nuclear arsenals. Two bargains are embodied in the treaty. In one, countries forgo the right to develop weapons in exchange for access to peaceful nuclear technology. In the other, nuclear "have nots" accept permanent nonnuclear status in exchange for the commitment of the nuclear-weapons states to eliminate their own stockpiles. Every five years, the treaty signatories -- currently there are 188 -- meet to review the status of the NPT and the global nonproliferation regime. The most recent conference concluded last week in New York and it was an unmitigated failure. Despite the imminent threat of proliferation by Pyongyang and Tehran, and the nuclear black market that has been exposed by the revelations about the activities of Pakistan's A.Q. Khan, treaty members could not agree on priorities. Nonnuclear-weapons states insist that the "haves" cut their nuclear arsenals. The nuclear-weapons states, in particular the U.S., demand that the group focus on the activities of Iran and North Korea. The gap proved unbridgeable. The seeming lack of progress in dismantling the U.S. arsenal -- which in fact has been cut by 13,000 weapons since the 1980s -- undermined any willingness by nuclear "have nots" to accept tighter restrictions on their access to nuclear technology. The conference concluded in acrimony. Unable to even agree on an agenda until after three weeks of meetings -- and this followed several equally fruitless preparatory conferences -- the review conference ended without even issuing a chairman's statement. Mr. Mohamed Elbaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, was blunt: "Absolutely nothing" came out of the meeting. The conference failure does not spell the end of the NPT. At the 1995 review conference, signatories agreed to its indefinite expansion. The breakdown last week does not affect that. The nuclear nonproliferation regime is bigger than the NPT itself and the regime has proven remarkably adaptable. As loopholes have been identified, fixes have been prepared. After the discovery in the 1990s that Iraq had made considerable progress advancing its nuclear ambitions, the IAEA developed the Additional Protocols that strengthened the agency's safeguard mechanisms. Revelations surrounding A.Q. Khan prompted the creation of the Proliferation Security Initiative, which aims to interdict illegal transfers of nuclear weapons and related materials. Finally, the prospect of terrorists acquiring such weapons prompted last year's passage of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1540, which obligates all U.N. member states to strengthen laws to stem the spread of weapons of mass destruction. These steps have helped reinvigorate efforts to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction. More must be done, of course, and concerns about nuclear apartheid must be addressed. The world will never be free of the threat of nuclear annihilation until all nuclear arsenals have been dismantled. But hopes for that day must not become the enemy of more pragmatic, incremental efforts to build a safer world. The Japan Times: May 31, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 24 csmonitor.com: Nuclear Holes to Be Filled Commentary > The Monitor's View from the May 31, 2005 edition The Monitor's View Pessimists of the world, take heart. Most nations came together in May with the goal of fixing the loopholes in a 35-year-old treaty that's worked pretty well to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Optimists, take heed. This conference, a twice-a-decade affair to review the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), ended last Friday with no agreement on which loopholes to fix. The loopholes are serious and many. The big nuclear powers don't suffer from not seeking disarmament, as the treaty calls for; North Korea was able to easily exit the treaty and make such weapons with no penalty; Iran was able to cheat on the NPT for two decades and, after being caught, is still allowed to make bomb-grade nuclear material; and three non-NPT signatories, India, Pakistan, and Israel, have the bomb despite a potential for war in their regions. For two of those problems, Iran and North Korea, the US is relying on a coalition of nations to attempt a solution through negotiations. It's also recognized the NPT's failings and set up the Proliferation Security Initiative, a multinational effort to stop any ship, plane, or train suspected of carrying nuclear materials. A Libya-bound ship containing nuclear related material, for instance, got caught in 2003 under this dragnet. Short of fixing the NPT, these US-led enforcement efforts send a strong warning to any nation to think twice before moving toward making, testing, or exporting nuclear weapons. The NPT's grand bargain still holds: Nuclear nations must move to reduce their nuclear arsenals while nonnuclear nations agree not to seek the bomb in return for gaining access to nuclear power plants. But addressing the NPT's shortcomings will probably need to happen outside it, led by the one nation with the biggest stake in preventing loose nukes getting in terrorist hands. www.csmonitor.com | Copyright © 2005 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 25 asahi.com: EDITORIAL: Nuclear nonproliferation 05/31/2005 Fresh diplomatic efforts needed to kickstart the NPT. The review conference on the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) held in New York came to a close without any agreement being reached. The conference was held under difficult conditions. North Korea, which had bolted from the treaty, says it has nuclear weapons. Though Iran is still a party to the treaty, there is persistent suspicion that it is engaged in nuclear development. Furthermore, the nuclear black market appears to be spreading ominously. Representatives of nearly 190 countries gathered to discuss implementation of the nuclear nonproliferation regime, which has many loopholes. The review conference was assigned the job of finding a way to reconstruct, if only slightly, this important treaty. In the face of a disappointing outcome, Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), expressed regret by saying, ``The conference after a full month ended up where we started.'' Conference participants were highly critical of the Bush administration's policies. They said the U.S. government had put up major obstacles by not stopping the development of new types of nuclear weapons, turning its back on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and refusing to listen to the opinion of non-nuclear countries. But other factors came into play, too. While the United States mounted strong criticisms of North Korea and Iran, Tehran stood its ground in insisting on its right to the peaceful use of atomic energy, and Egypt supported Iran's position. Conference members also felt frustrated at the U.S. policy on Israel, which has refused to be a party to the NPT even though it is a practical nuclear power. The failure of the review conference will not lead directly to the collapse of nuclear nonproliferation arrangements. There is no doubt, however, that a good opportunity was missed for regaining the public's trust in the nonproliferation regime. If the international community is divided, there is no hope for the nuclear nonproliferation regime. Countries of the world should keep that fact firmly in mind and make a fresh start in their diplomatic efforts. Countries that possess nuclear weapons should, first of all, demonstrate their seriousness about nuclear disarmament, if only for requesting the cooperation of non-nuclear power to prevent more nations from acquiring the technology. If the United States ratifies the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, it will be helpful in prodding China and other countries that have not yet ratified it to do likewise. Eliminating nuclear tests will put a halt to the growing number of nuclear powers. That, we believe, is in the interest of the United States. It will also be necessary to plug all the loopholes in the nonproliferation regime. This can best be accomplished by working through the United Nations and the IAEA. Measures need to be drawn up to disallow countries to bolt from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty whenever they feel like it. In addition, more countries need to accept the Additional Protocol for strengthening the IAEA's power to undertake nuclear inspections. These are among key tasks that were not tackled by the review conference. These are matters that must be discussed intensively at existing international forums. Decisions must be reached on these issues as soon as possible. If the problems concerning nuclear development by North Korea and Iran continue to fester, the nuclear nonproliferation regime will suffer a fatal blow. The road to de-nuclearization must be tackled at the six-way talks with North Korea and through negotiations between Iran and European countries. Nor can discussion on the problem of Israel be put off any longer. Talk on disarmament in the Middle East and abandoning weapons of mass destruction in the region should be part of the continuing peacemaking process in that part of the world. If the world continues to beset lack of action by the review conference, the future of the nuclear nonproliferation regime will only grow darker. -The Asahi Shimbun, May 30(IHT/Asahi: May 31,2005) ***************************************************************** 26 NRC: NRC to Hold Conference With Arizona Public Service Co. for Palo Verde News Release - Region IV - 2005-02 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV No. IV-05-023 May 26, 2005 CONTACT: Victor Dricks Phone: 817-860-8128 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov conference with representatives of Arizona Public Service Co. on Wednesday, June 1, to discuss an apparent violation of NRC requirements at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station. APS operates the facility, located near Wintersburg, Ariz. The conference will be held from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. in the NRCs Region IV office in Arlington, Texas. The public is invited to observe the meeting and will have one or more opportunities to communicate with the NRC after the business portion, but before the meeting is adjourned. Persons interested in participating in the conference via telephone can do so by calling (800) 952-9677 and dialing extension 475 to be transferred to the meeting. An NRC inspection of Palo Verde this past winter discovered that changes made to the plants emergency action levels apparently decreased the effectiveness of the plants emergency plan. The changes removed direct use of measured radiation levels for the plants classification of Site Area Emergency and General Emergency levels. Emergency preparedness is very important to protecting the publics health and safety, said NRC Region IV Administrator Bruce S. Mallett. Although the company corrected this problem when it was brought to their attention, its important for us to discuss with APS how this happened and how they will prevent any recurrence. The company asked the NRC for the opportunity to provide its perspective on the apparent violation and to offer any other information that they believe the NRC should take into consideration in making an enforcement decision. No decision on the apparent violations or any enforcement action will be made at the conference. Those decisions will be made later by NRC officials. Last revised Friday, May 27, 2005 ***************************************************************** 27 Guardian Unlimited: Moral and political questions over nuclear energy Letters Wednesday June 1, 2005 Max Hastings' arguments are wrong in many ways (Nuclear power is the future, May 30). Wrong on the economics (insurance, for instance, is never included as civil nuclear power is uninsurable); wrong on the technology (recent accidents in Japan have shown it still to be as error-prone as other technologies); and wrong on the security issues (it is impossible to separate nuclear power and nuclear weapons technology reliably). Above all, though, he simply ignores the moral question. Nuclear power is the ultimate non-sustainable technology. It consigns future generations to deal with wastes that we have no way of dealing with ourselves. What gives a generation that lives in a particular part of the world for a couple of decades either side of the millennium the right to inflict this on future generations, potentially for thousands of years, just to satisfy our bloated energy demands? If the Romans had had nuclear power, Hadrian's wall would not be a tourist attraction but a military exclusion zone. Edward Milford Renewable Energy World Putting new reactors at existing sites would speed the planning process, enable the use of existing power lines and reduce site acquisition, management and security costs. Using off-the-shelf designs and a rolling programme, starting where reactors have already closed, would reduce construction times and costs. Hastings' vision of life in 50 years' time neglected to explain that by then power will probably be from clean fusion reactors. He also did not men tion that much of this country's stockpile of nuclear waste comes from past military programmes. A replacement generation of nuclear fission power stations would add only 10% to our existing stocks. Steve Bolter Gestingthorpe, Essex The politics of nuclear power are centralised, expert-driven and remote from the people. Alternative energy sources, especially when microgenerated, can be decentralised and under the control of local communities. Nuclear energy can only ever give electrical power to the people; alternative energy can give them political power as well. Prof Andrew Dobson Open University Paul Mobbs, who gave an excellent presentation to the Swansea science cafe last week, suggested that if the nuclear sector were to expand to provide 30% of world energy, then the uranium supply would last only 20 years. We are energy junkies; the usual treatment for addicts is to wean them from their fix, not provide ever more means to satisfy their cravings. E Ford Ammanford, Carmar Hastings would have some credibility if he offered to have a nuclear power station near his house. From where I live I can see two nuclear power stations, the chimney of an oilfired power station and two wind farms. There is no doubt which are the mostbeautiful as well as the most environmentally friendly. Norman Lamond Rothesay, Isle of Bute [UP] Guardian Unlimited ż Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 28 NRC: NRC to Discuss Performance for Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant News Release - Region IV - 2005-02 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region IV No. IV-05-024 May 31, 2005 CONTACT: Victor Dricks Phone: 817-860-8128 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of Pacific Gas & Electric Co. on June 7 to discuss the results of the agencys assessment of safety performance at the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant. The facility is located in San Luis Obispo, Calif. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 6:30 p.m. at the Embassy Suites Hotel, 333 Madonna Road, San Luis Obispo. Before the session is adjourned, NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public on the plants safety performance, as well as the agencys role in ensuring safe operation of the facility. This meeting gives us a chance to discuss our annual safety assessment with the company, local officials and residents who live near Diablo Canyon, said Region IV Administrator Bruce S. Mallett. We know community interest in Diablo Canyon is strong, and we encourage members of the community to attend our meeting. The NRC staff will address any questions the public may have and make available the latest information about the plant. Overall, Diablo Canyon operated safely during 2004. The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators to assess nuclear plant performance. The colors start with green and increase to white, yellow, and red, according to the safety significance of the issues involved. All of the plants inspection findings and performance indicators were rated green during 2004. However, there were multiple findings of very low safety significance indicating some issues remain with the sites problem identification and resolution and corrective action programs. The NRC will focus attention on these areas through its baseline inspection program during 2005. Baseline inspections are performed by the NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists from the Region IV office and the agencys headquarters in Rockville, Md. A letter sent from the NRC Region IV Office in Arlington, Texas, to plant officials will serve as the basis for the meeting. It is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/diab_2004q4.pdf [PDF Icon] . Current information for Diablo Canyon Unit 1 is available on the NRC web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/DIAB1/diab1_chart.html. Information for Unit 2 is available at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/DIAB2/diab2_chart.html. Last revised Tuesday, May 31, 2005 ***************************************************************** 29 BBC: Sweden shuts down atomic reactor Last Updated: Wednesday, 1 June, 2005 [Engineer Gunnar Enkvist shuts down Barseback] At midnight on Tuesday, technicians closed Barseback down Sweden has closed its Barseback 2 nuclear reactor. two years behind schedule, and 25 years after Swedes voted to stop using atomic energy. Danes celebrated the shutdown, as Barseback lies just across the Baltic Sea from their capital, Copenhagen. Sweden took the decision to phase out nuclear power in 1980, when anti-nuclear protest was at its peak. However, concerns about global warming have led many to reconsider the case for nuclear energy. Although Denmark remains nuclear free, Sweden's northern neighbour Finland is building its fifth nuclear reactor, due to come online in 2009. The Swedish state company Vattenfall, which runs Barseback, says it will invest SEK8bn ($1.09bn) to build the biggest wind farm in northern Europe. It hopes it will produce two terawatt hours per year from 2010. Barseback produced double that, and Sweden used 148 terawatts hours last year. A third of Barseback's 348 employees will keep their jobs for the time being, and the plant will not be knocked down until at least 2020. Price rises Recent polls should some 80% of Swedes say they want to keep nuclear power, which covers half of the country's electricity needs. [Barseback nuclear reactor in Sweden] Most Swedes now want to keep nuclear power The majority of Swedes say they fear they will have to import energy from carbon dioxide-emitting coal and gas power plants elsewhere in Europe, as a result of energy shortages. There have also been warnings that power costs are on course for sharp rises. "There is a lack of electricity in the Nordic market and this will only contribute to that," Kalle Lindholm, spokesman for Sweden's power industry group Swedenergy, told Reuters news agency. But the authorities say measures to increase energy from renewable sources to replace the capacity lost through the closure of Barseback 1 and 2 have been completed. In the 1980 referendum, people voted on three alternative ways of phasing out nuclear power - the vote gave no option to continue nuclear energy. As a result, Barseback 1 was closed in 1999. ***************************************************************** 30 NRC: NRC Publishes Licensing, Inspection and Annual Fees for Fiscal Year 2005 News Release - 2005-08 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 05-085 May 25, 2005 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is amending its regulations to reflect the licensing, inspection and annual fees it will charge applicants and licensees for fiscal year (FY) 2005. The agency is required by Congress to recover for the Treasury nearly all of its annual appropriated budget through two types of fees. One is for specific NRC services, such as licensing and inspection activities, that apply to a specific license; this fee is calculated using an hourly rate. The other is an annual fee paid by all licensees, which recovers generic regulatory expenses and other costs not recovered through fees for specific services. These fees are contained in NRC regulations 10 CFR Part 170 (fees for licensing and inspection services) and 10 CFR Part 171 (annual fees). These fees are paid to the U.S. Treasury and go into the general fund. By law, the NRC must recover 90 percent of its budget for FY 2005 (Oct. 1, 2004 - Sept. 30, 2005) from fees, less the amount ($68.5 million) appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund for high-level waste activities. The total amount to be recovered in FY 2005 is $540.7 million, about $4.6 million less than last year, when the mandate was to recover 92 percent of the agencys budget. After accounting for carryover and billing adjustments, the net amount to be recovered is approximately $538 million. Under the final rule, the hourly rates used to assess Part 170 fees will change to allow the funds recovered to reflect more accurately the resources NRC expends providing licensee-specific services. The final rule also reflects higher salaries and benefits resulting from the Government-wide pay raise. The new hourly rates are $205 for the Nuclear Reactor Safety Program and $197 for the Nuclear Materials and Waste Safety Program. Fees not recovered under Part 170 will still be recovered under Part 171 to collect the 90 percent of the budget for FY 2005. Instead of an across-the-board percentage increase, annual fees for FY 2005 have been determined under the re-baselining method. This method reflects NRC budget changes for certain classes of licensees. Re-baselining fees will result in decreased annual fees compared to FY 2004 for five classes of licenses (power reactors, test and research reactors, spent fuel storage/reactor decommissioning, rare earth mills, and transportation), and increased annual fees for two classes (fuel facilities and uranium recovery). Most materials users will have increased annual fees. The final FY 2005 annual fees include the following: Class/category of licenses FY 2005 Annual fee Operating Power Reactors (including Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning annual fee) $3,155,000 Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning $159,000 Test and Research Reactors (Nonpower Reactors) $59,500 High Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility $5,449,000 Low Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility $1,632,000 UF6 Conversion Facility $699,000 Rare Earth Mills $73,700 Transportation: Users/Fabricators $80,900 Users Only $4,300 Typical Materials Users: Radiographers $12,800 Well Loggers $4,100 Gauge Users (Category 3P) $2,500 The final rule was published today in the Federal Register, and becomes effective July 25. A proposed rule on this subject was published February 22, with a request for public comment. The agency received 16 comments, which are summarized, along with the agency's responses, in the final rule Federal Register notice. Last revised Friday, May 27, 2005 ***************************************************************** 31 St. Petersburg Times: Former Chernobyl Pilot Soars Above His Obstacles - #1074, Tuesday, May 31, 2005 By Lyuba Pronina STAFF WRITER Photo by VLADIMIR FILONOV / SPT MOSCOW - If there are men who have gone through fire and water, Nikolai Melnik is certainly one of them. Once a test pilot, Melnik lives in Spain, where he has received a royal award for his efforts in aerial firefighting. His most dangerous mission, however, came in 1986, when he was sent to help measure radiation at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant after one of its reactors exploded. Making about 40 sorties to the area, he was hit by radiation 10 times above the permitted level. Predictably, medical complications ensued. "In 1994, I had two operations. ... Doctors told me to stay away from drinking and smoking, and lead a normal life," Melnik said as he lit a cigarette. "A month later, I decided I would live the way I like, not limiting myself in anything." For the past decade, Melnik, 51, has been living comfortably with his wife and son in a house in Alicante, Spain, fighting fires and helping out in emergency situations. Living what he calls a calm and stable life in Spain, Melnik said he would trade it back for the years when he did "real man's work." "If I was given what I had back in the Soviet times, I would not have gone to Spain," he said. "What I do in Spain now is a game for kids. I used to do serious risk-related work." Back in 1986, working as a test pilot with the Kamov helicopter design bureau, Melnik was summoned to Moscow to prepare for the Chernobyl mission. However, it was only on the way to Borispol Airport in Kiev that he was told what he would be doing. Melnik's task was to place radiation sensors in the reactor by dropping them with a 200-meter cable from his helicopter. "I just thought, 'Woe is my youth!' when we were told what we were about to do," Melnik said. "I was 32 years old." A few days before flying to Kiev, he was practicing the maneuver he would have to perform at Chernobyl at the Kamov facility in southeast Moscow: dropping a heavy weight into a small circle. "It looked like a preparation for some official show," he said. Melnik's interest in aviation followed his father, who was among the first pilots to test-fly the MiG-9, the first jet fighter made by the famous design bureau after World War II. In 1972, Melnik started off his career as a pilot flying the Czechoslovak L-29 trainer jet, later progressing to the MiG-17 and MiG-21 jet fighters. Five years later, he was forced to switch to civilian planes, having been decommissioned after he suffered partial hearing loss in his left ear due to a sudden depressurization in the cockpit at 7,000 meters. Melnik moved to Aeroflot, where he got his first taste of flying helicopters. He flew various types of craft, including the workhorse Mi-8 and superheavy transport Mi-26, starting at Kamov in 1982. After the Soviet Union broke up, Melnik, who had been named a Hero of the Soviet Union for his work at Chernobyl, had to make a move again, and he set up a cargo airline in Kiev. "When [the country] broke up, I realized that as a Hero of the Soviet Union, I would either be wearing a dirty jacket and begging like a babushka, or have to get myself a new job," Melnik said. In 1993, Melnik and a Bulgarian partner set up the airline in Ukraine, shipping cargo for DHL and UPS on Antonov 24s and Kamov helicopters. The business did well enough for the Spanish company Helicopteros Del Sureste to approach him in 1995 about obtaining some helicopters. "When [the Spanish firm's representatives] came over in 1995, we had complete disorder here in the country," Melnik said. "People were pulling the wool over their eyes for months, taking them [horseriding] and to saunas, but never gave them business. In 1 1/2 months, we found six Mi-8s and two Ka-32s for them." Melnik and his family moved to Spain, where he became a pilot and instructor for Helicopteros Del Sureste, one of the country's largest helicopter operators, and a link to Kamov, which supplies Ka-32 helicopters to the Spanish company. Business between the two firms has taken off. Melnik has 13,400 recorded flight hours, 3,000 of them in Spain. He has trained 25 Spanish pilots, and in 1998 he received his award from Spain's King Juan Carlos for firefighting but shies away when asked about it. "He is not a man of many words," said Luis Alzira, a pilot he trained. "He would not go about being proud. He just does it because it's his job and he likes it. "But he is a true professional with lots of experience, and one you can learn a lot from. When you want to try something new, he shows how to do it and has faith in you." [Copyright] copyright The St. Petersburg Times 1993-2004 ***************************************************************** 32 NRC: RIN 3150-AH69 Delegation Changes FR Doc 05-10710 [Federal Register: May 31, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 103)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 30896-30897] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31my05-3] AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is revising its regulations to change the references from Deputy Executive Director for Management Services to Deputy Executive Director for Information Services and Administration and Chief Information Officer. The revision is necessary to reflect a recent realignment in the Office of the Executive Director for Operations. This final rule is necessary to inform the public of organizational changes within the NRC. DATES: Effective May 31, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alzonia Shepard, Regulations Specialist, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Telephone (301) 415-6864, e-mail aws1@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 6, 2005, the NRC announced a realignment of functions of the Office of the Executive Director for Operations. With the realignment, some of the functions assigned previously to the Deputy Executive Director for Management Services are assigned to the Deputy Executive Director for Information Services and Administration and Chief Information Officer. Because these amendments constitute minor administrative changes to the [[Page 30897]] regulations concerning agency organization, the notice and comment provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act do not apply under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). The amendments are effective upon publication in the Federal Register. Good cause exists under 5 U.S.C 553(d) to dispense with the usual 30-day delay in the effective date of the final rule, because the amendments are of a minor and administrative nature dealing with changes to certain CFR sections, which do not require action by any person or entity regulated by the NRC. Further, the final rule does not change the substantive responsibilities of any person or entity regulated by the NRC. Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion The NRC has determined that this final rule is the type of action described in categorical exclusion 10 CFR 51.22(c)(2). Therefore, neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental assessment has been prepared for this final rule. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This final rule does not contain new or amended information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the Office of Management and Budget, approval numbers 3150-0053; 3150-0044; 3150-0010; 3150-0130; 3150-0020; and 3150-0011. Public Protection Notification The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request for information of an information collection requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently valid OMB control number. List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 10 Administrative practice and procedure, Classified information, Government employees, Security measures. 0 For the reasons set forth in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is adopting the following amendments to 10 CFR part 10. PART 10--CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR ACCESS TO RESTRICTED DATA OR NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION OR AN EMPLOYMENT CLEARANCE 0 1. The authority citation for Part 10 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 145, 161, 68 Stat. 942, 948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2165, 2201); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); E.O. 10450, 3 CFR parts 1949-1953 COMP., p. 936, as amended; E.O. 10865, 3 CFR 1959-1963 COMP., p. 398, as amended; 3 CFR Table 4; E.O. 12968, 3 CFR 1995 COM., p. 396. PART 10--[AMENDED] 0 2. In 10 CFR Part 10, revise the phrase ``Deputy Executive Director for Management Services'' to read ``Deputy Executive Director for Information Services and Administration and Chief Information Officer'' wherever it appears. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of May, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Luis A. Reyes, Executive Director for Operations. [FR Doc. 05-10710 Filed 5-27-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 33 NRC: Portland General Electric Company; Notice of Termination of FR Doc E5-2734 [Federal Register: May 31, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 103)] [Notices] [Page 30974-30975] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31my05-78] Trojan Nuclear Plant Facility Operating License No. NPF-1 AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of termination of the Portland General Electric Company (PGE) Trojan Nuclear Plant (TNP) Facility Operating (Possession Only) License, No. NPF-1. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is noticing the termination of the TNP Facility Operating (Possession Only) License, No. NPF-1, (NRC Docket No. 50-344), located near Portland, Oregon. Background: The TNP facility is located in Columbia County, Oregon, approximately 42 miles north of [[Page 30975]] Portland, Oregon. TNP began commercial operation in May 1976. The reactor output was rated at 3411 MWt with an approximate net electrical output rating of 1130 MWe. The nuclear steam supply system was a four- loop pressurized water reactor designed by Westinghouse Electric Corporation. TNP was shut down for the last time on November 9, 1992. In August 1999, PGE submitted its License Termination Plan (LTP) for the TNP facility. Under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.82(a)(10), the NRC approved the LTP by license amendment dated February 12, 2001. PGE conducted decommissioning activities at TNP in accordance with the approved LTP from February 2001 to December 2004. In accordance with the approved LTP, the licensee conducted final status surveys (FSSs) to demonstrate that the facility and site meet the criteria for unrestricted release as presented in 10 CFR 20.1402. Details of the FSS results were submitted to the NRC in 10 separate FSS reports (FSSRs). PGE submitted an application for termination of the TNP Facility Operating (Possession Only) License, No. NPF-1, on December 20, 2004. The application states that PGE has completed remaining radiological decommissioning and FSSs of the TNP facility and site in accordance with the NRC-approved LTP, and the FSSs demonstrate that the facility and site meet the criteria for decommissioning and release of the site for unrestricted use that are stipulated in 10 CFR part 20, subpart E. The NRC conducted a number of performance-based in-process inspections of the licensee's FSS program during the decommissioning process. The purpose of the inspections was to verify that the FSS was being conducted in accordance with of the commitments made by the licensee in the LTP, and to evaluate the quality of the FSS by reviewing the FSS procedures, methodology, equipment, surveyor training and qualifications, document quality control, and survey data supporting the FSSRs. In addition, the NRC conducted a number of independent confirmatory surveys to verify the FSS results obtained and reported by the licensee. Confirmatory surveys consisted of surface scans for beta and gamma radiation, direct measurements for total beta activity, and collection of smear samples for determining removable radioactivity levels. The NRC staff reviewed the FSS Report and concludes that: (I) Dismantlement and decontamination activities were performed in accordance with the approved LTP; and (ii) The FSS and associated documentation, including an assessment of dose contributions associated with parts released for use before approval of the LTP, demonstrate that the facility and site have met the criteria for decommissioning in 10 CFR Part 20, Subpart E. Therefore, NRC is terminating TNP Facility Operating License No. NPF-1. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: See the application dated December 20, 2004, and the Safety Evaluation Report, available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agency-wide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/adams.html (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML050030054, and ML050680345). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated in Rockville, Maryland this 23rd day of May, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Andrew Persinko, Acting Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. E5-2734 Filed 5-27-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 34 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting of the FR Doc E5-2735 [Federal Register: May 31, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 103)] [Notices] [Page 30975] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31my05-79] Subcommittee on Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems will hold a meeting on June 14-15, 2005, Room T-2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday, June 14, 2005--8:30 a.m. until the close of business. Wednesday, June 15, 2005--1 p.m. until the close of business. The purpose of this meeting is to review selected digital instrumentation and control research projects and related matters. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Michael R. Snodderly (telephone 301-415-6927) or the Cognizant Staff Engineer, Mr. Eric A. Thornsbury (telephone 301-415-8716), five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official or the Cognizant Staff Engineer between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (e.t). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact one of the above named individuals at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: May 24, 2005. Michael L Scott, Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E5-2735 Filed 5-27-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 35 AFP: Japan sets concessions to give breakthrough reactor project to EU - Monday May 30, 03:30 PM TOKYO (AFP) - Japan is setting two conditions to secure business at home before it will give up its bid to host a revolutionary nuclear energy project also sought by France. Japan would ask for funds slated for the multibillion-dollar International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) to pay for upgrades of an existing nuclear fusion research center in Japan, the Nihon Keizai Shimbun said Monday. Tokyo would also demand that Japan gets a new center to design reactors with the construction cost shared between Japan and the European Union. France has already said it is virtually certain to be the host of ITER, a breakthrough testbed which aims to emulate the sun's nuclear fusion by 2050. The United States and South Korea support Japan's offer to build ITER in Rokkasho-mura, northern Japan, while China and Russia back the EU bid to construct it in the southeastern French town of Cadarache. So far, Japan and EU have agreed that Japan would receive 57 billion yen (533 million dollars) worth of contracts to build facilities related to ITER and that a new analysis center for ITER would be built in Japan, the Nihon Keizai said. But it said Japan has not been able to finalize the deal with local authorities who would lose the vital project. Takeshi Ebina, vice governor of Aomori Prefecture which includes Rokkasho-mura, said Monday that French voters' rejection of the EU constitution showed that Paris should have bigger concerns such as unemployment. Ebina noted that President Jacques Chirac had "strongly appealed to host ITER as a symbol of France." "Unemployment in the 25 EU countries is very high -- about nine percent. We are very worried about whether the people of the European Union would truly support ITER," Ebina said. Copyright © 2005 AFP AFP. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 36 NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting FR Doc 05-10825 [Federal Register: May 31, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 103)] [Notices] [Page 30975-30976] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31my05-80] Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dates: Weeks of May 30, June 6, 13, 20, 27, July 4, 2005. Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Status: Public and Closed. Matters to be Considered: Week of May 30, 2005 Tuesday, May 31, 2005 2 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1) (This meeting was originally scheduled for June 1st). Wednesday, June 1, 2005 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Threat Environment Assessment (Closed--Ex. 1) (This meeting was originally scheduled for May 25th). [[Page 30976]] 2:30 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1) (This meeting was originally scheduled for May 25th) Thursday, June 2, 2005 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Office of International programs (OIP) Programs, Performance, and Plans (Public Meeting) (Contact: Margie Doane, 301- 415-2344). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address-- . 2:30 p.m. Discussion of management Issues (Closed--Ex. 2 & 9). Week of Week of June 6, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of June 6, 2005. Week of Week of June 13, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of June 13, 2005. Week of Week of June 20, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of June 20, 2005. Week of Week of June 27, 2005--Tentative Tuesday, June 28, 2005 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Program (Public Meeting) (Contact: Corenthis Kelley, 301-415-7380). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address-- . Week of July 4, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of July 4, 2005. *The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings call (recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more information: Dave Gamberoni, (301) 415- 1651. The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: . The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, August Spector, at 301-415-7080, TDD: 301-415- 2100, or by e-mail at . Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. * * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to . Dated: May 24, 2005. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 05-10825 Filed 5-26-05; 9:24 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M ***************************************************************** 37 Prague Daily Monitor: Water spill at Temelin, Austrians protest - The Czech Republic's English- WEDNESDAY 1 JUNE (PDM staff with CTK) May 30 - Temelin nuclear power plant spokesman Milan Nebesar told CTK on Saturday that 3,000 litres of water containing boric acid had spilled from the shut-down second unit of the plant. The water spilled into a pond in the controlled zone around the plant. No radioactive substances got outside of the zone, Nebesar said. Austrian opponents of nuclear power have called for the plant to be shut down. The power plant is now checking the equipment in the upper part of the reactor where the water spilled. The shutdown of the second block may have to be extended until the end of June, Nebesar announced. Dana Kuchtova from the South Bohemian Mothers civic association pointed out that this is the third such failure. Kuchtova said the plant did not inform the Czech public, in particular mayors of the neighbouring towns, immediately after the event. "[Power producer] CEZ had no news about this on its web pages, even on Saturday at 10.00 a.m., while they announced it to Austria. They should have informed the Czech public at the same time," she said. The Czech side informed Austria on the basis of the Melk agreement. Austrian Environment Minister Josef Proell said Austria wants the reasons of the event to be explained, the APA news agency reported. CTK news edited by the staff of the Prague Daily Monitor ***************************************************************** 38 Scotsman.com News: Chernobyl Reactor's Shelter in 'No Danger of Collapsing' Tue 31 May 2005 The crumbling concrete and steel shelter hastily erected over the destroyed nuclear reactor at Chernobyl is in no danger of collapsing, a senior Ukrainian official has said. Fears have been growing that the shelter built 19 years ago after Chernobyl’s reactor No. 4 exploded and caught fire is deteriorating, which could lead to the release of dangerous radiation. Earlier this month, the West offered more money to the cash-strapped government to help fund a replacement. David Zhvania, head of the Emergency Situations Ministry, told Ukraine’s Channel 5 in an interview yesterday that construction work would begin within 18 months. In the meantime, he insisted that the current shelter is safe. “There is no danger that the shelter we currently have may break apart and cause a catastrophe,” he said. “Such a thing can’t happen. It’s excluded.” Zhvania said that work will begin only after all preliminary plans are complete. The European Union and the Group of Eight industrial nations pledged a combined ÂŁ101.5 million towards the project at a conference in London earlier this month. Ukraine has also promised to pay ÂŁ12 million. More than ÂŁ329 million had been pledged earlier by 28 donor governments. Total costs are estimated at ÂŁ550 million. The protective shelter is meant to contain remnants of the reactor, which was the site of the world’s worst nuclear accident in 1986. The explosion spewed radiation over much of northern Europe. Some 4,400 people died and about seven million people in the former Soviet republics are believed to have suffered from radiation-related health problems. Yuriy Andreev, the head of the Chernobyl Union action group, said that danger levels are still high because used fuel remains stored in the ground under reactor No. 4. Chernobyl’s remaining reactors were closed in 2000. Officials say the proposed confinement structure – a 328ft-high steel arch spanning some 853ft – could be the largest moveable structure ever built. It is expected to be complete by 2009 and to last 100 years. 2005 Scotsman.com ***************************************************************** 39 ITAR-TASS: Ukraine to build new sarcophagus over Chernobyl reactor 31.05.2005, 13.36 KIEV, May 31 (Itar-Tass) - The construction of a new sarcophagus over the reactor of Ukraine’s Chernobyl nuclear power plant will be begun in one and a half years, Ukrainian Emergency Situations Minister David Zhvania said. “There is no danger that the facility Shelter that we have at present can destroy and a catastrophe can happen. There can be no such thing, this is excluded,” he told reporters on Tuesday. The new facility that is to bury the reactor that exploded on April 26, 1986, for 100 years will be 257 meters long, 150 meters broad and 108 meters high. In late April, Ukraine called on the work community to come with more substantial technical and financial assistance for overcoming the consequences of the Chernobyl nuclear accident, in particular increasing donations to the Shelter Foundation, as donor countries had promised. Ukrainian Fuel and Energy Minister Ivan Plachkov said Ukraine needs increasing the bankrolling of the Shelter Foundation from 758 million dollars to 1.1 billion dollars. The plan of action at the Shelter facility includes 93 contracts worth 326 million dollars, 241 million of which have been spent since the beginning of the shelter construction, Plachkov said. The US promised to issue 45 million dollars and G-7 countries 160 million dollars to the Shelter Foundation. Russia will contribute five million dollars in 2005 and five million in 2006. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 40 PRN: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Files Final Report on Investigation Into Location of Fuel Segments Source: Pacific Gas and Electric Company Tuesday May 31, 3:06 pm ET SAN FRANCISCO, May 31 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Pacific Gas and Electric Company has now provided the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with a final report on the investigation into the location of segments of a used nuclear fuel rod at its Humboldt Bay Power Plant (HBPP) near Eureka in northern California. The investigation began last June, when the utility reported to the NRC the discovery of conflicting records on the location of three, 18-inch long cut segments. These records indicate that the segments were either stored in the used fuel pool in 1968 or were shipped to a licensed nuclear waste facility in 1969. The final report to the NRC details the work that has been conducted over the past year to determine the possible location of the segments and to rule out unlikely locations and scenarios. These activities included: 1) a meticulous review of the records, record-keeping processes and reporting associated with the used fuel pool and with shipments of used fuel and other radioactive materials; 2) interviews of former and current plant personnel and contractors; 3) a physical search of the used fuel pool and the rest of the HBPP site; 4) an analysis of the possibility of theft or diversion and 5) an analysis of the cause of the problem. In the process, PG&E also established a more accurate inventory for all special nuclear material onsite, and reaffirmed there are solid controls for storing and accounting for these materials in place today. PG&E's exhaustive investigation points to two reasonable possibilities regarding the location of the fuel segments: 1) they remain in the used fuel pool; or 2) they were shipped offsite to one of three licensed facilities. "Only one of those possibilities is supported by physical evidence, which indicates the three segments have been found in the used fuel pool, but in broken, fragment form rather than as intact, 18-inch cut segments," said Greg Rueger, PG&E's senior vice president for generation and chief nuclear officer. Unfortunately, the condition of the apparently cut fuel rod fragments -- after nearly 40 years of storage in a container within the used fuel pool under other irradiated material -- makes conclusive positive identification very difficult. Given that identification of the broken segments in the used fuel pool is not conclusive, PG&E has come to the conclusion that it is also possible that the segments were shipped offsite to either the Nuclear Fuel Services (New York), a fuel reprocessing facility, or to Barnwell (South Carolina) or Hanford (Washington), licensed low level radioactive waste facilities, where they would not have posed a threat to the health and safety of the public. "Although there is no evidence that offsite shipment occurred, we cannot say with 100 percent certainty that it did not," added Rueger. All other possibilities have been determined to be implausible or highly unlikely. The conclusion that the fuel fragments may have been found in the used fuel pool over the last year is supported by an independent expert analysis. This analysis found evidence that some of the fuel fragments in the pool appeared to be mechanically cut, which would associate them with the three 18-inch cut fuel segments. This analysis also determined that it is likely that the three 18-inch segments were broken into smaller pieces during movement of fuel and equipment inside the pool during the late 1960s. The comprehensive investigation also found no evidence to support the possibility that the fuel segments were stolen from the facility. Such a possibility was shown to be highly unlikely because of barriers in place from 1968 through the present to deter, prevent and detect any attempted theft. As part of the investigation, PG&E also conducted a comprehensive physical inventory of nuclear material and handling processes at the site and documented and securely stored all fuel fragments that were found. A cause analysis of the events leading to the loss of control over the cut fuel rod segments was performed to help assure that special nuclear materials handling, inventorying and control processes and procedures going forward are strong and capable of handling all nuclear material at the HBPP site. The final report also documents findings related to four very small pieces of non-fuel nuclear material which could not be located during the comprehensive physical inventory. These four pieces of nuclear material consist of one intact and three partial incore detectors. The 2-1/2 inch long incore detectors were part of the instrumentation used to measure the level of zreactivity inside the reactor when it was operating. The four pieces included about 0.006 of an ounce of nuclear material which was required to be controlled. The report concludes that it is very likely that these portions of incore detectors were shipped to a low level radioactive waste facility. Shipment of these detectors to such a facility would have been appropriate since low level radioactive waste facilities are licensed to contain this material. PG&E has kept the NRC apprised of developments in the comprehensive investigation leading up to this report. From this point, the NRC will critically review the report, complete its own comprehensive inspection, and issue its findings. PG&E will work with the NRC to resolve any outstanding issues. Source: Pacific Gas and Electric Company ***************************************************************** 41 Cumbria Online: ATOMIC PLANT STORY IS TOLD IN NEW EXHIBITION Published in News &Star on Tuesday, May 31st 2005 [Landmark: The Chapelcross cooling towers, visible for miles] Landmark: The Chapelcross cooling towers, visible for miles By Chris Story FOR nearly 50 years, the cooling towers of Chapelcross have dominated the Borders skyline. In another 50 years the unmistakable landmark – visible across the Solway Firth and from the Northumberland border – will be unrecognisable. But the contribution the Annan nuclear power plant has made to the region is more than purely physical, whether regarded as a blight or symbol of a generation. Economists estimate the station pumps Ł18 million a year into the economy as well as giving grants and expertise to a wide variety of other groups. These are facts being marked as the atomic complex embarks on its biggest change since construction in a new exhibition; The Life and Times of Chapelcross. Station manager, Mike Travis, of Carlisle, said: “Chapelcross is a scientific and engineering success story; one told with pride by those who made a lasting contribution to the operation of Scotland’s first nuclear power station.” Chapelcross stopped producing electricity a year ago and its 24-year rundown began almost half a century after plans to transform the former World War Two RAF airfield into “a combined civilian and military” power plant were first revealed. They were lodged in August 1955 when plans included 200 new houses and a school. Construction on the station and what was to become the Newington housing scheme in nearby Annan began just two months later. Each of the four reactors – officially opened in May 1959 – are 295ft high and 250ft wide. By December the following year, Chapelcross was producing at full power, producing 160 megawatts of electricity to the national grid – enough to continuously supply Carlisle. The need for the station was propelled by new electricity-powered technology, as well as the threat of the Cold War and atomic obliteration. Chapelcross was chosen because it was near Britain’s first nuclear power station, Calder Hall in West Cumbria, had access to six million gallons of water a day for its cooling towers and was close to the construction centres of Glasgow and Newcastle. During construction, 2,000 people from Southern Scotland and Northern England were employed. Even as the plant prepares for its complex decommissioning and shutdown, almost 500 staff, agency workers and contractors work there. Like all atomic plants, Chapelcross has been no stranger to controversy. Its only major failure came amid protests in 1967 when fuel elements in reactor two over-heated, causing internal radioactive contamination. It did not go back on-line until 1969 after being modified. Opponents also argued against Chapelcross’s military role. In 1980, it became part of the government’s “nuclear deterrent programme” – supplying tritium from one of its reactors to the Ministry of Defence to use in atomic bombs. Chapelcross is today the responsibility of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which will manage it until the decommissioning and clearance of the site ends in 2128. As well as giving a history of the plant, the exhibition in Annan’s Historic Resources Centre, Bank Street, has pictures of the characters who have worked there and the community work staff have done. It runs until June 18. ***************************************************************** 42 Portsmouth Herald: Public has right to know about failded Seabrook Station fence editorial Sun. May 29, 2005 opinion@seacoastonline.com The idea that the security fence surrounding the Seabrook Station nuclear power plant has not been operating since it was installed late last year is frightening enough. But what is more frightening - and perhaps even more dangerous - is the ability of plant personnel and owners to hide behind the laws enacted since Sept. 11, 2001, in order to keep their failures quiet. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission used to put incident reports on its Web site. It was a way for the public to know just how safe their local power plants are. However, in the paranoia that has gripped this country since 9/11/01, this - as well as other types of information formerly accessible to the public - is no longer available. The fact is neither we, nor you the reader, would have known about the nuclear plant’s failure to adequately install or test one of the primary safeguards against a terrorist attack had it not been for the willingness of someone inside the plant, who was fed up with how security was being mismanaged, to come forward. This employee took a risk. It showed courage and more concern for the community surrounding the nuclear plant than was evident from the plant’s management, which failed to do the things necessary to find out if this perimeter intrusion fence was working properly. It makes one wonder just what else is going wrong inside our nuclear plants, chemical-production facilities, ports and airports that we citizens will never be able to find out about - and, therefore, never be able to exert the pressure necessary to change them - because that information is deemed too sensitive to be released. In fact, when we asked a Seabrook Station official to confirm the fence failure, he said he could not because he would be in violation of federal law. He also warned that sharing this important information with our readers could bring federal fines and punishments. We decided to write the story because we believe our readers, almost all of whom live within the 10-mile evacuation zone surrounding Seabrook Station, need to know the failure of a primary security system had gone undetected for nearly eight months. We also factored in information from Seabrook officials that they had immediately embarked on correcting the problem and there are sufficient redundant systems in place to keep the plant and the public safe. But we were told at least one other news organization had information about the fence failure and decided not to release it to the public. We can only assume it was because of the threat of federal reprisals. There is certainly a concern that reporting on security failures at potential terrorist targets could make that information known to those willing to take advantage of those soft spots in order to wreak havoc on our country and our citizens. However, in many cases the option is to simply take the word of those with vested interests in portraying an aura of security when none actually exists, as the Seabrook Station event shows. One of the roles of the media is to be the watchdog that barks at night, and tells everyone in the house something is wrong - especially if the back gate is open. Increasingly, there is a desire of policymakers, especially the current majority party in power, to muzzle the dog. Federal policymakers would like less public oversight, but more knowledge of your most intimate details. A free press is a vital part of our system of checks and balances, and was very much envisioned by our founding fathers. The Seabrook Station incident shows how these issues play out right here in our back yard. We are best as a community, and as a nation, when we allow openness and public scrutiny of homeland security, when we insist on transparency as to what our government "of the people" has done lately - or has not done - to protect us. -Herald Sunday Seacoast Online is owned and operated by Seacoast Newspapers. Copyright © 2005 Seacoast Online. All rights reserved. Please ***************************************************************** 43 [RADFOOD] A COOL solution Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 13:42:20 -0500 (CDT) Several weeks ago, some members of the House of Representatives inserted language into the House Appropriations bill that would delay country of origin labeling (COOL) for yet another year, until 2007. Yet COOL advocates are putting up a fight over this stalling tactic; Dennis Rehberg, a Montanan Republican Representative, is going to offer an amendment that would strip the COOL delay from the Appropriations bill, and restore COOL implementation to 2006. Montana leadership on COOL is strong; they recently passed a state law that would require beef, pork, poultry and lamb products to be labeled with their country of origin in 2006, if the federal law does not go into effect. Other states, specifically Wyoming, Kansas, North Dakota and South Dakota, already require meat retailers to clearly label imported meat with the country of origin. And COOL for seafood was implemented this spring on the national level. However, we need to implement COOL nationally for fruits, vegetables, and meat products. Country of origin labeling is important because it can benefit both consumers, who will be able to make an informed choice and buy food produced closer to home, and producers, who need a way to identify their crops and livestock as products of the United States. Consumer surveys clearly indicate that consumers want COOL for a variety of reasons; including a desire to buy food domestically, avoid mad cow disease risk and certain pesticide residues, and make purchases based on other food safety concerns. The repeated delays on COOL are unacceptable! Send an email to your Representative, urging them to support Rehberg's amendment, and ensure COOL's timely implementation at: http://action.citizen.org/pc/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=7664201. *** Audrey Hill Organizer Public Citizen 215 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE www.safelunch.org Washington, DC 20003 (202) 454-5185 ******************** If you would like to be removed from the radfood list, send an email to listserv@listserver.citizen.org with the words "unsubscribe radfood" in the message. If you would like to be added to the radfood list, send an email to listserv@listserver.citizen.org with the words "subscribe radfood" in the message. To learn more about food irradiation, visit our website at http://www.citizen.org/cmep/ Questions about the radfood list can be directed to RADFOOD-request@LISTSERVER.CITIZEN.ORG -Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program ***************************************************************** 44 [du-list] New Australian Documentary on the horrifying effects Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 17:22:32 -0700 New Australian Documentary on the horrifying effects of DU Australian Coalition for Economic Justice May 2005 Article nr. 12027 sent on 25-may-2005 02:37 ECT http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m12027&l=i&size=1&hd=0 The World premiere of new Australian documentary on Depleted Uranium (DU) weaponry and its horrifying effects on "Coalition of the willing" soldiers and civilians will be held in Brisbane at a date and venue now under negotiation. Details will be available on our website at http://www.acej.org.au The documentary by David Bradbury: Blowin' in the Wind, was two years in the making and took him around the world. It was inspired by the Australian Coalition for Economic Justice (ACEJ) 2003 sponsored tour by former US Army physicist Dr Doug Rokke. He features in the film, which has important messages for Australians. After former US Army physicist Dr Doug Rokke's visit to Australia in 2003 a new organisation was formed to continue creating awareness of the horrific effects of depleted uranium (DU) ammunition on soldiers and innocent civilians alike. It is called Depleted Uranium Silent Killer (DUSK). DUSK is on the campaign trail again and will launch a new documentary highlighting how DU could affect the lives of Australians living near places like Shoalwater Bay Military Training Area in Central Queensland and at Lancelin Western Australia, 130 km north of Perth. Perth is now a major R&R city for U.S. troops. Will they be kicked out of there as they have been in other places around the world? Not only are locals likely to be affected by radiation from DU practice shelling but also our own soldiers and their families, not to mention the endangered dugongs at Shoalwater Bay. The Federal Department of Environment and Heritage website describes Shoalwater Bay 454 500ha military training area as "a significant habitat for the threatened dugong, and several species of marine turtle. Five nationally threatened plant species also occur in this area. Abundant species of migratory birds were also recorded by the department on the tidal mudflats during the summer of 1991-1992 including the lesser golden plover (pluvialis fulva), and other bird species. It is listed as a Commonwealth Heritage Place. According to an article in The Australian April 20 more than 17,000 Australian and US troops will take part in the major military exercise in central coastal Queensland. A defence spokesman said navy, army, air force, marines and special forces personnel would combine for exercise Talisman Sabre 2005 in Shoalwater Bay. "More than 6000 Australian Defence Force (ADF) and 11,000 US troops would take part," he said. Land forces will train primarily in the Shoalwater Bay area.. Maritime forces will exercise off Queensland's coast in the Coral Sea, while Australian and US fighter jets and transport aircraft will operate from the RAAF Base Amberley, in the state's south-east, and Townsville, in the north. "Talisman Sabre merges past combined training exercises, Tandem Thrust and Crocodile," he said. "It will help improve ADF/US combat readiness and interoperability." Just how closely and for how long will our troops be "merged" with US troops? The residents at Lancelin WA are very unhappy since the arrival of American war ships using the firing range nearby at all hours of the day and night. This relaxed W.A. coastal town is part of the Coral Coast and is promoted as being "perfect for tourists who are interested in adrenaline sports. Recognised worldwide as an excellent venue for windsurfing and sandboarding on the amazingly large, white sandhills. Offshore islands and reefs are great for fishing and diving." -- Posted for educational and research purposes only, ~ in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 ~ NucNews Links and Expanded Archives - http://nucnews.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers. At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide! http://us.click.yahoo.com/EA3HyD/3MnJAA/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/ ***************************************************************** 45 DU: A Scientific Perspective/ An Interview With LEUREN MORET, Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 12:52:05 -0500 (CDT) Question. How are low level alpha emitting particles scientifically proven to actually do all of this as is posited in this armageddon doomsday scenario with no scientifric evidence to back it up? Where are the scientific studies to link this to severe health problems. Definitely linked--not just speculation. Does anybody have a recent bibliographical list of actual (not speculation, not heresay, and not opinions or propaganda) that they might provide that we post to this list? For instance what are we to make of this scary sounding statement, which is made without mentioning the context of this that these are low level alpha emitters: "MORET: Yes, it's in the air, water, and soil. The half-life of DU, Uranium 238, is 4.5 billion years the age of the Earth." United States DU: A Scientific Perspective/ An Interview With LEUREN MORET, Geoscientist By W. Leon Smith/Nathan Diebenow May 13, 2005, 07:20 Interview Conducted By W. Leon Smith and Nathan Diebenow Leuren Moret is a geoscientist who works almost around the clock educating citizens, the media, members of parliaments and Congress and other officials on radiation issues. She became a whistleblower in 1991 at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab after witnessing fraud on the Yucca Mountain Project. She is currently working as an independent citizen scientist and radiation specialist in communities around the world, and contributed to the U.N. subcommission investigating depleted uranium. According to Wikipedia online encyclopedia, Moret testified at the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan in Japan in 2003, presented at the World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference in Hamburg, Germany, and spoke at the World Court of Women at the World Social Forum in Bombay, India, in January 2004. THE INTERVIEW ICONOCLAST: What are the latest developments with reducing depleted uranium exposures on U.S. troops? MORET: A young veteran named Melissa Sterry of Connecticut has introduced a bill into the Connecticut Legislature requiring independent testing of returning Afghan and Gulf War veterans going back to 2001. She said that she did it because shes sick, and her friends are dead, and thats from serving in the 2003 conflict. I have been following the bill and talking to her. Yesterday, she testified twice at the United Nations. I said, Why dont we get this bill all over the U.S. in state legislatures because it informs the public and get the local media to cover it. The U.S. has blocked any accountability at international and national levels. Theres a total cover-up just like with Agent Orange, the atomic veterans, MKULTRA, the mind control experiments the CIA did. This is more of the same, but the issue is much, much worse because the genetic future of all those contaminated is effected. Now vast regions around our world, as well as our atmosphere, are contaminated with the depleted uranium. Theyve used so much. Its the equivalent number of atoms, as the Japanese professor calculated it, to over 400,000 Nagasaki bombs that has been released into the atmosphere. Thats really an underestimate. I went to Louisiana in April. I was invited to speak at the University of New Orleans for three days. One of the veterans asked me to be in their April 19 protest and rally through the City of New Orleans. He took the Connecticut bill straight to the Legislature, and he got two legislators to sponsor it, and he said, Just whiteout the name Connecticut and write in Louisiana on the bill. Youre not going to believe it. It passed 101 to 0 yesterday in the Louisiana House. I want you to write about it because we want it (the DU testing bill) in Texas. Nevada is going to introduce it. Congressman Jim McDermott is going to put it into the Washington legislature. We want to get the governor of Montana to do it because hes the first governor to demand his National Guard be returned. I think half of them are back. He said, I need them in the state. The DU issue is just really, really, really, really so awful. I dont think theres any greater tragedy in the history of the world in what theyve done. ICONOCLAST: Is there a danger of depleted uranium, being used in weaponry over there, spreading by air over here? MORET: The atmosphere globally is contaminated with it. Its completely mixed in one year. Im an expert on atmospheric dust. Im a geoscientist, a geologist, and thats what I studied and did my research on. Its really a fascinating subject. We have huge dust storms that are a million square miles and transport millions of tons of dust and sand every year around the world. The main centers of these dust storms are the Gobi Desert in China, which is where the Chinese did atmospheric testing, so thats all contaminated with radiation, and it gets transported right over Japan, and it comes straight across the Pacific and dumps all its sand and dust on the U.S., North America. Its loaded with radioactive isotopes, soot, pesticides, chemicals, pollution everything is in it fungi, bacteria, viruses. The Sahara Desert is another huge dust center, and it goes up all over Europe and straight across the Atlantic, to the Caribbean, and up the East Coast. Of course, you get it in Texas with those hurricanes. They all originate in the Sahara Desert. The third region is the Western United States, which is where the Nevada test site is located. We did 1,200 nuclear weapons tests there, so all this radiation that is already there, which is bad enough, has caused a global cancer epidemic since 1945. All of that radiation was the equivalent of 40,000 Nagasaki bombs. Were talking about 10 times more. In April of 2003, the World Health Organization said they expect global cancer rates to increase 50 percent by the year 2020. Infant mortality is going up again all over the world. This is an indicator of the level of radioactive pollution. When the U.S. and Russia signed the partial test ban treaty in 1963, the infant mortality rate started dropping again, which is normal. Now they are going up again. Its the global pollution with this radiation. ICONOCLAST: I had one of our correspondents send me a series of photographs of the Al-Asad dust storm in Iraq on April 28. MORET: That dust is what Im talking about. ICONOCLAST: In the picture you can see a gigantic wall of sand. MORET: I have 16 pictures of that storm. Theyre posted with photos from Iraqi doctors of the children of people with cancer and leukemia. So what did you think of that dust storm? ICONOCLAST: I thought it was really dramatic. MORET: It remobilizes all the radiation, but those are the larger chunks. The DU burns at such high temperatures. Its a pyroforic metal which means it burns. The bullets and big caliber shells are actually on fire when they come out of the gun barrel because they are ignited by the friction in the gun barrel. Seventy percent of the DU metal becomes a metal vapor. Its actually a radioactive gas weapon and a terrain contaminant. Ill email you the URL of the 1943 memo to General Leslie Grove under the Manhattan Project. Its the blueprint for depleted uranium. They dropped the atomic bombs, but they did not use the DU weapons because they thought they were too horrific. Ive toured and gone all over Japan with a pediatrician in Basra and an oncologist, a cancer specialist. These poor doctors their whole families are dying of cancer. He has 10 members of his family with cancer now that hes treating, and this is just from Gulf War I. Theyve used much, much, much more in 2003. All over the whole country. ICONOCLAST: What can soldiers expect when they come home? MORET: If they were in Bradley Fighting Vehicles, theyre coming home with rectal cancer from sitting on ammunition boxes. The young women are reporting terrible problems with endometriosis. Thats the lining of the uterus malfunctioning, and they just bleed and bleed and bleed. Some of them have uterine cancer 18 and 19 and 20 year olds. The Army will not even diagnose it. They send them back to the battlefields. They wont treat them or diagnose them. A group of 20 soldiers pushed from Kuwait to Baghdad in 2003 in all the fighting. Eight of those 20 soldiers have malignancies. ICONOCLAST: Does exposure to depleted uranium effect their psychological background when they come home? MORET: Depleted uranium are these particles that form at very high temperatures. They are uranium oxides that are insoluble. They are at least 100 times smaller than a white blood cell, so when the soldiers breathe, they inhale them. The particles go through the nose, go through the olfactory and into the brain, and it messes up their cognitive abilities, thought processes. It damages their mood-control mechanism in the brain. Four soldiers at Fort Bragg came back from Afghanistan, and within two months, those four had murdered their wives. This is part of the damage to the brain from the radiation and the particles. The soldiers from Gulf War I in a group of 67 soldiers who came back, they had DU in their equipment, in their clothes, in their bodies, in their semen, and they had normal babies before they went over there to war. They came back, and the VA did a study. Of 251 Gulf War I veterans in Mississippi, in 67 percent of them, thier babies born after the war were deemed to have severe birth defects. They had brains missing, arms and legs missing, organs missing. They were born without eyes. They had horrible blood diseases. Its horrific. If you want to look at something, Life magazine did a photo essay which is still on the Internet. Its called The Tiny Victims of Desert Storm. You should look at that oh, my God, the post-Gulf War babies playing with their brothers and sisters who are normal. Basically, its like smoking crack, only youre smoking radioactive crack. It goes straight into the blood stream. Its carried all throughout the body into the bones, the bone marrow, the brain. It goes into the fetus. Its a systemic poison and a radiological poison. ICONOCLAST: What about the people in the United States that are here? You say that DU is being mixed and spread globally? MORET: Yes, its being mixed globally. Were getting secondary smoke. Its the secondary smoke effect. You know the people who inhabit a room with smokers? They are getting that secondary smoke, and so are we. ICONOCLAST: Is that secondary smoke getting thicker as we speak? MORET: Yeah, the concentration of the depleted uranium particles in the atmosphere all around the globe is increasing. There are indications that the U.S. will go in June and bomb the heck out of Iran. Were monitoring the U.S. Army ammunition factories. They have very large orders for those huge bunker buster bombs that have 5,000 lbs. of DU in the warhead. ICONOCLAST: So the prognosis for America isnt really good? MORET: No, its really bad. ICONOCLAST: And if this continues then? MORET: Its going to kill off the worlds population. It already is, and it doesnt just effect people. It effects all living systems. The plants, the animals, the bacteria. It effects everything. ICONOCLAST: So the things that we eat for instance, if they have DU in them, then well just get it in our systems, and so were polluting the oceans, so that could effect all marine life? MORET: Yes, its in the air, water, and soil. The half-life of DU, Uranium 238, is 4.5 billion years the age of the Earth. ICONOCLAST: With the damage thats been done to this point, can we turn back? We cant clean it up? MORET: Theres no way to clean it up. What happens is these tiny particles float around the Earth. There are still plutonium and uranium floating around the Earth from bomb testing. These particles are so tiny that molecules bumping into them keep them lofted in the air, and so the only way for them to get out of the atmosphere is rain, snow, fog, pollution, which will clear them out of the air and deposit them in the environment. What happens is the surface of these particles gets wetted by the moisture in the air. They come down and land on stuff and stick to it like a glue. You cant ever get the particles off whatever theyre sticking to because have you ever put a drop of water on a microscope slide and then put another one on top of it? Can you pull those apart? ICONOCLAST: No. MORET: Okay, thats the same effect that happens to radioactive particles. Once they are removed from the atmosphere, they stick to any surfaces they land on. In a way they are removed from circulation from the atmosphere. You cant wash them off. If it keeps raining or theyre in a creek, you know, if theyre on rocks or stones or something in a creek, they wont even wash off. You didnt know it was this bad, did you? ICONOCLAST: No, I knew it was bad, but I thought it was fairly isolated. MORET: No. What is over there (in Iraq) is over here in about four days. I dont know if you followed Chernobyl. That big bubble of radiation went around and around the world, but this is dust. It becomes a part of atmospheric dust. Like the dust storm you saw in that photo, it goes everywhere. ICONOCLAST: Is it in the upper levels of the atmosphere or the lower levels? MORET: Its in lower orbital space. They brought the Mir spacecraft back down to Earth when they got done using it, and there was something called a space midge which covered the electronics on the outside of the spacecraft and protected it from radiation that comes from the sun because electronics are real vulnerable to radiation. They analyzed the surface of that space net and found uranium and uranium decayed products which they said came from atmospheric testing or burned up spacecraft with nuclear materials or nuclear reactors on board. Uranium can also come from supernovas, but they thought that the most likely sources were atmospheric testing and the nuclear materials we put in space. ICONOCLAST: Essentially then, youre saying that were conducting a nuclear war. MORET: Yes, and thats exactly what it is. Weve conducted four nuclear wars since 1991. Yeah, these are nuclear wars. DU is a nuclear weapon. ICONOCLAST: From the point of view of a scientist, what needs to happen to correct this? MORET: Well, we need to stop the use of it. Weve built an international movement to stop the use, the manufacture, the storage, the sales, and the deployment of depleted uranium weapons. ICONOCLAST: Are the munitions we sell to other countries contained with depleted uranium? MORET: We have. In 1968 the first depleted uranium weapons systems that we found a patent for suddenly appeared in the U.S. patent office. It was for the Navy. It was sort of a Gatling gun style weapon system that you mounted on ships. It rapidly fires like 2,500 bullets a minute. Its over 3,000 now. Theyve improved the design. Then in 1973, we gave depleted uranium weapons systems to the Israelis and supervised their use. They used them in the Arab-Israeli war and completely wiped out the Arabs in five days. Then the show was on the road. That was the first actual battlefield demonstration of this new weapon system. Hughes Aircraft developed the full-length system which is for the Navy. Thats the Gatling gun system. They still use it. That was produced in 1974 and tested. Within six months the U.S. government had sold the DU weapons system to 12 entities which included many branches of the U.S. military and other counties. Weve sold DU weapons systems to about we dont know exactly for sure its been about 12 or 17 countries. The good news is that normally such a weapons system that effective would have been sold to 80, 100, or 120 countries by now. But because of the radiological, biological, and environmental hazard, countries were not only afraid to buy it, the ones who did buy it are afraid to use it. The only countries we know that have used DU are Britain, the U.S., and Israel. The United Nations in 1996 passed a resolution that depleted uranium weapons are weapons of mass destruction, and they are illegal under all international laws and treaties. In 2001, the European Parliament passed a resolution on DU. What happened is that the NATO forces went into Yugoslavia in 1998 and 99 and flew 39,000 bombing runs and completely bombed Yugoslavia into radioactive rubble. Germany and the U.S. made the most money on the destruction of Yugoslavia, and they made sure that countries that didnt know about the DU, that the peacekeepers from those countries like from Italy and Portugal, were sent to the most contaminated regions in Yugoslavia. Germans and Americans didnt send their own troops into those areas. They were in the least contaminated areas. These poor soldiers from other countries came back and died within weeks or in a couple of days or months. The parents in Portugal and Italy are furious and went to the Parliament and media, and there was just a huge media storm of articles about DU. The cat was out of the bag because of the 1998 NATO invasion of Yugoslavia. The cat was out of the bag, but Japanese troops have been sent into Somawa. Theyre self-defense forces. It was the most contaminated area where the heaviest fighting happened in Iraq. We can expect those soldiers to be really, really sick. ICONOCLAST: What about Iraq itself? Whats been done thus far? MORET: Its uninhabitable. The whole country. Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Afghanistan are completely uninhabitable. ICONOCLAST: But people live there, so theyre going to live there suffering? MORET: Well, you can see from the birth defects and the illnesses that it is pretty severe. Each year the number of birth defects and illnesses will rise because of the total contamination levels in all living things will increase because they are breathing that air and drinking water and eating the food from contaminated soils. Its just a slow death sentence. The same with Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. Depleted uranium is a very, very, very effective biological weapon. This is the primary purpose for using it. Marion Falk (a retired chemical physicist who built nuclear bombs for more than 20 years at Lawrence Livermore lab), who is the Manhattan Project scientist I work with, taught me pretty much everything about radiation and particles and DU. He said the purpose of weapons used by the military is not only to injure and kill the enemy soldiers, but the purpose is to kill, maim, and disease the civilian population because it reduces the productivity of a country and pretty soon a lot of their resources are going to be used for taking care of sick people. They will have fewer and fewer healthy workers. Of course, once you cause mutation in the DNA, that damage is passed on to future generations of that affected person or animal or plant. DNA does not repair itself. ICONOCLAST: So the mutations would be probably destructive moreso than constructive. MORET: Oh, the mutations are causing those birth defects. ICONOCLAST: Theyre not evolutionary diseases? MORET: No, they are evolutionary. They are inherited by all future generations and passed on. Its like if you have red hair and all of your future generations will have that gene. ICONOCLAST: So if I had a precondition to heart disease because of the radiation, then the generation that would come after me would have the same problem? MORET: Well, if you damage the cell or parts of the cell or functioning of cells, that doesnt necessarily damage the DNA. There are two kinds of damage: one damages the cells of the living organism, and that may not be passed on, but if you damage the DNA in the egg or the sperm, that is passed on to all future generations. ICONOCLAST: So the guys coming back from the war, their sperm is probably going to be MORET: Damaged. Yes. They also have depleted uranium in their semen. When theyre intimate with their partners, they internally contaminate them with depleted uranium. The women become sick themselves. They have depleted uranium in their bodies, and there is something called burning syndrome. Just absolutely horrible. You can read about it in an article by David Rose in the December Vanity Fair. Its on the Internet. A friend of mine is the widow of a Canadian Gulf War veteran. David Rose interviewed her, and she griped about the burning semen. She said, I had 20 condoms full of frozen peas in my freezer at all times, and after we were intimate, I would insert one into my vagina, and that is the only way I could bear the pain from the burning semen. And it goes through condoms, too. ICONOCLAST: Gosh, durn! MORET: Yeah, you should see the high school classes when I talk about the burning semen and the internal contamination. The girls mouths go into little round Os, and the boys start panicking because theyre like, Ill never get sick! (laughs) The name of this article is Weapons of Self-Destruction. ICONOCLAST: How much DU will it take to kill off all known life on this planet? MORET: The amount of radiation released is certainly going to have a very, very profound global impact, and were already seeing infant mortality increasing globally. The fetus is the most susceptible to radiation damage because all the cells are rapidly dividing, the limbs and the bodies developing, so when you start introducing toxic chemicals and radiation, it really damages the natural process of fetal development. The reason they were able to convince the Senate to sign the partial test ban treaty in 1963 was because of the increase in infant mortality. It had been dropping and declining two or three percent for quite a long time each year because of better prenatal care and educating mothers. Infant mortality started going up after the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, especially in the 50s when the big bomb testing started. By 1963, it was really obvious that the bomb testing globally was having a real impact on the unborn. They signed the partial test ban treaty. Russia and the U.S. stopped atmospheric testing, and the infant mortality rate started going down right away. Theyre going up again now. This is global radioactive pollution, and how long it would take to eliminate all life is something nobody knows, but the depleted uranium is a very, very effective biological weapon. There are two purposes for the military use of weapons. One is to destroy the enemy soldiers, and the other, which is just as important, is to destroy the enemy civilian population. By causing illnesses and disease, long lingering illnesses really impact the productivity and the economy of a country. It was Chernobyl and other nuclear disasters that actually destroyed the Soviet Union because the former Soviet Union is very, very sick from all the radiation that was released. They were much more sloppier than we were. I have a World Health Organization world health survey which they published in the Journal of American Medical Association last June. The impact of atmospheric testing is very, very apparent by the percentage of population in each country they investigated for some form of mental illness. For instance, Japan is 8.8 percent. Nigeria is very low 4.7 percent. They have almost no radiation in Nigeria. In the Ukraine where they had the Chernobyl accident, it is 20.4 percent. Spain is at 9.2 percent. Italy is 8.2 percent. Its pretty low because they dont have nuke plants. France is 75 percent reliant on nuclear power, so you have mental illness in 18.4 percent of the population. Mexico is at 12.2 percent, and the United States is at 26.3 percent the highest rate of mental illness in the world. And George Bush and his siblings were all exposed in utero to bomb testing fallout in the United States. He had a toddler sister who died of leukemia when she was about three. I worked with a group called the Radiation And Public Health Project. Their website is . We are all radiation specialists, well-known scientists, and independent scientists. Weve collected 6,000 baby teeth around nuclear power plants and measured the radiation in them, and one of our members is the neighbor of the women who worked with all of the Bush children, including President Bush himself, because they had severe learning disabilities. ICONOCLAST: How do we know that the Bush children were exposed? MORET: By the year of their birth. The year they were carried by their mother. You have to look at how much bomb testing material was released into the atmosphere, and theres a direct correlation to the decline in SAT scores for all teenagers in the U.S. to the amount of radiation that was released into the atmosphere the year their mother was carrying them. These are delayed effects of radiation exposure in utero. ICONOCLAST: So they were living in Connecticut, but they were still feeling the effects of the radiation in Nevada? MORET: Two years ago the U.S. government admitted that every single person living in the United States between 1957 and 1963 was internally exposed to radiation. So for any pregnant woman during those years, her fetus was exposed. ICONOCLAST: What type of radiation levels are we talking about? MORET: Its low levels, and the main pathways are drinking water and dairy products. It even killed the baby fish in the Atlantic. Strontium-90 is a man-made isotope that comes out of nuclear bombs and nuclear reactors. They measured the levels of strontium-90 in milk in Norway from the 1950s up until the 1970s, and they measured the decline in the fishing catch in that same period, and as the strontium-90 increased in the milk in Norway, fishing catches declined. By 1963, when the U.S. tested a nuclear bomb almost every day (they did 250 tests in one year because the treaty was going to be signed), the fishing catch declined by 50 percent. In the Pacific, it declined 60 percent because there was Russian, Chinese, French, and U.S. testing in the Pacific. ICONOCLAST: So were still eating those contaminated fish today. Has the genetic code been changed? MORET: The oceans are getting whatever is getting rained down, snowed down, or fogged down from the atmosphere. Its getting into the oceans. This big frog die-off, which is global, is certainly related to the radiation in the rainwater. Its a global nuclear holocaust. It effects all living things. Thats why they call it omnicide, which means it kills all living things the plants, the animals, the bacteria. Everything. ICONOCLAST: You think we ought to have the Weather Channel report on the current sand storm conditions in Iraq so we can prepare four days in advance for the radiation? MORET: Ill tell you what I did when 9/11 happened. I called all the doctors with Radiation And Public Health Project, and I said, Get out of town, and dont come back until it has rained three times. One lived 12 miles downwind from the Pentagon. She went out on her balcony with her geiger counter. I said, Get that geiger counter out of your purse. We had just done a press conference in San Francisco, and I knew she had it in her purse. Well, the radiation levels were 8-10 times higher than background. We called the EPA, HAZMAT, FBI, and said, Get all those emergency response workers suited up. They need to be protected. Two days after 9/11, the EPA radiation expert for that region called back and said, Yup, the Pentagon crash rubble was radioactive, and we believe its depleted uranium, but were not worried about that. Its only harmful if its inhaled. He said, Were worried about the lead solder in the plane. Well, you know whats in Tomahawk missiles? They have depleted uranium warheads. The radioactive crash rubble contaminated with DU is evidence of a DU warhead. ICONOCLAST: I did not think about that, but going back to my original question: Should the Weather Channel report for us on the toxic dust storms in Iraq? MORET: But how could people get away from them? These dust storms are a million square miles. Theyre huge, and they come right across the Atlantic, the Caribbean, and Texas coast line, and right up the East Coast. There are people who are going to leave the state every time theres a hurricane Its in the food, drinking water, dairy products, and then the problem with Uranium 238, which is 99.39 percent DU, is that it decays in over 20 steps into other radioactive isotopes. Thats why I call it the Trojan Horse. Its the weapon that keeps giving. It keeps killing. This is like smoking radioactive crack. It goes right in your nose. It crosses the olfactory bulb into your brain. Its a systemic poison. It goes everywhere. These particles that form at very high temperatures 5,000-10,000 degrees C are nanoparticles. They are a 10th of a micron or smaller. A 10th of a micron is 100 times smaller than a white blood cell. They get picked up in the lipids and probably the cholesterol and go right through the cell membranes of the cell. They screw up the cell processes. They screw up the signaling between the cells because the cells all talk to each other and coordinate what theyre doing. It messes up brain function. ICONOCLAST: Do you know what Iraq was like before the first Gulf War? MORET: Iraq prior to the 1991 Gulf War was the most advanced in the entire Middle East. They had scrupulous databases of the health problems and disease rates, which is why the U.S. bombed all of the offices in the Ministry of Health. We destroyed all those records so that a pre-Gulf War health base could not be established to show how much these diseases have increased. This would concern the U.S. in terms of compensation for war crimes. In these horrible U.N. sanctions, they (the Iraqis) could never get all of the protocol medicine for the treatment of leukemia. They (the U.N.) would say, These steps of the leukemia treatment were components in weapons, so you cant have that. They never gave the people the full proper protocols in the areas of treatment they needed to get rid of the leukemia. It hid the effects of the depleted uranium because the children were starving. They had malnutrition. They had the healthiest population in the Middle East (prior to Gulf War I). ICONOCLAST: Lets talk about the children of Iraq. MORET: After the Gulf War, they had maybe one baby a week born with birth defects in the hospitals in Basra. Now they are having 10-12 a day. The levels of uranium are increasing in the population every year. Every day, people are eating and drinking while the whole environment is contaminated. Just what youd expect. There are more babies born with birth defects, and the birth defects are getting more and more severe. An Iraqi doctor told me that babies are being born now that are lumps of flesh. She said that they dont have heads or legs or arms. Its just a lump of flesh. This also happened to populations that were not removed from islands in the Pacific when the bomb tests occurred. Basically, governments were using them as guinea pigs. ICONOCLAST: So all the countries that were equipped with nuclear weapons are guilty of those atrocities. MORET: They were all doing it. France, Russia. China, and the U.S. And Im not sure if Britain did bomb testing. They were real low key about it. ICONOCLAST: Where are the radiation hot spots in the United States? MORET: In the United States, it would be within a 100 miles of nuclear power plants. We have 110 nuclear power plants in the U.S. We have the most of any country in the world, but only a 103 are operating. Almost all of the entire East Coast. What we did was we took government data from the Centers of Disease Control on breast cancer deaths between 1985 and 1989. Anywhere from within a 100 miles of a nuclear power plant is where two-thirds of all breast cancer deaths occurred in the U.S. between 1985 and 1989. Its also around the nuclear weapons laboratories. That would be Los Alamos in New Mexico, the Idaho Nuclear Engineering Lab in Idaho, and Hanford in Washington State, which is where they got the plutonium for all the bombs. They contaminated the entire Columbia River watershed and almost the whole state of Washington. It gets into the water and into the plants and into the vegetation. If you eat clams or mussels or crabs or things like that, even certain kinds of fish that eat off of the mud at the bottom of the river, you have much higher levels of radiation in your tissues. It depends on each person and on how healthy they are, but this man from Washington State died suddenly. He was in his late 40s. They did an autopsy, and he was full of radioactive zinc. They went, Where in the world did he get this? It only comes from nuclear bombs and nuclear reactors. They studied his diet and discovered he loved to eat oysters. They found out where he bought his oysters and found the oyster beds. They were 200 miles off shore, from Washington State. The radiation was being carried off out to sea from the coastline. It was passing over this oyster bed. The oysters were just gobbling them up. ICONOCLAST: What are the symptoms of DU poisoning? MORET: Soldiers on the battlefield have reported a metallic taste in their mouth. Thats the actual taste of the uranium metal. Then within 24-48 hours, soldiers on the battlefield have reported that they felt sick. They start getting muscle aches, and they lose energy. Some of them came back incontinent. In other words, in adult diapers. One woman reported that the first night home, she wanted to be intimate with her husband, but she had absolutely no feeling. She couldnt feel anything from the waist down. This particulate matter damages the neuromuscular system, the nerves; it just goes everywhere. And theres no treatment for it. These particles are very, very insoluble, so they cant even dissolve in body fluids, so they can be excreted from the body. Then they keep releasing. Even when uranium decays, it turns into another radioactive isotope. So its a particle that just sits there shooting bullets until you die. Another problem is that soldiers have crumbling teeth. Teeth just start falling apart. The uranium replaces calcium in the calcium-phosphate structure of the teeth. Some have complained about grand mal seizures, cerebral palsy. Some diseases reported at very high rates in Air Force and Army soldiers are Parkinsons disease, Lou Gehrigs disease, and Hodgkins disease. This is damage to the mitochondria in the cells and the nerves. The mitochondria make all the energy for the body, so when you damage mitochondria, another symptom is chronic fatigue syndrome. Theres just not enough energy produced by the body to function normally. I found a study in the SanDia Nuclear Weapons Laboratory employee newsletter in September 2003. They are doing major studies in mitochondrial disfunction related to Lou Gehrigs, Hodgkins, and Parkinsons diseases for veterans. Since its at a nuclear weapons lab, they are fully aware of the health damage. ICONOCLAST: Tell me about the tests that detect for DU in the body. MORET: The chromosome test in the best indicator. Its $5,000. The urine test is a $1,000. If you test positive with the urine test, you know youre contaminated. If you test negative, it does not mean that youre not contaminated. It just means that you may or may not be contaminated but enough hasnt dissolved in your blood stream to go through your kidneys to be excreted in your urine. Anyone who goes now cannot avoid being contaminated. Anyone. Anyone. Anyone. Everyone who goes to the Middle East and Afghanistan will be contaminated. The DU issue affects every single living thing on this planet. What else has that impact? They have altered the genome for the entire planet forever with this DU. The Pentagon people say, Youre exaggerating or you use the uranium word to scare people. I dont care if people believe me or not. All I can say is that over time what I am saying will actually be an underestimation of the long term effects. What Is Depleted Uranium? A Scientific Perspective Interview with Leuren Moret, Geo-Scientist A Military Perspective Interview with Dr. Doug Rokke, Ph.D, former Director of the U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project A Survivors Perpsective Interview with Melissa Sterry, Gulf War Veteran who is surviving the effects of depleted uranium http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/News/19news03.htm ***************************************************************** 46 Bill Introduced Into Congress to Obtain Scientific Certainty Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 20:15:45 -0500 (CDT) "McDermott said. "We may be endangering the health and lives of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians. All we've gotten so far from the Pentagon are assurances. We need facts backed by science. We don't have that today." Well then, how could Lauren Moret and others be making all these statements about DU definitively linked to severe health effects--and more importantly why are various activists claiming they are true when, apparently, they have little or no evidence to back this up? http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/News/22news04.htm Lone Star Iconoclast Depeted Uranium Bill Introduced Into Congress WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA), a medical doctor, on May 17 introduced legislation with 21 original co-sponsors in the House of Representatives that calls for medical and scientific studies on the health and environmental impacts from the U.S. Military's use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions in combat zones, including Iraq. The McDermott bill also calls for cleanup and mitigation of sites in the U.S. contaminated by DU. "The need is urgent and imperative for full, fair and impartial studies," McDermott said. "We may be endangering the health and lives of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians. All we've gotten so far from the Pentagon are assurances. We need facts backed by science. We don't have that today." Because of its density, the military uses DU as a protective shield around tanks, and in munitions like armor piercing bullets and tank shells. DU tends to spontaneously ignite upon impact, disintegrating into a micro-fine residue that hangs suspended in the air where it can be inhaled and falls to the ground to leach into the soil. DU is a by-product of the uranium enrichment process; it is chemically toxic. and DU has low-level radioactivity. About 300 metric tons of DU munitions were fired during the first Gulf War, and about half that amount has been used to date in the Iraq War. "I've been concerned about DU since veterans of the first Gulf War began to experience unexplained illnesses, commonly called 'Gulf War Syndrome' that remain mysterious," McDermott said. McDermott added that there are reports from Iraqi doctors and others today of seemingly unexplained serious illnesses including higher rates of cancer and leukemia, and even birth defects. "We pretended there was no problem with Agent Orange after Vietnam and later the Pentagon recanted, after untold suffering by veterans. I want to know scientifically if DU poses serious dangers to our soldiers and Iraqi civilians." The Depleted Uranium Munitions Study Act of 2005 has 21 original co-sponsors, all Democrats, including: Reps. Charles Rangel, Pete Stark, Sherrod Brown, Peter DeFazio, Maurice Hinchey, Raul Grijalva, Jan Schakowsky, Robert Wexler, Sam Farr, Tammy Baldwin, Robert Andrews, Bob Filner, Jay Inslee, Jose Serrano, Lynn Woolsey, Earl Blumenauer, Bart Stupak, Mike Honda, Tom Udall, Barney Frank and Ed Markey. ***************************************************************** 47 Lone Star Iconoclast: Depeted Uranium Bill Introduced Into Congress www.iconoclast-texas.com WASHINGTON, D.C. — Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA), a medical doctor, on May 17 introduced legislation with 21 original co-sponsors in the House of Representatives that calls for medical and scientific studies on the health and environmental impacts from the U.S. Military’s use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions in combat zones, including Iraq. The McDermott bill also calls for cleanup and mitigation of sites in the U.S. contaminated by DU. “The need is urgent and imperative for full, fair and impartial studies,” McDermott said. “We may be endangering the health and lives of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi civilians. All we’ve gotten so far from the Pentagon are assurances. We need facts backed by science. We don’t have that today.” Because of its density, the military uses DU as a protective shield around tanks, and in munitions like armor piercing bullets and tank shells. DU tends to spontaneously ignite upon impact, disintegrating into a micro-fine residue that hangs suspended in the air where it can be inhaled and falls to the ground to leach into the soil. DU is a by-product of the uranium enrichment process; it is chemically toxic. and DU has low-level radioactivity. About 300 metric tons of DU munitions were fired during the first Gulf War, and about half that amount has been used to date in the Iraq War. “I’ve been concerned about DU since veterans of the first Gulf War began to experience unexplained illnesses, commonly called ‘Gulf War Syndrome’ that remain mysterious,” McDermott said. McDermott added that there are reports from Iraqi doctors and others today of seemingly unexplained serious illnesses including higher rates of cancer and leukemia, and even birth defects. “We pretended there was no problem with Agent Orange after Vietnam and later the Pentagon recanted, after untold suffering by veterans. I want to know scientifically if DU poses serious dangers to our soldiers and Iraqi civilians.” The Depleted Uranium Munitions Study Act of 2005 has 21 original co-sponsors, all Democrats, including: Reps. Charles Rangel, Pete Stark, Sherrod Brown, Peter DeFazio, Maurice Hinchey, Raul Grijalva, Jan Schakowsky, Robert Wexler, Sam Farr, Tammy Baldwin, Robert Andrews, Bob Filner, Jay Inslee, Jose Serrano, Lynn Woolsey, Earl Blumenauer, Bart Stupak, Mike Honda, Tom Udall, Barney Frank and Ed Markey. Copyright ©2004 The Lone Star Iconoclast ***************************************************************** 48 BELLACIAO: Depleted Uranium: A Scientific Perspective - Collective Bellaciao Monday 30th May 2005 (20h28) : An Interview With LEUREN MORET, Geoscientist Interview Conducted By W. Leon Smith and Nathan Diebenow Leuren Moret is a geoscientist who works almost around the clock educating citizens, the media, members of parliaments and Congress and other officials on radiation issues. She became a whistleblower in 1991 at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab after witnessing fraud on the Yucca Mountain Project. She is currently working as an independent citizen scientist and radiation specialist in communities around the world, and contributed to the U.N. subcommission investigating depleted uranium. According to Wikipedia online encyclopedia, Moret testified at the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan in Japan in 2003, presented at the World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference in Hamburg, Germany, and spoke at the World Court of Women at the World Social Forum in Bombay, India, in January 2004. THE INTERVIEW ICONOCLAST: What are the latest developments with reducing depleted uranium exposures on U.S. troops? MORET: A young veteran named Melissa Sterry of Connecticut has introduced a bill into the Connecticut Legislature requiring independent testing of returning Afghan and Gulf War veterans going back to 2001. She said that she did it because shes sick, and her friends are dead, and thats from serving in the 2003 conflict. I have been following the bill and talking to her. Yesterday, she testified twice at the United Nations. I said, "Why dont we get this bill all over the U.S. in state legislatures because it informs the public and get the local media to cover it." The U.S. has blocked any accountability at international and national levels. Theres a total cover-up just like with Agent Orange, the atomic veterans, MKULTRA, the mind control experiments the CIA did. This is more of the same, but the issue is much, much worse because the genetic future of all those contaminated is effected. Now vast regions around our world, as well as our atmosphere, are contaminated with the depleted uranium. Theyve used so much. Its the equivalent number of atoms, as the Japanese professor calculated it, to over 400,000 Nagasaki bombs that has been released into the atmosphere. Thats really an underestimate. I went to Louisiana in April. I was invited to speak at the University of New Orleans for three days. One of the veterans asked me to be in their April 19 protest and rally through the City of New Orleans. He took the Connecticut bill straight to the Legislature, and he got two legislators to sponsor it, and he said, "Just whiteout the name ‘Connecticut and write in ‘Louisiana on the bill." Youre not going to believe it. It passed 101 to 0 yesterday in the Louisiana House. I want you to write about it because we want it (the DU testing bill) in Texas. Nevada is going to introduce it. Congressman Jim McDermott is going to put it into the Washington legislature. We want to get the governor of Montana to do it because hes the first governor to demand his National Guard be returned. I think half of them are back. He said, "I need them in the state." The DU issue is just really, really, really, really so awful. I dont think theres any greater tragedy in the history of the world in what theyve done. ICONOCLAST: Is there a danger of depleted uranium, being used in weaponry over there, spreading by air over here? MORET: The atmosphere globally is contaminated with it. Its completely mixed in one year. Im an expert on atmospheric dust. Im a geoscientist, a geologist, and thats what I studied and did my research on. Its really a fascinating subject. We have huge dust storms that are a million square miles and transport millions of tons of dust and sand every year around the world. The main centers of these dust storms are the Gobi Desert in China, which is where the Chinese did atmospheric testing, so thats all contaminated with radiation, and it gets transported right over Japan, and it comes straight across the Pacific and dumps all its sand and dust on the U.S., North America. Its loaded with radioactive isotopes, soot, pesticides, chemicals, pollution -- everything is in it -- fungi, bacteria, viruses. The Sahara Desert is another huge dust center, and it goes up all over Europe and straight across the Atlantic, to the Caribbean, and up the East Coast. Of course, you get it in Texas with those hurricanes. They all originate in the Sahara Desert. The third region is the Western United States, which is where the Nevada test site is located. We did 1,200 nuclear weapons tests there, so all this radiation that is already there, which is bad enough, has caused a global cancer epidemic since 1945. All of that radiation was the equivalent of 40,000 Nagasaki bombs. Were talking about 10 times more. In April of 2003, the World Health Organization said they expect global cancer rates to increase 50 percent by the year 2020. Infant mortality is going up again all over the world. This is an indicator of the level of radioactive pollution. When the U.S. and Russia signed the partial test ban treaty in 1963, the infant mortality rate started dropping again, which is normal. Now they are going up again. Its the global pollution with this radiation. ICONOCLAST: I had one of our correspondents send me a series of photographs of the Al-Asad dust storm in Iraq on April 28. MORET: That dust is what Im talking about. ICONOCLAST: In the picture you can see a gigantic wall of sand. MORET: I have 16 pictures of that storm. Theyre posted with photos from Iraqi doctors of the children of people with cancer and leukemia. So what did you think of that dust storm? ICONOCLAST: I thought it was really dramatic. MORET: It remobilizes all the radiation, but those are the larger chunks. The DU burns at such high temperatures. Its a pyroforic metal which means it burns. The bullets and big caliber shells are actually on fire when they come out of the gun barrel because they are ignited by the friction in the gun barrel. Seventy percent of the DU metal becomes a metal vapor. Its actually a radioactive gas weapon and a terrain contaminant. Ill email you the URL of the 1943 memo to General Leslie Grove under the Manhattan Project. Its the blueprint for depleted uranium. They dropped the atomic bombs, but they did not use the DU weapons because they thought they were too horrific. Ive toured and gone all over Japan with a pediatrician in Basra and an oncologist, a cancer specialist. These poor doctors -- their whole families are dying of cancer. He has 10 members of his family with cancer now that hes treating, and this is just from Gulf War I. Theyve used much, much, much more in 2003. All over the whole country. ICONOCLAST: What can soldiers expect when they come home? MORET: If they were in Bradley Fighting Vehicles, theyre coming home with rectal cancer from sitting on ammunition boxes. The young women are reporting terrible problems with endometriosis. Thats the lining of the uterus malfunctioning, and they just bleed and bleed and bleed. Some of them have uterine cancer -- 18 and 19 and 20 year olds. The Army will not even diagnose it. They send them back to the battlefields. They wont treat them or diagnose them. A group of 20 soldiers pushed from Kuwait to Baghdad in 2003 in all the fighting. Eight of those 20 soldiers have malignancies. ICONOCLAST: Does exposure to depleted uranium effect their psychological background when they come home? MORET: Depleted uranium are these particles that form at very high temperatures. They are uranium oxides that are insoluble. They are at least 100 times smaller than a white blood cell, so when the soldiers breathe, they inhale them. The particles go through the nose, go through the olfactory and into the brain, and it messes up their cognitive abilities, thought processes. It damages their mood-control mechanism in the brain. Four soldiers at Fort Bragg came back from Afghanistan, and within two months, those four had murdered their wives. This is part of the damage to the brain from the radiation and the particles. The soldiers from Gulf War I in a group of 67 soldiers who came back, they had DU in their equipment, in their clothes, in their bodies, in their semen, and they had normal babies before they went over there to war. They came back, and the VA did a study. Of 251 Gulf War I veterans in Mississippi, in 67 percent of them, thier babies born after the war were deemed to have severe birth defects. They had brains missing, arms and legs missing, organs missing. They were born without eyes. They had horrible blood diseases. Its horrific. If you want to look at something, Life magazine did a photo essay which is still on the Internet. Its called "The Tiny Victims of Desert Storm." You should look at that -- oh, my God, the post-Gulf War babies playing with their brothers and sisters who are normal. Basically, its like smoking crack, only youre smoking radioactive crack. It goes straight into the blood stream. Its carried all throughout the body into the bones, the bone marrow, the brain. It goes into the fetus. Its a systemic poison and a radiological poison. ICONOCLAST: What about the people in the United States that are here? You say that DU is being mixed and spread globally? MORET: Yes, its being mixed globally. Were getting secondary smoke. Its the secondary smoke effect. You know the people who inhabit a room with smokers? They are getting that secondary smoke, and so are we. ICONOCLAST: Is that secondary smoke getting thicker as we speak? MORET: Yeah, the concentration of the depleted uranium particles in the atmosphere all around the globe is increasing. There are indications that the U.S. will go in June and bomb the heck out of Iran. Were monitoring the U.S. Army ammunition factories. They have very large orders for those huge bunker buster bombs that have 5,000 lbs. of DU in the warhead. ICONOCLAST: So the prognosis for America isnt really good? MORET: No, its really bad. ICONOCLAST: And if this continues then? MORET: Its going to kill off the worlds population. It already is, and it doesnt just effect people. It effects all living systems. The plants, the animals, the bacteria. It effects everything. ICONOCLAST: So the things that we eat for instance, if they have DU in them, then well just get it in our systems, and so were polluting the oceans, so that could effect all marine life? MORET: Yes, its in the air, water, and soil. The half- life of DU, Uranium 238, is 4.5 billion years the age of the Earth. ICONOCLAST: With the damage thats been done to this point, can we turn back? We cant clean it up? MORET: Theres no way to clean it up. What happens is these tiny particles float around the Earth. There are still plutonium and uranium floating around the Earth from bomb testing. These particles are so tiny that molecules bumping into them keep them lofted in the air, and so the only way for them to get out of the atmosphere is rain, snow, fog, pollution, which will clear them out of the air and deposit them in the environment. What happens is the surface of these particles gets wetted by the moisture in the air. They come down and land on stuff and stick to it like a glue. You cant ever get the particles off whatever theyre sticking to because have you ever put a drop of water on a microscope slide and then put another one on top of it? Can you pull those apart? ICONOCLAST: No. MORET: Okay, thats the same effect that happens to radioactive particles. Once they are removed from the atmosphere, they stick to any surfaces they land on. In a way they are removed from circulation from the atmosphere. You cant wash them off. If it keeps raining or theyre in a creek, you know, if theyre on rocks or stones or something in a creek, they wont even wash off. You didnt know it was this bad, did you? ICONOCLAST: No, I knew it was bad, but I thought it was fairly isolated. MORET: No. What is over there (in Iraq) is over here in about four days. I dont know if you followed Chernobyl. That big bubble of radiation went around and around the world, but this is dust. It becomes a part of atmospheric dust. Like the dust storm you saw in that photo, it goes everywhere. ICONOCLAST: Is it in the upper levels of the atmosphere or the lower levels? MORET: Its in lower orbital space. They brought the Mir spacecraft back down to Earth when they got done using it, and there was something called a space midge which covered the electronics on the outside of the spacecraft and protected it from radiation that comes from the sun because electronics are real vulnerable to radiation. They analyzed the surface of that space net and found uranium and uranium decayed products which they said came from atmospheric testing or burned up spacecraft with nuclear materials or nuclear reactors on board. Uranium can also come from supernovas, but they thought that the most likely sources were atmospheric testing and the nuclear materials we put in space. ICONOCLAST: Essentially then, youre saying that were conducting a nuclear war. MORET: Yes, and thats exactly what it is. Weve conducted four nuclear wars since 1991. Yeah, these are nuclear wars. DU is a nuclear weapon. ICONOCLAST: From the point of view of a scientist, what needs to happen to correct this? MORET: Well, we need to stop the use of it. Weve built an international movement to stop the use, the manufacture, the storage, the sales, and the deployment of depleted uranium weapons. ICONOCLAST: Are the munitions we sell to other countries contained with depleted uranium? MORET: We have. In 1968 the first depleted uranium weapons systems that we found a patent for suddenly appeared in the U.S. patent office. It was for the Navy. It was sort of a Gatling gun style weapon system that you mounted on ships. It rapidly fires like 2,500 bullets a minute. Its over 3,000 now. Theyve improved the design. Then in 1973, we gave depleted uranium weapons systems to the Israelis and supervised their use. They used them in the Arab-Israeli war and completely wiped out the Arabs in five days. Then the show was on the road. That was the first actual battlefield demonstration of this new weapon system. Hughes Aircraft developed the full-length system which is for the Navy. Thats the Gatling gun system. They still use it. That was produced in 1974 and tested. Within six months the U.S. government had sold the DU weapons system to 12 entities which included many branches of the U.S. military and other counties. Weve sold DU weapons systems to about -- we dont know exactly for sure -- its been about 12 or 17 countries. The good news is that normally such a weapons system that effective would have been sold to 80, 100, or 120 countries by now. But because of the radiological, biological, and environmental hazard, countries were not only afraid to buy it, the ones who did buy it are afraid to use it. The only countries we know that have used DU are Britain, the U.S., and Israel. The United Nations in 1996 passed a resolution that depleted uranium weapons are weapons of mass destruction, and they are illegal under all international laws and treaties. In 2001, the European Parliament passed a resolution on DU. What happened is that the NATO forces went into Yugoslavia in 1998 and 99 and flew 39,000 bombing runs and completely bombed Yugoslavia into radioactive rubble. Germany and the U.S. made the most money on the destruction of Yugoslavia, and they made sure that countries that didnt know about the DU, that the peacekeepers from those countries like from Italy and Portugal, were sent to the most contaminated regions in Yugoslavia. Germans and Americans didnt send their own troops into those areas. They were in the least contaminated areas. These poor soldiers from other countries came back and died within weeks or in a couple of days or months. The parents in Portugal and Italy are furious and went to the Parliament and media, and there was just a huge media storm of articles about DU. The cat was out of the bag because of the 1998 NATO invasion of Yugoslavia. The cat was out of the bag, but Japanese troops have been sent into Somawa. Theyre self-defense forces. It was the most contaminated area where the heaviest fighting happened in Iraq. We can expect those soldiers to be really, really sick. ICONOCLAST: What about Iraq itself? Whats been done thus far? MORET: Its uninhabitable. The whole country. Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Afghanistan are completely uninhabitable. ICONOCLAST: But people live there, so theyre going to live there suffering? MORET: Well, you can see from the birth defects and the illnesses that it is pretty severe. Each year the number of birth defects and illnesses will rise because of the total contamination levels in all living things will increase because they are breathing that air and drinking water and eating the food from contaminated soils. Its just a slow death sentence. The same with Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. Depleted uranium is a very, very, very effective biological weapon. This is the primary purpose for using it. Marion Falk (a retired chemical physicist who built nuclear bombs for more than 20 years at Lawrence Livermore lab), who is the Manhattan Project scientist I work with, taught me pretty much everything about radiation and particles and DU. He said the purpose of weapons used by the military is not only to injure and kill the enemy soldiers, but the purpose is to kill, maim, and disease the civilian population because it reduces the productivity of a country and pretty soon a lot of their resources are going to be used for taking care of sick people. They will have fewer and fewer healthy workers. Of course, once you cause mutation in the DNA, that damage is passed on to future generations of that affected person or animal or plant. DNA does not repair itself. ICONOCLAST: So the mutations would be probably destructive moreso than constructive. MORET: Oh, the mutations are causing those birth defects. ICONOCLAST: Theyre not evolutionary diseases? MORET: No, they are evolutionary. They are inherited by all future generations and passed on. Its like if you have red hair and all of your future generations will have that gene. ICONOCLAST: So if I had a precondition to heart disease because of the radiation, then the generation that would come after me would have the same problem? MORET: Well, if you damage the cell or parts of the cell or functioning of cells, that doesnt necessarily damage the DNA. There are two kinds of damage: one damages the cells of the living organism, and that may not be passed on, but if you damage the DNA in the egg or the sperm, that is passed on to all future generations. ICONOCLAST: So the guys coming back from the war, their sperm is probably going to be -- MORET: Damaged. Yes. They also have depleted uranium in their semen. When theyre intimate with their partners, they internally contaminate them with depleted uranium. The women become sick themselves. They have depleted uranium in their bodies, and there is something called burning syndrome. Just absolutely horrible. You can read about it in an article by David Rose in the December Vanity Fair. Its on the Internet. A friend of mine is the widow of a Canadian Gulf War veteran. David Rose interviewed her, and she griped about the burning semen. She said, "I had 20 condoms full of frozen peas in my freezer at all times, and after we were intimate, I would insert one into my vagina, and that is the only way I could bear the pain from the burning semen." And it goes through condoms, too. ICONOCLAST: Gosh, durn! MORET: Yeah, you should see the high school classes when I talk about the burning semen and the internal contamination. The girls mouths go into little round Os, and the boys start panicking because theyre like, "Ill never get sick!" (laughs) The name of this article is "Weapons of Self-Destruction." ICONOCLAST: How much DU will it take to kill off all known life on this planet? MORET: The amount of radiation released is certainly going to have a very, very profound global impact, and were already seeing infant mortality increasing globally. The fetus is the most susceptible to radiation damage because all the cells are rapidly dividing, the limbs and the bodies developing, so when you start introducing toxic chemicals and radiation, it really damages the natural process of fetal development. The reason they were able to convince the Senate to sign the partial test ban treaty in 1963 was because of the increase in infant mortality. It had been dropping and declining two or three percent for quite a long time each year because of better prenatal care and educating mothers. Infant mortality started going up after the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, especially in the ‘50s when the big bomb testing started. By 1963, it was really obvious that the bomb testing globally was having a real impact on the unborn. They signed the partial test ban treaty. Russia and the U.S. stopped atmospheric testing, and the infant mortality rate started going down right away. Theyre going up again now. This is global radioactive pollution, and how long it would take to eliminate all life is something nobody knows, but the depleted uranium is a very, very effective biological weapon. There are two purposes for the military use of weapons. One is to destroy the enemy soldiers, and the other, which is just as important, is to destroy the enemy civilian population. By causing illnesses and disease, long lingering illnesses really impact the productivity and the economy of a country. It was Chernobyl and other nuclear disasters that actually destroyed the Soviet Union because the former Soviet Union is very, very sick from all the radiation that was released. They were much more sloppier than we were. I have a World Health Organization world health survey which they published in the Journal of American Medical Association last June. The impact of atmospheric testing is very, very apparent by the percentage of population in each country they investigated for some form of mental illness. For instance, Japan is 8.8 percent. Nigeria is very low -- 4.7 percent. They have almost no radiation in Nigeria. In the Ukraine where they had the Chernobyl accident, it is 20.4 percent. Spain is at 9.2 percent. Italy is 8.2 percent. Its pretty low because they dont have nuke plants. France is 75 percent reliant on nuclear power, so you have mental illness in 18.4 percent of the population. Mexico is at 12.2 percent, and the United States is at 26.3 percent -- the highest rate of mental illness in the world. And George Bush and his siblings were all exposed in utero to bomb testing fallout in the United States. He had a toddler sister who died of leukemia when she was about three. I worked with a group called the Radiation And Public Health Project. Their website is . We are all radiation specialists, well-known scientists, and independent scientists. Weve collected 6,000 baby teeth around nuclear power plants and measured the radiation in them, and one of our members is the neighbor of the women who worked with all of the Bush children, including President Bush himself, because they had severe learning disabilities. ICONOCLAST: How do we know that the Bush children were exposed? MORET: By the year of their birth. The year they were carried by their mother. You have to look at how much bomb testing material was released into the atmosphere, and theres a direct correlation to the decline in SAT scores for all teenagers in the U.S. to the amount of radiation that was released into the atmosphere the year their mother was carrying them. These are delayed effects of radiation exposure in utero. ICONOCLAST: So they were living in Connecticut, but they were still feeling the effects of the radiation in Nevada? MORET: Two years ago the U.S. government admitted that every single person living in the United States between 1957 and 1963 was internally exposed to radiation. So for any pregnant woman during those years, her fetus was exposed. ICONOCLAST: What type of radiation levels are we talking about? MORET: Its low levels, and the main pathways are drinking water and dairy products. It even killed the baby fish in the Atlantic. Strontium-90 is a man-made isotope that comes out of nuclear bombs and nuclear reactors. They measured the levels of strontium-90 in milk in Norway from the 1950s up until the 1970s, and they measured the decline in the fishing catch in that same period, and as the strontium-90 increased in the milk in Norway, fishing catches declined. By 1963, when the U.S. tested a nuclear bomb almost every day (they did 250 tests in one year because the treaty was going to be signed), the fishing catch declined by 50 percent. In the Pacific, it declined 60 percent because there was Russian, Chinese, French, and U.S. testing in the Pacific. ICONOCLAST: So were still eating those contaminated fish today. Has the genetic code been changed? MORET: The oceans are getting whatever is getting rained down, snowed down, or fogged down from the atmosphere. Its getting into the oceans. This big frog die-off, which is global, is certainly related to the radiation in the rainwater. Its a global nuclear holocaust. It effects all living things. Thats why they call it "omnicide," which means it kills all living things -- the plants, the animals, the bacteria. Everything. ICONOCLAST: You think we ought to have the Weather Channel report on the current sand storm conditions in Iraq so we can prepare four days in advance for the radiation? MORET: Ill tell you what I did when 9/11 happened. I called all the doctors with Radiation And Public Health Project, and I said, "Get out of town, and dont come back until it has rained three times." One lived 12 miles downwind from the Pentagon. She went out on her balcony with her geiger counter. I said, "Get that geiger counter out of your purse." We had just done a press conference in San Francisco, and I knew she had it in her purse. Well, the radiation levels were 8-10 times higher than background. We called the EPA, HAZMAT, FBI, and said, "Get all those emergency response workers suited up. They need to be protected." Two days after 9/11, the EPA radiation expert for that region called back and said, "Yup, the Pentagon crash rubble was radioactive, and we believe its depleted uranium, but were not worried about that. Its only harmful if its inhaled." He said, "Were worried about the lead solder in the plane." Well, you know whats in Tomahawk missiles? They have depleted uranium warheads. The radioactive crash rubble contaminated with DU is evidence of a DU warhead. ICONOCLAST: I did not think about that, but going back to my original question: Should the Weather Channel report for us on the toxic dust storms in Iraq? MORET: But how could people get away from them? These dust storms are a million square miles. Theyre huge, and they come right across the Atlantic, the Caribbean, and Texas coast line, and right up the East Coast. There are people who are going to leave the state every time theres a hurricane Its in the food, drinking water, dairy products, and then the problem with Uranium 238, which is 99.39 percent DU, is that it decays in over 20 steps into other radioactive isotopes. Thats why I call it the "Trojan Horse." Its the weapon that keeps giving. It keeps killing. This is like smoking radioactive crack. It goes right in your nose. It crosses the olfactory bulb into your brain. Its a systemic poison. It goes everywhere. These particles that form at very high temperatures -- 5,000-10,000 degrees C -- are nanoparticles. They are a 10th of a micron or smaller. A 10th of a micron is 100 times smaller than a white blood cell. They get picked up in the lipids and probably the cholesterol and go right through the cell membranes of the cell. They screw up the cell processes. They screw up the signaling between the cells because the cells all talk to each other and coordinate what theyre doing. It messes up brain function. ICONOCLAST: Do you know what Iraq was like before the first Gulf War? MORET: Iraq prior to the 1991 Gulf War was the most advanced in the entire Middle East. They had scrupulous databases of the health problems and disease rates, which is why the U.S. bombed all of the offices in the Ministry of Health. We destroyed all those records so that a pre-Gulf War health base could not be established to show how much these diseases have increased. This would concern the U.S. in terms of compensation for war crimes. In these horrible U.N. sanctions, they (the Iraqis) could never get all of the protocol medicine for the treatment of leukemia. They (the U.N.) would say, "These steps of the leukemia treatment were components in weapons, so you cant have that." They never gave the people the full proper protocols in the areas of treatment they needed to get rid of the leukemia. It hid the effects of the depleted uranium because the children were starving. They had malnutrition. They had the healthiest population in the Middle East (prior to Gulf War I). ICONOCLAST: Lets talk about the children of Iraq. MORET: After the Gulf War, they had maybe one baby a week born with birth defects in the hospitals in Basra. Now they are having 10-12 a day. The levels of uranium are increasing in the population every year. Every day, people are eating and drinking while the whole environment is contaminated. Just what youd expect. There are more babies born with birth defects, and the birth defects are getting more and more severe. An Iraqi doctor told me that babies are being born now that are lumps of flesh. She said that they dont have heads or legs or arms. Its just a lump of flesh. This also happened to populations that were not removed from islands in the Pacific when the bomb tests occurred. Basically, governments were using them as guinea pigs. ICONOCLAST: So all the countries that were equipped with nuclear weapons are guilty of those atrocities. MORET: They were all doing it. France, Russia. China, and the U.S. And Im not sure if Britain did bomb testing. They were real low key about it. ICONOCLAST: Where are the radiation hot spots in the United States? MORET: In the United States, it would be within a 100 miles of nuclear power plants. We have 110 nuclear power plants in the U.S. We have the most of any country in the world, but only a 103 are operating. Almost all of the entire East Coast. What we did was we took government data from the Centers of Disease Control on breast cancer deaths between 1985 and 1989. Anywhere from within a 100 miles of a nuclear power plant is where two-thirds of all breast cancer deaths occurred in the U.S. between 1985 and 1989. Its also around the nuclear weapons laboratories. That would be Los Alamos in New Mexico, the Idaho Nuclear Engineering Lab in Idaho, and Hanford in Washington State, which is where they got the plutonium for all the bombs. They contaminated the entire Columbia River watershed and almost the whole state of Washington. It gets into the water and into the plants and into the vegetation. If you eat clams or mussels or crabs or things like that, even certain kinds of fish that eat off of the mud at the bottom of the river, you have much higher levels of radiation in your tissues. It depends on each person and on how healthy they are, but this man from Washington State died suddenly. He was in his late 40s. They did an autopsy, and he was full of radioactive zinc. They went, "Where in the world did he get this? It only comes from nuclear bombs and nuclear reactors." They studied his diet and discovered he loved to eat oysters. They found out where he bought his oysters and found the oyster beds. They were 200 miles off shore, from Washington State. The radiation was being carried off out to sea from the coastline. It was passing over this oyster bed. The oysters were just gobbling them up. ICONOCLAST: What are the symptoms of DU poisoning? MORET: Soldiers on the battlefield have reported a metallic taste in their mouth. Thats the actual taste of the uranium metal. Then within 24-48 hours, soldiers on the battlefield have reported that they felt sick. They start getting muscle aches, and they lose energy. Some of them came back incontinent. In other words, in adult diapers. One woman reported that the first night home, she wanted to be intimate with her husband, but she had absolutely no feeling. She couldnt feel anything from the waist down. This particulate matter damages the neuromuscular system, the nerves; it just goes everywhere. And theres no treatment for it. These particles are very, very insoluble, so they cant even dissolve in body fluids, so they can be excreted from the body. Then they keep releasing. Even when uranium decays, it turns into another radioactive isotope. So its a particle that just sits there shooting bullets until you die. Another problem is that soldiers have crumbling teeth. Teeth just start falling apart. The uranium replaces calcium in the calcium-phosphate structure of the teeth. Some have complained about grand mal seizures, cerebral palsy. Some diseases reported at very high rates in Air Force and Army soldiers are Parkinsons disease, Lou Gehrigs disease, and Hodgkins disease. This is damage to the mitochondria in the cells and the nerves. The mitochondria make all the energy for the body, so when you damage mitochondria, another symptom is chronic fatigue syndrome. Theres just not enough energy produced by the body to function normally. I found a study in the SanDia Nuclear Weapons Laboratory employee newsletter in September 2003. They are doing major studies in mitochondrial disfunction related to Lou Gehrigs, Hodgkins, and Parkinsons diseases for veterans. Since its at a nuclear weapons lab, they are fully aware of the health damage. ICONOCLAST: Tell me about the tests that detect for DU in the body. MORET: The chromosome test in the best indicator. Its $5,000. The urine test is a $1,000. If you test positive with the urine test, you know youre contaminated. If you test negative, it does not mean that youre not contaminated. It just means that you may or may not be contaminated but enough hasnt dissolved in your blood stream to go through your kidneys to be excreted in your urine. Anyone who goes now cannot avoid being contaminated. Anyone. Anyone. Anyone. Everyone who goes to the Middle East and Afghanistan will be contaminated. The DU issue affects every single living thing on this planet. What else has that impact? They have altered the genome for the entire planet forever with this DU. The Pentagon people say, "Youre exaggerating or you use the uranium word to scare people." I dont care if people believe me or not. All I can say is that over time what I am saying will actually be an underestimation of the long term effects. by : Leon Smith Monday 30th May 2005 ***************************************************************** 49 DenverPost.com: Flats expert spent career exposing radiation's effects Article Launched: 05/30/2005 01:55:09 AM biography By Kim McGuire Denver Post Staff Writer Bob Bistline demonstrates a device to monitor radioactive materials in workers lungs. Developing one was among his first tasks upon arriving at Rocky Flats in 1966. (Post / Lyn Alweis) As a nuclear physicist, Bob Bistline was trained in the world of subatomic particles - neutrons, protons, electrons and quarks. Observing autopsies of former Rocky Flats workers was a very different and bloody environment but one Bistline would become intimately familiar in during his 38-year career at Rocky Flats, where he was responsible for - among other things - measuring plutonium inside employees' bodies. "It was hard," Bistline said. "Here they are my friends - I even went to church with a couple I did autopsies on. But at the same time my feeling is, 'I'm here to help them.' My job is to try to find out as much as I possibly can to protect the future generation." Bistline retired last week from the former nuclear bomb plant, where he conducted what is widely regarded throughout the Department of Energy complex as some of the nation's most important research on radiation exposure. His work has helped mold DOE policies and programs that focus on protecting thousands of nuclear workers from the dangerous materials they handle in the name of national defense. "I guess you could say he's populated an entire country with his knowledge about these issues," said Dr. John McInerney, Rocky Flats' site doctor. "If there's a beryllium issue at (the Hanford nuclear site in Washington state), the Department of Energy calls Dr. Bist line. If there's a major study regarding plutonium, Dr. Bistline's work is always cited." Born on the family farm in Kansas, Bistline's career at Rocky Flats was launched when he was approached by recruiters from Dow Chemical Co. while he was working on his master's degree in radiological sciences at the University of Washington. One of his first tasks upon arriving at the nuclear bomb plant in 1966 was to develop a device that could measure plutonium in workers' lungs at levels that equaled 2-billionths of a gram. It was a challenge, Bistline said, because of plutonium's ability to lodge itself deep inside the lungs and other organs where it was difficult to detect. "We were finding surprises," Bistline said of those early tests. "We were finding plutonium in workers we didn't realize had been involved in incidents. If we hadn't had the lung counters, we wouldn't have known for years." Those kind of discoveries happened frequently at Rocky Flats, where Bistline worked for every contractor until joining the DOE in 1995. In the plant's early days, Bist line said, protecting workers from radiation was a top priority, but it was sometimes hindered by ignorance. Back then, he said, the government contractors wanted to keep workers who had been exposed to plutonium far away from the radioactive material. So they put them to work in the beryllium foundries. "In fact the industrial hygienist at the time said, 'Beryllium? That's as innocuous as the sand we walk on.' And that was kind of the thinking at the time. But I had real concerns even back then." As one of the first scientists to study the cumulative impact of the two materials, Bistline is today considered one of the nation's top experts on beryllium, which can cause lung scarring and often leads to a painful death. While his scientific research has won him national recognition, it's his quiet advocacy for the thousands of sick Rocky Flats workers that has won him the most respect from his peers. "He does his job - not because he enjoys being published or being considered a world expert," said Bruce Wallin, Rocky Flat's radiation safety officer. "He does it because it's all about having heart. He does it because he cares about the workers and wants to help." In the early '80s, for example, Bistline started the Department of Energy's first real worker "recall" program so he could monitor radiation effects long after employees left the plant. He is now among the hundreds of employees who are moving on. Rocky Flats is expected to close in October as crews complete the $7 billion cleanup job. And even though he and his wife will soon be moving back to Kansas, Bistline says he will probably continue to do consulting work and serve on panels looking at health effects of radiation. "I was really blessed," he said. "The good Lord blessed me, I tell you, to place me here at Rocky Flats. There were so many lessons learned here." Staff writer Kim McGuire can be reached at 303-820-1240 or kmcguire@denverpost.com. All contents Copyright 2005 The Denver Post or other copyright ***************************************************************** 50 ITAR-TASS: 2 containers with radioactive cobalt 60 found in Tbilisi. 31.05.2005, 23.25 TBILISI, May 31 (Itar-Tass) -- The Georgian Interior Ministry’s Counter-Intelligence Service found two containers with radioactive cobalt 60 on premises of the Gidrostroienergo Company in Tbilisi on Tuesday. The service said the containers with the radioactive material, which had been used in medicine, were buried several years ago. Terrorists might have taken possession of the containers and used them for the production of dirty bombs, service deputy head Merab Topchishvili said. The containers have been evacuated to a safe place. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, store in any medium (including in any other websites), distribute, transmit, re-transmit, broadcast, modify or show in public any part of the ITAR-TASS website without the prior written permission of ITAR-TASS. ***************************************************************** 51 Online Journal: Depleted, it ain't! So-called depleted uranium, that is! Analysis By Bob Nichols Project Censored Award Winner & Online Journal Contributing Writer OKLAHOMA CITY, Red State of Delusion, May 31, 2005—The term "Depleted Uranium" is misleading, on purpose. So-called "depleted uranium" (DU) results from making hydrogen bombs. The CIA tries to deceive us all, all the time. They have succeeded for 55 years. George Lakoff blows the lid off the "Big Lie" about uranium weapons use. Processing natural uranium removes about half of the bomb making material. It is then called "depleted uranium" by the powers that be, because it can no longer be used to make H-Bombs; but it is used to make uranium bullets, shells, land mines and regular bombs instead. The so-called "depleted uranium" is 88 percent as radioactive as the original uranium. There is a huge amount, about 1.5 billion pounds, of "depleted uranium" at H-bomb factories in the US. The word depleted does not mean the uranium is safe or okay to use, it means it has been used to make H-Bombs, that's all. A less deceptive name would be George Lakoff's "Radioactive Weaponry." Or "12 percent depleted uranium;" but Lakoff's term "Radioactive Weaponry" better describes what the US military is currently widely using in Iraq and Central Asia. Copyright by Bob Nichols. Bob Nichols is a Project Censored Award Winner and lives in Oklahoma where 20 percent of the people cannot read. He is a contributor to Online Journal, AxisofLogic.com, DissidentVoice.com other online publications and the "San Francisco Bay View" newspaper. Nichols is a former employee of the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant. Nichols can be reached by bob.bobnichols@gmail.com ***************************************************************** 52 [NYTr] Groton Nuclear Sub Base a "Minefield of Pollution" Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 15:46:21 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by mart AP via The Washington Post - May 29, 2005 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/29/AR2005052900410.html Connecticut Sub Base a 'Minefield' of Pollution By MATT APUZZO GROTON, Conn. -- For decades, the land around the Navy's oldest submarine base was a dumping ground for whatever it needed to dispose of: sulfuric acid, torpedo fuel, waste oil and incinerator ash. Now the Pentagon has proposed closing the base, leaving a huge swath of land that contains dozens of acres of polluted soil and groundwater, an Associated Press review of more than 1,000 pages of government documents found. The Submarine Base New London is among at least seven military bases proposed for closure this year that are polluted, and the Pentagon has estimated it will cost more than $700 million to clean them. Even some areas that already have been cleaned could pose health risks to construction workers and future residents if the Groton base were to close, the military, state and federal environmental documents show. Although elected officials have promised to fight the base closure, which they estimate could cost Connecticut 31,500 jobs and $2 billion a year in personal income, Groton officials have already starting thinking about what might replace it. "I know we'll hear proposals for a waterfront district: parks, hotel, entertainment, condos, retail district and housing," said Paulann H. Sheets, a Groton town councilor and environmental attorney. But while the Navy pledges $23.9 million toward cleaning the base it opened as a naval station in 1868, officials said Wednesday that cleanup would only be to industrial standards. State officials fear the money won't be nearly enough to make the land fit for residential or recreational use. "That's not a redevelopment opportunity, that's a minefield of contamination," said Gina McCarthy, commissioner of the state Department of Environmental Protection. The military has a history of shutting down bases and leaving behind contaminated land. Thirty-four bases closed since 1988 are on the Superfund list of worst toxic waste sites, and none is completely cleaned yet" In its most recent Defense Environmental Programs report, an annual submission to Congress that outlines the Pentagon's environmental efforts, the Pentagon estimated it would cost more than $700 million to clean the polluted bases proposed for closure. Otis Air National Guard Base in Massachusetts, where petroleum, solvents and pesticides have contaminated the soil and water, is part of a military compound that requires $538 million in cleanup, according to the report. The Concord, Calif., Naval Weapons Station and the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, also are heavily polluted. The Navy has already spent $57.6 million cleaning the Groton base. Crews have sealed landfills, cleaned acres of wetlands and hauled away tons of soil contaminated with arsenic, PCBs, and the pesticide DDT. Some areas, such as a 14,000-gallon battery acid tank buried during World War II, have been cleaned to residential standards, but others have been treated with a combination of cleanup and land-use restrictions that presume the land will never be used for residential development. * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 53 [NukeNet] Monju: Supreme Court Snubs Citizens Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 17:21:23 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Media Release Monju Court Case: Supreme Court Snubs Citizens Japanese citizens' attempts to seek protection from the legal system received a blow today. The Supreme Court overturned an earlier Nagoya High Court verdict, which had invalidated the license approval for the Monju fast breeder reactor in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture. The Supreme Court failed to address the basic safety issues and simply rejected the citizens' argument on a technicality. After twenty years of brave struggle, the citizens have been snubbed by a totally unreasonable decision from a cold and distant Supreme Court. CNIC expects that the government will use this to justify its fuel cycle and plutonium policies. However, just because the Supreme Court has endorsed the original license approval, that doesn't mean that Monju will ever become fully operational. There are still huge technical and obstacles to be overcome and it is highly doubtful whether fast breeder reactors can ever be economically competitive. Furthermore, if fast breeders ever become a reality, we will be living in a plutonium economy. That means we will be living in a police state, because the plutonium required to operate just one commercial sized fast breeder reactor will be enough to produce hundreds of nuclear weapons. Background The 280 MW Monju prototype fast breeder reactor is located in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture. It has been shut down since 8 December 1995 because of a sodium leak and fire accident. Preparations are currently underway for modifications designed to rectify various safety defects identified since this accident. These modifications are scheduled to begin in September this year and will continue until around February 2007. According to Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute (JNC), the owner of Monju, the plan is for operations to recommence around February 2008. The lawsuit against the Monju prototype fast breeder reactor was originally filed by citizens in September 1985. Since then it has been back and forth between the Fukui District Court and the Nagoya High Court, with the status before today's decision being that the Nagoya High Court had adjudicated in 2003 in favor of the citizens who filed the suit. Under this decision the license approval was found to be invalid. The then Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation (now JNC) applied for a licence in 1980. Approval was granted in 1983 after safety investigations by the then Science and Technology Agency and the Nuclear Safety Agency. For more details about this case, see the following link: http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/nit104/nit104articles/nit104court.html Monju uses plutonium as fuel and sodium as coolant. Also neutrons which escape from the reactor core are absorbed by a blanket of depleted uranium packed around the core. These neutrons convert some of this uranium to plutonium. These three characteristics of the fast breeder reactor give rise to a number of problems, including the following: (1) plutonium is a potential material for nuclear weapons; (2) the high temperature molten sodium circulating within the reactor is explosive if it comes in contact with water. The citizens' major arguments against Monju related to safety. Three major defects formed the basis of their claim that the license approval was invalid. These were as follows: 1. The sodium leak and fire in 1995 revealed that the Monju approval failed to meet the required safety standards. 2. The approval did not take into account the possibility of a high temperature rupture of pipes in the steam generator. Such a rupture would cause steam to come into contact with sodium, resulting in an explosion. 3. The approval did not give adequate consideration to the possibility of a runaway nuclear reaction leading to the reactor core breaking up and releasing its radioactive contents. There were also legal technicalities that needed to be argued. These revolved in particular around the issue of whether flaws in the approval process were 'clear' and 'serious' and whether the court was technically competent to make a judgment. The Nagoya High Court had ruled that the flaws didn't have to be 'clear', that they were 'serious' and that it was competent to make the necessary judgment, given the serious flaws in the safety review process. However, the Supreme Court took the view that, except where the administration's judgment regarding the safety of the basic design was not reasonable, the administration's judgment should be respected. The following link leads to a document produced by Green Action with answers to frequently asked questions about Monju: http://www.greenaction-japan.org/english/archives/050529.html Contact: Philip White Citizens' Nuclear Information Center 3F Kotobuki Bdg, 1-58-15, Higashi-Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003 Phone: 81-3-5330-9520 Fax: 81-3-5330-9530 http://cnic.jp/english/ cnic@nifty.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 ***************************************************************** 54 Guardian Unlimited: Court Upholds Japan's OK of Nuke Reactor From the Associated Press [UP] Monday May 30, 2005 12:46 PM AP Photo TOK801 By MARI YAMAGUCHI Associated Press Writer TOKYO (AP) - The Supreme Court upheld Japan's approval of an experimental fast-breeder nuclear reactor Monday, paving the way for the reopening of a plant that was shut down a decade ago by an accident and cover-up. Environmentalists were outaged by the ruling, which overturned a 2003 decision by a high court to nullify the government's 1983 approval for the Monju reactor in Tsuruga, 200 miles west of Tokyo, court spokesman Takao Arakawa said. The decision was a big boost for the plutonium-fired plant, the centerpiece in the government's campaign to expand resource-poor Japan's reliance on nuclear energy. The project's original start-up ended after just four months in 1995 with an accident in its cooling system and cover-up that bred distrust of nuclear power among voters. The Fukui regional government in February approved repairs at the mothballed plant, and construction there could allow the facility to restart within three years. ``We will resume our construction with a renewed commitment for safety,'' said Yuichi Tonozuka, president of Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute, which operates the plant. Critics say the reactor's plutonium-based technology is dangerous. Aileen Mioko Smith of Green Action, a Kyoto-based environmental group, called the ruling ``shocking.'' ``If there's an accident it could be disastrous,'' she said. ``We haven't read the reasons for the court's decision yet, but it's astounding that the court could rule this way.'' The Monju reactor uses plutonium fuel instead of conventional uranium and produces radioactive substances than can be reused as fuel. Japanese officials hope it will increase the oil-dependent nation's self-sufficiency. Monju went into service in August 1995 but was shut down on Dec. 8, when more than a ton of volatile liquid sodium leaked from a secondary cooling system. No one was hurt and no radioactivity escaped, but Monju's operators came under fire for concealing videotape that showed extensive damage to the reactor. Many other nations have abandoned similar projects because of high costs and dangers associated with handling plutonium, which is highly radioactive and can be used to make nuclear weapons. Japan reportedly has already spent 800 billion yen (US$7.4 billion; euro5.9 billion) on the Monju reactor. Japan's 52 nuclear reactors supply 35 percent of the country's electricity. The government wants to build 11 new plants and raised electricity output to nearly 40 percent of the national supply by 2010. The nuclear energy industry in Japan, however, has been plagued by safety violations, reactor malfunctions and accidents. The Fukui region also was the scene of Japan's deadliest-ever nuclear-plant accident, when a corroded cooling pipe - carrying boiling water and superheated steam - burst at a plant in Mihama last August, killing five workers. No radiation was released in that accident. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 55 Herald Sun: Uranium mining boost [31may05] By Katharine Murphy THE Howard Government has foreshadowed a dramatic expansion of Australia's uranium mining industry, identifying Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam as future export markets as South East Asia becomes a player in nuclear energy. Linking the nation's uranium exports to international strategies to combat global warming, the Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer has revealed politically contentious plans to boost Australia's uranium exports. Any sales would have to meet rules that the radioactive material only be used for civilian projects under the gaze of the international atomic energy watchdog and could not be re-exported. "Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam are also considering the possibility of nuclear power. These countries could become markets for Australian uranium, provided bilateral safeguards agreements were concluded with them," he says. The Foreign Minister has used a submission to a parliamentary inquiry into the strategic importance of uranium resources to confirm Australia remains committed to exporting uranium to China. Any exports would be under a safeguards agreement, and to give strong and unqualified endorsement to nuclear energy as a legitimate tool to lower greenhouse gas emissions. "Nuclear energy can be expected to have an important place in meeting future energy needs over the next few decades," Mr Downer says. "From this, it is apparent that Australia's uranium holdings are an internationally strategic resource which can only grow in significance. "Since the whole world stands to benefit from the important issue of global warming, including through policies which give a significant place to nuclear energy, then development of this strategic resource is clearly consistent with our national and international interests." Mr Downer's submission puts no caveats on the idea of developing a nuclear power industry in Australia. But last night, Mr Downer's office denied that his comments represented broad-ranging endorsement for a nuclear power industry for Australia. "His comments were expressed in the context of developments in the global industry," Mr Downer's spokesman said. Mr Downer's strong endorsement of expanding the uranium sector in Australia backs other bullish comments in recent times from the Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane and the Finance Minister Nick Minchin. Labor is also shifting ground on the issue of uranium mining, with pressure from the South Australian Government to scrap the 20-year-old three-mines policy which restricts uranium production to only three sites. Labor's leader Kim Beazley and resources spokesman Martin Ferguson have endorsed the Government's plans to export uranium to China. The mining sector is using the current parliamentary inquiry to run a strong campaign to scrap the state bans on uranium mining and to create a nationally consistent framework to allow Australia to chase high world prices. The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, which runs Australia's only nuclear reactor, has also told the inquiry that exporting uranium helps deal with global warming. "Because nuclear power emits virtually no greenhouse gases, Australia's uranium exports reduce global greenhouse gas emissions at the present time," ANSTO says. "Further development and export of uranium will prevent additional emissions of greenhouse gases if used in new nuclear plants," it says. © Herald and Weekly Times ***************************************************************** 56 The State: Facility plans hit obstacle 05/31/2 By LAUREN MARKOE Washington Bureau U.S. House allows only fraction of budget request MOX plant at SRS WASHINGTON  The U.S. House has budgeted only a fraction of what President Bush requested for a planned nuclear waste reprocessing plant slated for SRS, raising doubts about the facilitys fate. The Houses decision last week  to budget only $35 million of the requested $340 million for 2005-06  disappointed the Bush administration and S.C. proponents of the $4 billion plant, which could create more than 1,000 jobs at and around the Savannah River Site near Aiken. Im worried about it, deputy secretary of energy Clay Sell said. We need to get the money. Obviously, we cant build the plant if we dont have resources. House leaders handling the $29.8 billion energy and water bill that included funding for the MOX plant cited an ongoing dispute between the United States and Russia to explain why they slashed the administrations request. The proposed MOX plant is part of a bilateral effort to reduce stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium  and to keep it out of the hands of terrorists. Each of the two plants would dispose of 34 metric tons of plutonium, turning it into fuel suitable for commercial nuclear reactors. But the program has hit an obstacle  a disagreement over the liability of Americans working on the Russian MOX program. Ground-breaking for the mixed-oxide fuel plant at the Savannah River Site  scheduled for this month  has been reset for May 2006. The plant was slated to begin operations in 2009, but the delay in reaching agreement with the Russians has made that date impossible to meet, according to the Energy Department. Most people around nuclear-friendly Aiken still want to see the plant built. The 310-square-mile SRS campus once produced much of the nuclear fuel for the nations Cold War arsenal. Now mostly a nuclear waste storage and research facility, SRS employs about half of the 20,000-plus who worked there during the height of the Cold War. House leaders who reduced MOX funding also pointed out unspent money allotted for MOX in prior years  there is now more than $650 million in the MOX construction account. U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett, R-Westminster, whose district includes SRS, advised against too bleak an interpretation of the House action. U.S. diplomats and the president himself are paying close attention to the liability problem, said Barrett, who had an opportunity recently to talk about the issue with Bush. Theyre desperately trying to work this out, he said. Its probably a couple of weeks away. Barrett said he also spoke with U.S. Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio, who heads the House Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee and guided the bill through the House. He believes in the MOX program, Barrett said. To paraphrase him, When the liability issue is worked out, the money will be there. Thats their commitment. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who represented Barretts district for eight years, said MOX is going to be fine. But he added that the United States should delink its MOX program from the Russians if the liability issue is not resolved by this fall. MOX opponents  who say the program will work against nuclear non-proliferation by establishing plutonium as a commercial commodity  are hailing the House action. Dell Isham, director of the South Carolina chapter of the Sierra Club, called it a sign that Congress is starting to question the Department of Energys overly optimistic plans for MOX. It shows a little bit of integrity, he said. MOX has been sold as beating swords into plowshares, but it still creates a dangerously radioactive product. Reach Markoe at (202) 383-6023 or lmarkoe@krwashington.com. ***************************************************************** 57 Daily Yomiuri: Top court backs govt on Monju The Yomiuri Shimbun The Supreme Court on Monday overturned a high court ruling that rescinded a government approval to build the experimental Monju fast breeder nuclear reactor in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture. In handing down the ruling, presiding Justice Tokuji Izumi said the approval to build the reactor did not violate the law as the government had not overlooked shortcomings in its safety assessment. The top court ruled in favor of the government's appeal against a ruling by the Nagoya High Court's Kanazawa branch in January 2003, giving the government a reversal victory almost 20 years after 32 residents living near the reactor's construction site filed a lawsuit against the economy, trade and industry minister's approval. The decision of the five judges of the top court's No. 1 Petty Bench was unanimous. Built by the Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation, the reactor has remained closed since a massive leak of sodium coolant occurred at the plant in 1995. This is the first time the top court has handed down a ruling on the approval for the construction of a fast breeder nuclear reactor despite difficulties in determining the reactor's safety at an experimental stage. Overturning of the high court ruling, the first to support a claim of residents against such a reactor, is likely to boost promotions of the nuclear fuel recycling policy by the government. The Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law allows for the construction of nuclear reactors only after it has been confirmed that such construction will not hamper safety efforts in the event of a disaster. The point of contention in the appeal was whether the government's safety assessment had overlooked the possibility of a leak of sodium coolant, damage to pipes in steam generators and corrosion of the reactors' cores. The petty bench determined that the basic design had not been in breach over the inclusion of a steel floor to prevent a reaction resulting from contact of leaked sodium with moisture in concrete. While the basic design should be evaluated, it was not irrational that attention was not paid to such design details as the thickness of the steel floor, the petty bench said. It added that the nuclear reactor was designed to stop functioning when damage to the pipes in the steam generator was detected, saying the high court's statement that the flow of hydrogen from the broken pipe could cause the corrosion of the reactor cores was absurd. Regarding the meltdown of reactor cores, the petty bench said the energy analysis conducted during the safety assessment had been appropriate, and it was not irrational that the safety assessment was not conducted on the assumption that overseas nuclear reactors were different in size and structure. It concluded that the high court ruling was wrong to say the safety assessment had overlooked three possibilities that were capable of causing serious accidents. In September 1985, the residents filed a lawsuit with the Fukui District Court, saying the government's May 1983 approval for the construction of the nuclear reactor had been illegal. The government and the residents first fought over whether the residents could be recognized as plaintiffs. The case was remanded to the district court after the top court recognized the residents as plaintiffs. In March, 2000, after the sodium coolant leak, the district court rejected the plaintiffs' request to rescind the approval for the construction of the nuclear reactor. The government filed an appeal with the top court after the high court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in January 2003. Copyright 2005 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 58 Daily Yomiuri: Monju's safety main point of contention Fumio Tanaka / Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writer The Supreme Court ruling in favor of the construction of the Monju fast breeder nuclear reactor Monday highlighted the difficulty in maintaining absolute safety at the facility. The main point that divided the top court and the high court was interpreting the concept of safety. Judging that a serious accident was possible, the Nagoya High Court rescinded the government's approval for the construction of the reactor, saying the government had not considered some scenarios in its safety assessment, such as a sodium coolant leak, which could lead to a serious accident, including a meltdown of the reactor's core. The high court ruling held that the reactor should be "completely safe." In contrast, the top court ruled that the reactor's construction was legal as long as the safety assessment had not been made irrationally. This judgment was based on the view that "relative safety" was sufficient. This ruling followed a case in 1992 in which the top court rejected the plaintiffs' argument against an approval for the construction of the Ikata Nuclear Power Plant No. 1. "The required safety level at a nuclear reactor is not difficult to achieve. For example, it is not required that reactors never leak radioactive substances," a document of a Supreme Court official said. Taking into consideration the benefits of a nuclear reactor, risks that society can accept should be allowed--this idea is common in safety regulations for airplanes, medicine and in other areas. In the Monju case, the Supreme Court ruled that the safety assessment should be limited to the reactor's basic design. Since a serious accident involving a nuclear reactor probably would cause much more damage than incidents involving other technology, the government inspects the basic design of nuclear reactors aided by the Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan before issuing approval for a reactor's construction. Detailed designs of a reactor's parts and construction methods are checked for safety. An investigation by the then Science and Technology Agency into a sodium leak in 1995 at the Monju reactor found that the steel floor in a reactor, which keeps moisture in concrete from coming in contact with sodium, had eroded, allowing sodium to leak through. The high court said the government's safety assessment of the reactor's basic design had not considered such a scenario--an error that should not have been overlooked. However, the Supreme Court said the government was only required to assess the basic design of a reactor, supporting the government's assertion that the thickness of the floor was not part of the original design. As the Supreme Court ruling does not guarantee that the Monju reactor is safe, governments and other related parties must take all possible measures to ensure the reactor's construction proceeds safely and safety measures are implemented. Copyright 2005 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 59 Daily Yomiuri: Ruling gives fast breeder technology a major boost Tatsuo Nakajima / Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writer The Supreme Court ruling Monday will add momentum to promoting the country's nuclear fuel recycling project. The so-called dream nuclear reactor, which theoretically creates more nuclear fuel than it consumes, converts unburnable uranium into burnable plutonium, which can be used as source of energy. The United States and many European countries have given up on developing fast breeder nuclear reactors due to their high cost and fears that increased use of plutonium could lead to the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Japan, which does not have many natural resources, views fast breeder nuclear technology as its last resort to ensure a stable energy supply. The Cabinet Office's Nuclear Committee, which will work out the nation's nuclear policies for the next five years, confirmed in February that the development of a fast breeder nuclear reactor would continue. Around 2015, the government is expected to start looking into pursuing the reactor's practical applications. But some problems remain. As the electricity supply continues to liberalize, it remains unclear whether electric power companies that have exercised a local monopoly but are facing the prospects of competition will introduce the fast breeder nuclear reactor. The Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation, the predecessor of Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute, concealed video footage of a sodium leak in 1997 and falsely reported information about the accident, which caused a fire at facilities near the nuclear reprocessing plant. This and other scandals led to the disbandment of the organization and the creation of the institute. The Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute will merge with the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute in October to form the Japan Nuclear Research Development Institute, which will be tested on whether it can develop a fast breeder nuclear reactor, keeping lessons learned in mind. Another sodium coolant leak in 1995 was followed by an accident at a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in Tokaimura, Ibaraki Prefecture, and another incident at Kansai Electric Power Co.'s Mihama Nuclear Power Plant. The incidents have prompted public concern over nuclear development. The Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute is not the only organization that must focus on safety efforts, the nuclear industry as a whole must make up for public confidence lost. Copyright 2005 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 60 Daily Yomiuri: Bring Monju reactor back on line ASAP The Yomiuri Shimbun The Supreme Court's latest ruling on the Monju fast breeder nuclear reactor must have been a great relief to people connected with the nation's nuclear power program. On Monday, the top court ruled in favor of the government in a lawsuit over the legitimacy of its safety review of the experimental reactor in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture. In 2003, the Kanazawa branch of the Nagoya High Court found in favor of a claim by a group of residents around Monju that the government's safety inspection conducted prior to the reactor's construction had been seriously flawed. The high court nullified the government's 1983 permission to build the Monju reactor. However, Monday's ruling overturned the lower court decision, finalizing the government's victory in the suit. Operations at the Monju reactor have been suspended since a massive leak of sodium coolant occurred at the facility in December 1995. The high court's ruling served as a hindrance to efforts to gain the support of the residents in the area hosting the reactor to resume operations at the facility, which started to undergo repairs in March aimed at ensuring an accident like the 1995 disaster could never happen again. For years, the government has said its efforts to make the most effective use of uranium under what is called the nuclear fuel cycle is a main pillar of its nuclear power policy. The Monju reactor is the centerpiece of the policy. Given this, it is necessary to steadily carry out repairs at the reactor so it can resume operations at an early date. === Injunction hard to swallow Many specialists called the high court's determination that the government's safety review of the reactor was unlawful far-fetched. For example, nuclear reactors function with multiple protective mechanisms. The system is aimed at preventing an accident at a reactor from spreading to the outside of the facility. It is impossible that all such protective mechanisms fail at once. In fact, the Nuclear Safety Commission (NSC) does not presuppose that such a situation may take place as it inspects the safety of a reactor. The high court's sentence said such a danger could not be ruled out, concluding that the government's safety assessment of the Monju reactor was seriously flawed. It should be noted, however, that no technology could be put into use if it was required to be absolutely safe even under nearly impossible conditions. To rule on the legal dispute over the propriety of the government's approval to build the Monju reactor, the Supreme Court primarily examined whether there were any unreasonable elements in the series of steps taken to complete the procedure. Monday's decision showed that the top court respected the judgment given by the NSC concerning the technicalities of the Monju project. The latest ruling was in line with judicial precedents set in administrative lawsuits over the nation's nuclear power program, which valued the judgment of specialists. === Absolute safety impossible However, Monday's decision was no guarantee of the safety of the Monju reactor. It is important to remember that the 1995 accident occurred because defects in the design of a thermometer installed at the facility had been overlooked. It should also be recognized that operations at Monju have been suspended for close to 10 years. It is essential to determine whether parts and components comprising the reactor have deteriorated. The government and the Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute (JNC), the developer of the Monju reactor, have an extremely heavy responsibility in this respect. It is also important for the Monju operator to gain the public's full trust. In the 1995 disaster, the Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation (PNC), the predecessor of the state-run JNC, failed to properly handle the incident. The PNC did not adequately explain to the public the circumstances of the disaster, for example. The corporation also tried to conceal information about the incident. All this added to the public's distrust in the PNC, affecting the high court in its ruling on the case. The JNC intends to compile and reveal a list of possible accidents that may take place at the reactor. The plan is aimed at assuring the public that the reactor will remain safe whatever accidents may occur at the facility. All efforts should be expended to achieve this goal as soon as possible. (From The Yomiuri Shimbun, May 31) Copyright 2005 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 61 Al Jazeera: Closed down U.S. bases to be nuclear repositories Aljazeera.com 5/30/2005 1:10:00 PM GMT Barbed wire at the entrance to the closed Marine Corps Air Station El Toro In a small section of a spending bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives last week, closed military bases could become repositories for nuclear waste further exacerbating the fears of local lawmakers who are fighting the scheduled closure of four of New England's biggest bases. The energy and water bill from the House Appropriations Committee includes $15.5 million for the reprocessing of nuclear waste from power plants and construction of an interim nuclear waste dump. Though the legislation does not specify where that dump would be, the Appropriations Committee report, which explains the bill, suggests that mothballed military bases be considered as potential sites for the waste. Lawmakers say the idea adds to the pain of a region that faces the loss of 14,500 jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars if the recommendations by the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC) are adopted. Maine lawmakers met with the chairman of the BRAC to plead for Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, which is on the closure list, and the Brunswick Naval Air Station which is to be ''realigned," or shrunk. ''I'm very, very concerned about this. Our citizens would be very upset," Maine Governor John Baldacci said when he was shown the committee report language. He said he had been unaware of the proposal, and ''to think that someone could put nuclear waste there...is outrageous." The Defence Department, which is under fire from Congress, promised to give lawmakers access to detailed material backing up its recommendations to shut down about 180 military installations across the country. As parts of the report are classified, the Pentagon said legislators and staff with security clearances can only review that data at a secure location in northern Virginia. The Pentagon’s concession only came following increasing demands from lawmakers and state and local officials for the release of what will be an unprecedented amount of data in defense of the base closing plan. Lawmakers hope to use the information to persuade the independent commission reviewing the base closings to remove certain installations from the hit list. Representative Edward J. Markey said the proposal to put nuclear waste on closed bases was an insult to local communities that face a hardship from the job losses attached to the closings. ''Congratulations -- you may have lost your military facility, but you may be the winner of nuclear waste coming to your community," Markey said. He sought to kill the idea of temporary nuclear waste dumps by de-funding it in the energy and water bill, but his amendment was defeated, 312 to 110. The report emphasises the need to find interim sites for nuclear waste until the opening of a permanent nuclear waste repository. Yucca Mountain, in the Nevada desert, has been selected for permanent commercial nuclear waste disposal, but administrative and court actions have delayed the opening until at least 2012. Sites such as shut military bases and other federally owned lands would be more cost-effective as temporary nuclear waste sites than privately owned parcels since they are federally owned and have security systems in place, the report said. It did not recommend any bases by name or location, or indicate a preference between bases that have been closed and those facing closure. A Department of Energy spokesman, Mike Waldron, said the agency ''is reviewing the proposal." ''However, we believe that a permanent geological repository is the right policy for America," he added, underscoring the administration's determination to open Yucca Mountain as a permanent site. Environmentalists have raised concerns over the health and safety of residents near closed bases. President Bush last month suggested putting oil refineries on shuttered bases. The energy bill approved by the House last month would limit the state and local role in issuing permits for refineries -- a provision opposed by local officials. Environmental activists are also concerned about language in the Department of Defence authorisation legislation making its way through Congress. The DOD is required by law to clean up closed military sites, many of which have accumulated toxins from handling radioactive material and lead paint among other substances, said Phil Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust. The Senate version of the Defence Department's bill says the fund for realignment and closures should be the ''sole source" of funds to clean up the sites. Such language could be interpreted to mean that the Pentagon isn't responsible for cleanup once the BRAC funds are exhausted, or the fund is retired, Clapp said. ''There is literally no way of calculating how many billions -- or even up to a trillion dollars -- how much liability would be dumped on state and local governments for clean-up," Clapp said. ''It's saying, 'once it's [depleted], that's your problem'," he said. The House language states that the Defense Department cannot shirk its obligation to clean up contaminated former military sites. A Democratic House energy staff member said a revised House version made the language explicit once lawmakers realized it might free the Pentagon from responsibility to clean up the sites. Baldacci joined other Maine lawmakers yesterday in a group appeal to Anthony Principi, chairman of the BRAC Commission. The lawmakers said that the Department of Defense has not produced the data, and that the documentation is required under law to support the closure decisions. ''This is typical stonewalling and obfuscation by the Department of Defense on base closings," Senator Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine, said after the meetings. if the nuclear waste is not manageble, just imagin the amount of nuclear wepons the americans might have accumulated. it is time to disarm the americans, as they the potential threat to the people just by the nuclear waste they create. o people of america your saviour will come and bomb u and send occupying forces made of aliens to this great land of democracy, the land that spreads democracy and save u all from these monsters by shooting u, it is better to die of et shot than s caused by radiation. very soon the waiting will be over and will soon be rescued. hail democracy, hail peace, hail nuclear weapons and not nuclear waste. Copyright 2005 Al Jazeera Publishing Limited ***************************************************************** 62 Xinhua: Australia's WMC expects increased production www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-05-30 10:59:17 BEIJING, May 30 -- Australian miner and takeover target WMC Resources Ltd. said on Monday it expects increased production across its nickel and fertiliser businesses this year, while uranium production at Olympic remaining should be consistent with record performance levels. Chief executive Andrew Michelmore made the remarks at what will likely be the company's last annual general meeting. Chairman Tom Bergman said WMC had become the world's third largest producer of nickel-in-concentrate, providing about 16 per cent of global production, while it was the fourth largest copper miner and owned the world's largest known uranium resource. BHP Billiton, the world's biggest diversified miner, has launched a takeover offer for WMC which has been recommended by the WMC board. Mr. Bergman said the board viewed the BHP offer of $7.85 a share as fair value. About 25 anti-nuclear protesters have gathered outside a Melbourne conference centre where WMC Resources Ltd is holding its annual general meeting. Protest spokesman Hillel Freedman said: "Western Mining Corporation runs Australia's biggest uranium mine at Roxby Downs, they have plans to try to triple the size of this mine to make it the biggest uranium mine ... (providing) 30 per cent of the world's uranium". "We're protesting about the danger of uranium mining, the nuclear waste it creates, the resources is uses, and the fact that, ultimately, it ends up in nuclear weapons." (Agencies) Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 63 Lincoln Journal Star: Compact still looking for nuclear waste disposal site BY ALGIS J. LAUKAITIS / Lincoln Journal Star Texas is still in the cards, but the chairperson of the Central Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission says the group is also looking elsewhere for a place to store the compact's nuclear waste. "We're focusing on a couple of other options. We're looking at private companies, as well as Texas," said Laura Gilson, who heads the commission and represents the state of Arkansas. Gilson declined to name the companies but said they are outside of the compact region, made up of Kansas, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Louisiana. "We're negotiating with private companies to get the best possible price and secure a site for our compact," Gilson said in a phone interview. A presentation on the compact's efforts to find a site will be made at its annual meeting on June 29 at the Sheraton Hotel, 1615 Howard St. in Omaha. The state of Nebraska, whose membership in the compact ended almost a year ago, has been helping the commission in its negotiations with Texas and private companies. Nebraska's cooperation was part of an agreement to end years of lawsuits and disputes between the commission and the state of Nebraska over the failed siting of a proposed low-level radioactive waste storehouse in Boyd County. In 2002, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Kopf ruled former Gov. Ben Nelson acted in "bad faith" and blocked efforts to build the nuclear waste site. After months of negotiations, state officials agreed to pay the commission millions of dollars to settle the case. The Legislature recently approved a two-year budget that includes paying the $145.8 million in one lump sum. Nebraska also agreed to assist the commission for nine months in finding long-term storage for the low-level radioactive waste generated within the compact region, as well as Nebraska. Those nine months ended May 1. "We're still continuing to work with the compact commission exploring our various options," said David Cookson, special counsel for the Attorney General's Office. Cookson declined to discuss details of the ongoing negotiations with Texas or private companies. When asked if Nebraska will continue to be involved in negotiations even though the nine-month period has expired, Cookson replied: "It's my understanding we will continue to work together as long as we feel it's in our interests." The commission is negotiating with the Texas compact to accept low-level radioactive waste. The state of Texas is in a compact with Vermont, however no commissioners have been appointed yet. A Dallas company, Waste Control Specialists, has applied for a license to build a storage site for low-level waste in Andrews County in west Texas. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality is conducting a technical review of the application, which will take about 15 months, said Susan Jablonski, a radioactive waste specialist for the agency. She said a decision on the application will be made in 2007. Jablonski said she had no information about ongoing negotiations between the state of Texas and Central compact or Nebraska officials. Gilson said Nebraska has been actively involved in the negotiations. But she was uncertain whether Nebraska would have access to a site if one is found outside of the compact region. "We are negotiating with Nebraska according to our settlement agreement," Gilson said. "Beyond that, Nebraska is a non-compact state. They would have to find their own place." Most of Nebraska's low-level radioactive waste is generated by its two nuclear power plants, Cooper Nuclear Station near Brownville and Fort Calhoun Station north of Omaha. The waste is made up of mostly tools, clothing and resins used in daily operations. Much of it is stored on-site until it can be shipped out of state. The Nebraska Public Power District, which owns and operates Cooper, shipped 2,437 cubic feet of low-level radioactive waste to storage sites in Barnwell, S.C., and Clive, Utah, in 2004. Those sites are owned by private companies. NPPD spokeswoman Jeanne Schieffer said the utility is aware of the negotiations but "we have not heard of any solutions at this point." Mike Jones, a spokesman for the the Omaha Public Power District, which owns Fort Calhoun, said the utility has not been directly involved in negotiations but has been kept up-to-date. Last year, OPPD shipped about 1,500 cubic feet of low-level radioactive waste, mostly to Barnwell, S.C. Reach Algis J. Laukaitis at 473-7243 or alaukaitis@journalstar.com. Copyright © 2005, Lincoln Journal Star. All rights reserved. 926 P Street Lincoln NE 68508 402 475-4200 • feedback@journalstar.com ***************************************************************** 64 AFP: Japan's top court gives green light to reopen signature nuclear reactor - Monday May 30, 02:48 PM TOKYO (AFP) - Japan's Supreme Court gave the green light to reopen an experimental reactor opposed by residents on safety concerns, in a landmark ruling on the country's nuclear energy program. The Monju nuclear reactor located in Tsuruga, 350 kilometers (217 miles) west of Tokyo, was a signature of Japan's energy projects until December 1995 when it was closed due to a massive leak of sodium coolant. The Nagoya High Court in January 2003 for the first time ordered the closure of a Japanese reactor, siding with a lawsuit filed before the accident by local people who wanted Monju shut down due to fears of a meltdown. But the Supreme Court backed the government which said it has taken sufficient measures to ensure safety at Monju, administered by the government-run Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute. "We cannot say that there were mistakes or oversights in discussions on safety measures or decision-making," the supreme court ruled. "Therefore, we cannot say it is unconstitutional and we cannot nullify its approval," the court said. The six billion-dollar, 280,000-kilowatt "fast-breeder" reactor designed to produce more plutonium than it consumes has been emblematic for Japan, which relies heavily on nuclear energy due to its lack of natural resources. Even ahead of the Supreme Court ruling, local government authorities citing the economic impact of the plant had approved a plan to repair it and resume operation in 2008. "The ruling means confirmation that safety inspections were proper," said Yuichi Tonozuka, head of the nuclear institute. "We are determined to do our best to resume operation." But residents said the ruling had done nothing to ease their worries. "There will undoubtedly be problems if they try to operate it," the plaintiffs' lawyer, Yuichi Kaido, told a news conference. "When that happens, it is the Supreme Court that will be put to shame." No one was injured in the 1995 incident and no radiation was leaked, but the public was outraged after workers and officials involved in the project allegedly lied by hiding a video recording of the accident. Concerns about safety at nuclear reactors grew further after five workers were killed in the nation's worst nuclear accident in 2004 at Mihama nuclear plant just 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) away from Monju. Japan's nuclear energy reliance hit a peak of 36.8 percent for the year to March 1999 but plunged to some 25 percent in 2003 after power firms temporarily shut down reactors for emergency check-ups following accidents and cover-up scandals. But the use of nuclear energy climbed back up to 29.1 percent in the year to March 2005 and the government has set a goal of 41 percent in 2010. Currently, 54 nuclear reactors are operating in Japan to provide electricity. Japan's insistence on the fast-breeder reactor project even after the 1995 accident is at odds with much of the developed world. Major developed countries such as the United States, France and Germany have tried but abandoned the development of the controversial reactors due to huge development costs and concerns about the environment. But India and China, developing countries concerned about a shortage of power in the near future, have both begun planning for the fast-breeders. Copyright © 2005 AFP AFP. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 65 Japan Times: Top court rules in favor of trouble-prone Monju Tuesday, May 31, 2005 Compiled from Kyodo, AP The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the state's 1983 approval to build the Monju experimental fast-breeder reactor in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture, paving the way for reopening a facility that has been shut down for a decade due to an accident and coverup. The ruling reversed the 2003 high court decision that nullified the government's 1983 approval to build the prototype fast-breeder reactor and supported the claim by 32 plaintiffs that a massive sodium coolant leak at the reactor in December 1995 resulted from shortcomings in the safety assessment of the facility prior to its construction. The government had appealed the ruling by the Nagoya High Court's Kanazawa branch in January 2003. Presiding Justice Tokuji Izumi said, "No unacceptable flaws or faults existed in the (government's) safety assessment to approve the construction. Therefore, the approval itself was not illegitimate." All five justices of the court's First Petty Bench supported the government's construction approval, upholding the state's appeal. The reactor, which went on line in August 1995, has been shut down since the accident. No one was injured on Dec. 8, 1995, when more than a ton of volatile liquid sodium leaked from a secondary cooling system at the reactor, and no radioactivity escaped. But Monju's operators came under fire for concealing video footage that showed extensive damage to the reactor and for submitting a falsified report. The Monju reactor is an experimental reactor designated by the government as a prototype for future reactor models that would play a key part in the national nuclear fuel-recycling policy, under which plutonium will be produced through spent-fuel reprocessing. Japan has spent more than 800 billion yen on the reactor. By using plutonium-uranium mixed oxide fuel, fast-breeder reactors like the Monju are supposed to be able to produce more plutonium than they consume. The fast-breeder reactor has been targeted by antinuclear activists and others who feel its technology is particularly dangerous. Other nations have abandoned similar projects because of the high costs and dangers associated with handling plutonium, which is highly radioactive and can be used to make nuclear weapons. In overturning a 2000 Fukui District Court ruling, the high court said in 2003 that "flaws exist in the safety assessment (procedures) needed to prevent an accident such as the leakage of radioactive material inside a reactor into the neighboring environment." The high court also said the safety assessment must be completely redone. The high court ruling was the first court decision that ruled in favor of plaintiffs seeking to have approval for a plant nullified and construction work or plant operations halted. Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corp., the predecessor of the state-run Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute, applied in 1980 for permission to build the plant, and the government gave its approval in May 1983. The plaintiffs, mostly residents living near the facility, filed their suit in 1985 and the initial judicial debate focused on their eligibility as plaintiffs. In 1992, the Supreme Court recognized the eligibility of all the plaintiffs and sent the case back to the Fukui District Court for trial proceedings. The 280-mw reactor was operating at 40 percent capacity when the sodium coolant leak occurred in 1995. The Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute is hoping to get the reactor back on line. It has obtained approval from the state and the Fukui Prefectural Government to remodel it, but local residents have not given the green light for the remodeling work. Activists to fight on Staff report OSAKA -- Although the Supreme Court's decision Monday to overturn a Nagoya High Court ruling that favored residents opposed to the Monju experimental fast-breeder reactor was a complete legal defeat for activists, various groups vowed to fight on shortly after the ruling was announced. Aileen Mioko Smith of Green Action Japan said one of the first things the group would do is let the Japanese public know that, in its argument before the Supreme Court, the government did not challenge the lower court's ruling, made by the Kanazawa branch on Jan. 27, 2003, that the danger of an accident exists. "The government argued that unless the risk of an accident was high, operation of Monju should proceed. But they didn't deny there was the risk of an accident," Smith said. Citizens nationwide have submitted more than 1 million signatures calling for a government moratorium on the Monju, and more than 200,000 Fukui Prefecture citizens have signed a petition seeking its permanent closure, Smith said. The activists had hoped the International Atomic Energy Agency's call earlier this year for a moratorium on nuclear fuel reprocessing plants would put pressure on Japan to reconsider its plan to restart the Monju. But IAEA spokesman Mark Gwozdecky declined comment on Monday's ruling, saying the Monju issue was one for Japan, not the IAEA, to decide upon. The Japan Times: May 31, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 66 ITAR-TASS: Over 23 tonnes of radioactive waste removed in Moscow region 30.05.2005, 17.42 MOSCOW, May 30 (Itar-Tass) -- More than 23 tonnes of radioactive waste have been removed in the Moscow region in May 2005. More than 17 tonnes of contaminated soil were removed from the embankment of the Moscow River in the southern part of the city. Clean-up work is still under way. Almost 900 kilograms of contaminated soil and waste were removed from the city of Elektrostal, over four tones from the Ramenskoye district, and about 500 kilograms from the Mytishchi area. In Zelenograd, specialists picked up a container with depleted uranium on the grounds of a construction cooperative. All contaminated waste will be stored at a special site. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 67 asahi.com: Monju nuke reactor ruled safe to run 05/31/2005 The Asahi Shimbun A distraught Miwako Ogiso, secretary-general of the plaintiffs group in the Monju court case, holds a banner that says ``unfair ruling'' in front of the Supreme Court in Tokyo. Ruling that safety has not been compromised, the Supreme Court on Monday overturned a lower court decision and approved the government's plans to operate the troubled Monju fast-breeder nuclear reactor in Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture. At issue was whether appropriate safety assessment procedures had been in place when government approval was granted in 1983 to build Monju, a state-designed prototype nuclear reactor project. ``It cannot be said that there had been anything amiss,'' Justice Tokuji Izumi said. ``No fatal errors or glaring omissions could be found. Therefore, (Monju) cannot be deemed illegal.'' The Supreme Court thus revoked a Nagoya High Court branch's nullification of the government approval. Residents mostly living near the Monju site filed the lawsuit in 1985 to quash the original approval of the fast-breeder reactor, which uses highly toxic plutonium. Their safety concerns intensified after sodium leaked from the reactor's cooling system in December 1995. The plant has since been shut down. After the accident, the government scheduled renovation work at the plant based on revised plans. Plaintiffs argued that this move was virtually a government admission that the reactor's basic design had been flawed. But the top court backed the state's contention that initial blueprints for the reactor had no safety flaws. ``The legitimacy of the safety inspections of Monju has now been proved,'' the state-funded Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute, the operator of Monju, said in a statement. It was the Supreme Court's first ruling with a safety assessment regarding a noncommercial reactor still in its experimental stages. And the decision angered the plaintiffs. ``The ruling was an extreme exercise in an attempt to follow an administrative fait accompli-far from the ideal of judiciary discretion,'' they said in a statement. Miwako Ogiso, 69, secretary-general of the plaintiffs group, simply said, ``It's an awful awful ruling.'' The Monju case has a long, convoluted history. When the original go-ahead was granted in 1983, residents missed the 60-day deadline to file an objection. So they filed their suit in 1985, aiming for complete nullification of the project-a much tougher goal to achieve. Their lawsuit faced immediate problems when the Fukui District Court began questioning the eligibility of the residents as plaintiffs. In 1992, the Supreme Court finally recognized the eligibility of the plaintiffs, and the case was sent back to the district court for proceedings. The plaintiffs' arguments concerning the safety and integrity of the Monju plant seemed to be confirmed when the sodium spill occurred. The Nagoya High Court's Kanazawa branch on Jan. 27, 2003, revoked the approval to operate Monju. ``There is the lingering possibility of danger that nuclear matter will be released into the environment,'' the ruling said.(IHT/Asahi: May 31,2005) ***************************************************************** 68 Scotsman.com: Serious UK nuclear leak 'went unnoticed for nine months' Mon 30 May 2005 MICHAEL BLACKLEY TENS of thousands of litres of highly radioactive liquid has been leaking unnoticed at the UK's nuclear reprocessing plant for nine months, it was revealed yesterday. The leak is being described as the worst nuclear accident in Britain for 13 years and could threaten the future of the Thorp plant, at Sellafield in Cumbria, where the leak was discovered on 19 April. The International Atomic Energy Authority has admitted that it would classify the accident as "serious". It was only discovered that liquid was leaking last month, but by that time 83,000 litres of radioactive fuel, enough to fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool, had already been accidentally discharged. British Nuclear Group, which runs the plant, said workers had failed to respond to indicators that would have warned since last August that there was a leak. The company has ordered an urgent review to check that there are not any other potential leaks, and is also warning against staff complacency. The Nuclear Decommissioning Agency, the government quango responsible for the reprocessing plant, said that it will need time to assess the findings before discussing the implications with the government and the company. But if the decision is taken to close the plant, it is predicted that it would cost taxpayers billions of pounds. The accident will be a major setback for the government, which was preparing to seek public support for a new generation of power stations to help meet climate-change targets. The company says the leak was contained and thus was not a threat to public safety, but it could yet face criminal prosecution. A spokesman for the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate told a Sunday newspaper: "I can confirm we will be seeking to find out what monitors were in place, whether they were working and, if so, why they were not acted on." Four inspectors have been on site at Sellafield in Cumbria since the accident occurred, tasked with discovering why engineers failed to modify pipes leading to moveable tanks. The investigation is likely to last many weeks before it is decided whether to take action against the British Nuclear Group. It is clear that the leak will become a major political issue. David Willetts, the shadow trade secretary, said he would call on ministers to answer urgent questions on the matter when the House of Commons meets next week. He said the incident would have a major detrimental effect on public confidence in the nuclear industry, and the case would need to be rationally considered. [ border=] ©2005 Scotsman.com ***************************************************************** 69 IPS-English POLITICS: World Cannot Afford Failure on the Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 14:22:11 -0700 ROMAIPS AP WD IP POLITICS: World Cannot Afford Failure on the Nuclear Front Analysis - By Praful Bidwai New Delhi, May 31 (IPS) - With the seventh Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) ending in abysmal failure late last week at the United Nations, the worst fears about a tiny number of influential states holding the rest of the world a hostage to their narrow interests have materialised. The conference, the second review since the NPT was indefinitely extended 10 years ago, could not even adopt a consensus document when it ended on Friday. Said Rebecca Johnson, an independent expert and director of the Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy, a non-governmental organisation which closely monitored the meeting: ''From start to finish, this conference did little more than go through the motions, and was one of the most shameful exhibitions of cynical time-wasting ...'' During the four week-long deliberations, delegates from 153 countries wrangled over procedure and could not even agree to an agenda for 10 days. They lost precious opportunities to address major issues - for example, steps towards global elimination of nuclear weapons and preventing their use, acquisition and spread. Finally, they only agreed to a procedural declaration, which enumerated the participants and meetings and indicated how they would cover the financial costs. That ended the conference. This dismal outcome betrays the hope -- and the widespread popular aspiration -- that the world's nations would deliver on the solemn commitments they made 35 years ago by adopting the NPT: to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and to abolish them. The failure is all the more grave because it comes one-and-a-half decades after the Cold War's end -- which robs nuclear weapons of even the fig leaf of a rationale -- and after disclosures about the transgressions by North Korea and Iran of existing nuclear control regimes. The NPT was founded on a grand bargain. The bulk of the world's states would foreswear nuclear weapons and accept a regime of physical inspections to ensure that nuclear materials are not diverted to military programmes.. In return, the five nuclear weapons-states (NWSs) would earnestly initiate negotiations to eliminate them, and meanwhile, transfer no nuclear material/technology to non-NWSs. The vast majority of the world's non-NWSs have abided by the bargain. But the NWSs have failed to move towards disarming their nuclear arsenals, and indulged in clandestine transfers of nuclear materials and know-how to allies such as Israel. In the process, and by again refusing to commit themselves to disarmament at the latest conference, the NWSs risk undermining that bargain - to the detriment of the entire world. Thus, at least three new nuclear powers have emerged (Israel, India and Pakistan, none of them NPT signatories), and possibly a fourth one (North Korea). At the latest conference, the NWSs refused critical scrutiny of their record since the 2000 review, in which they accepted disarmament as an obligation and made an ''unambiguous'' commitment to nuclear elimination. Instead, they paid lip-service to disarmament as a ''moral'' and ''political'' goal. However, the International Court of Justice clarified in a landmark judgment in 1996 that nuclear weapons are incompatible with international law, and the NWSs are legally obliged to complete talks for their total elimination. The United States was the worst offender here. Argues Daryl Kimball of the Washington-based Arms Control Association: ''The arrogant and clumsy U.S. strategy (which was the brainchild of former Under Secretary of State John Bolton) has most certainly reinforced the view of the majority of countries that the U.S. and (other NWSs) do not intend to live up to their NPT-related disarmament commitments.'' Thus, the conference did not support U.S. proposals on strengthening the NPT's non-proliferation elements. Worse, there has been a weakening of other states' will to fulfill their treaty obligations. The U.S. strategy is driven by several considerations: paranoid fears, especially after Sept. 11, about security and North America's vulnerability to weapons of mass destruction (WMD); the profoundly mistaken Bush administration's view that nuclear weapons are essential to contain WMD threats; pressure from the military-industrial complex for raising defence spending and creating new uses for nuclear weapons; and the U.S.. aspiration to remain the world's sole superpower with an unparalleled nuclear might. Washington is planning to modify existing bomb designs to make ''bunker-busters''. It has accelerated deployment-oriented research on space-based ''Star Wars'' weapons. And it accepts no constraint on its nuclear programme, even as it advocates aggressive means to control the spread of WMDs. One example is the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), under which signatories co-operate to halt dangerous shipments, especially to ''rogue states''. But this has two major limitations. The PSI has recruited just 21 active participants. And it leaves out of the net ''friendly'' or ''cooperative'' regimes like Pakistan, which are useful to Washington's ''war on terrorism'' -- despite damning evidence of proliferation by the AQ Khan network. The U.S. has no coherent strategy to deal with the crises caused by disclosures about North Korea and Iran's nuclear activities. It threatens military "action" against them and has reportedly drawn up plans for strikes. Yet, it does not seem to have calculated the enormous costs of such action. While Washington has hesitantly engaged North Korea in talks, it has not offered the right economic concessions to roll back its nuclear programme. As for Iran, it has left the negotiations to Britain, France and Germany. President George W. Bush confesses the the U.S. sanctions strategy has not worked: ''We've sanctioned ourselves out of influence with Iran.'' Yet, Washington has proved blind to its own limitations. ''U.S. policy is driven by a peculiar hubris,'' says Achin Vanaik, professor of political science at Delhi University. ''This views (North) America as exceptional; it can do no wrong. (North) American nuclear weapons are good nukes, they will be used to good ends; others' nukes are bad. This exceptionalism is widely shared across the political spectrum.'' While the most culpable state, the U.S. alone cannot be blamed for the conference's failure, none of the other four NWSs showed any leadership to end the impasse. They hid behind Washington's skirts. India, Pakistan and Israel adopted a cynically distant attitude to the conference although they said they oppose proliferation. Iran too adopted a devious strategy to keep its nuclear option open. This meant averting discussion of the nuclear fuel cycle question, and the issue of withdrawal from the NPT. What happens when countries develop nuclear technology to the threshold of a weapons capability, and then decide to withdraw from the treaty to become a nuclear power? The NPT Review Conference failed to address these vital issues of global concern. It was equally silent on the early entry into force of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty - one of the 13 steps agreed in 2000. It was plain, says Acronym Institute's Johnson that the participating ''governments lacked the political will and backbone even to have an honest debate about these issues.'' The world could end up paying a very heavy price if the NPT consensus breaks down. Unless the NWSs lead by example, they will fail to persuade the 30 to 40 states that can have the potential to acquire nuclear weapons (if they try hard enough), not to do so. Meanwhile, the world remains insecure and vulnerable to mass destruction from the 27,000 nuclear weapons still in place, thousands of them on hair-trigger alert. It simply cannot afford a failure on the nuclear front. (END/IPS/AP/WD/IP/PB-RDR/SI/05) 2 = 05310431 ORP001 NNNN ***************************************************************** 70 Salt Lake Tribune: NUCLEAR WEAPONS: The United States must lead by example Opinion Article Last Updated: 05/31/2005 01:23:41 AM To no one's surprise, the conference to review the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty ended with not even a whimper last week. Most diplomats called it a complete failure. The United States must share the blame. The bargain that is the core of the NPT is this: The world's acknowledged nuclear powers (United States, Russia, Britain, France, China) agree not to help the non-weapons nations acquire the bomb. (Israel, India and Pakistan, which have nuclear weapons, are not parties to the treaty.) The non-weapons nations agree to give up efforts to build one. In the meantime, the weapons nations are supposed to work to eliminate their own nuclear arsenals. The only two nations with thousands of nuclear weapons - the United States and Russia - are not willing to give them up, as the treaty clearly envisions they should, or even to reduce their arsenals to a few hundred warheads. Yet the United States wants international help to pressure Iran to abandon the parts of its nuclear program that could lead to a weapon, and it wants to squeeze North Korea similarly to give up the nukes it says it has developed. The United States argues that there are loopholes in the treaty that allow non-weapons states to develop bombs under the cover of peaceful nuclear programs. The treaty allows non-weapons nations to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, such as generating electric power, and the International Atomic Energy Agency is supposed to conduct inspections to make sure the non-weapons states are not using nuclear technology to build weapons. But the technology of weapons and of peace are not mutually exclusive. Iran claims that it is enriching uranium to fuel reactors. But if the uranium is enriched further, it can be used in a bomb. The United States claims that is Iran's intent, and that it has deceived the international inspectors. It demands that Iran give up uranium enrichment. Under the treaty, however, Iran is not required to do that. This is the loophole that the United States wants closed. But until the United States lives up to its own treaty obligation to vastly reduce its arsenal to a rational, minimal deterrent, it will have difficulty persuading other nations to work to eliminate the loophole. By clinging stubbornly to thousands of nuclear weapons, the United States demonstrates its belief in the utility of such an arsenal. That, by itself, encourages other nations to build weapons of their own. © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 71 Daily Californian: UC Joins Race for Los Alamos Lab - By TRACI KAWAGUCHI AND JOSH KELLER Contributing Writers Tuesday, May 31, 2005 SAN FRANCISCO—The UC Board of Regents voted Thursday to formally enter what is now a head-to-head competition for management of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in an effort to continue UC’s 63-year hold on the nuclear weapons research facility. The 11-1 vote begins a battle between two partnerships of some of the country’s leading universities and defense contractors. UC will join with Bechtel National Inc. to compete against Lockheed Martin Corp. and University of Texas for the lab contract, which could bring in between $53 million and $79 million per year to the winner. A third competitor, the defense contractor Northrup Grumman Corp., dropped out of the race on Thursday. The company, which joined the competition one month ago, said in a statement it will bow out based on the U.S. Department of Energy’s request for proposals released earlier this month, but gave no further details. UC faces the possibility of losing the lab for the first time since its inception during World War II after a series of security blunders under university management prompted the energy department to put the lab up for competition in 2003. “We at the university have recognized that the management of these laboratories in the 21st century requires a team effort, one bringing together skills that are greater than what the university alone can offer,” UC President Robert Dynes said in a statement. “And we have put together a team that I believe is incredibly strong.” The request for proposals for the seven-year lab contract strongly encourages universities and corporations to join together by requiring a corporate partner to be part of the management team for the lab. If UC wins the contract, the university would run the lab’s scientific research while Bechtel, BWX Technologies Inc. and Washington Group International would help manage the lab. The contract’s value, up to $79 million annually, is nearly 10 times the amount UC can currently receive from the energy department. Members of two Board of Regents committees unanimously recommended a bid to the full board on Wednesday, saying the university had a national duty to compete for the contract. Some regents said UC’s university-centered team would allow for better scientific research than Lockheed Martin’s corporate-focused plan. “The true strength at the Los Alamos labs is the environment of academic freedom, so that scientists have the opportunity to openly pursue science,” Dynes said Wednesday. “That doesn’t exist in much of corporate America.” Regent Gary Novack, vice president of the California Alumni Association, was the sole dissenting vote on Thursday. Novack said that focusing on a bid for the lab would compromise the educational mission of the university and that the resources to run the lab would be better spent on educational support. Bids are due July 19, and energy department officials expect to award the bid in December. Traci Kawaguchi is an assistant news editor and Josh Keller is the news editor. Contact them at newsdesk@dailycal.org. Berkeley, California dailycal@dailycal.org ***************************************************************** 72 Berkeley Daily Planet: LBNL Plans For Cleanup Challenged At Hearing Edition Date: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 By RICHARD BRENNEMAN Praised by citizen activists in Richmond, the state Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) got a less than friendly reception Thursday night in Berkeley. While activists in Richmond fought a hard battle to get the DTSC to take charge of cleanup e fforts at Campus Bay and UC Berkeley’s Bayside Research Campus, also known as the Field Station, their Berkeley counterparts are unhappy with the agency’s handling of cleanup efforts at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). The gathering at t he North Berkeley Senior Center was held to answer questions and take public testimony on the latest round of LBNL cleanup efforts, which center on four areas of soil contamination and 11 areas of groundwater pollution. Chaired by DTSC Public Participation Specialist Nathan Schumacher, the initial part of the meeting focused on specific cleanup plans and featured a panel that included representatives from the agency, the lab, the San Francisco Water Quality Control Board and Nabil Al-Hadithy, Berkeley’s hazardous materials supervisor. Al-Hadithy presented a letter from City Manager Phil Kamlarz, written after the City Council voted Tuesday to urge that cleanup efforts target the highest possible remediation standards. Site investigations by the DTSC be gan in 1991, followed by a 1993 permit that requires LBNL to investigate and clean up all historical releases of pollutants on the site. The full site investigation was completed in November 1993, and a formal risk assessment was issue two years later. Th ursday’s hearing focused on the proposed remedies approved by the DTSC. Most of the contaminants are industrial solvents and chlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs. But many of those who came to offer questions and testimony were worried about radioactive conta mination, specifically the presence in groundwater of tritium, a manmade isotope of hydrogen first isolated by UCB’s Nobel-winning physicist Luis Alvarez. Unfortunately, cleanup of radioactive waste isn’t the province of DTSC but of the U.S. Department o f Energy, which has ultimate jurisdiction over the lab. “I believe your assessment of risk is inaccurate if all the radioactive exposure is left out,” declared Pamela Shivola of the Committee to Minimize Toxic Waste. Dr. Mohinder Sandhu, chief of DTSC’s Standardized Permits &Corrective Action Branch, acknowledged, “We don’t know what is happening with tritium” contamination. The element has a half-life of 10 years, meaning that after a decade only half the radiation remains in a given sample, and half of that remains after another decade, and so on. “The source of the tritium has been eliminated,” said Iraj Javandel, LBNL’s site restoration program manager. “The facility closed four or five years ago, and contamination is reduced to five percent of w hat it was. We have about 55 (monitoring) wells in the area, and only one has tritium at levels above the state drinking water standard, and that’s now on the boundary.” LA Wood, a member of Berkeley’s Community Environmental Advisory Commission, and fel low Commissioner Leuren Moret charged that radioactive monitoring wasn’t sufficient. Several speakers also charged that wells for monitoring for chemical and radioactive pollution should be extended throughout the site, and not just in relations to known releases. Cleanup plans call for a variety of remediation efforts based on the nature of contamination and the characteristics of individual sites. Methods include hauling contamination to toxic waste containment sites, purification of soil solvents in water by chemical oxidation, soil flushing, degradation by native or introduced bacteria, evaporation, pumping and treating of groundwater, monitored natural attenuation. City Councilmember Kriss Worthington asked why DTSC couldn’t create a Community Adv isory Group (CAG) for the LBNL cleanup. A similar panel composed of citizens and business and community leaders was formed after DTSC took control of Campus Bay from the water board in Richmond. Worthington suggested a similar panel at Tuesday’s council meeting, only to be voted down by the majority. Others echoed his call Thursday, a move strenuously opposed by DTSC and the university. Members of the public have until June 8 to offer comments to the DTSC. For more information on the cleanup, see the DTSC’s website at www.dtsc.ca.gov/hazardouswaste/lbnl/index.html. ***************************************************************** 73 California Aggie: UC should overhaul Los Alamos labs’ policies May 31, 2005 Guest Editorial: LOS ALAMOS Daily Bruin (UCLA)   The UC Regents voted overwhelmingly to bid on the Los Alamos labs Thursday, and if the University of California does beat out its competitors for control of the nuclear research center, it needs to make drastic changes so that the university doesn’t continue the labs’ troubled past.   The UC has had control of the labs for 63 years. But instead of invaluable prestige, its reputation has recently been plagued by management mishaps.   Disks and laptop computers containing sensitive information have gone missing. And the person the UC brought in two years ago to tidy things up — Pete Nanos — has since stepped down. Conditions at Los Alamos didn’t improve during his tenure.   Los Alamos also has a controversial image among students. At the regents meeting this week in San Francisco, students showed up to give an emphatic “no” to the UC lab bid because of the labs’ weapons research — but the regents ignored them.   Regardless, the decision has been made, and the UC now has a chance to reinvent the image of the labs. The university needs to construct a plan to resurrect what has become a broken institution.   The regents need to lay out a comprehensive explanation to both the Department of Energy and UC students and faculty as to why it is bidding for the labs and why it can be trusted not to mess things up again. Both parties deserve to hear reasons from the university because the ones provided so far have been weak and unconvincing.   And like the complete overhaul of the management of the UCLA Willed Body Program, there should also be a complete overhaul of the labs.   UC officials have blamed a reckless “cowboy” culture among lab employees for past security lapses. But when disks allegedly containing classified information go missing, prompting a lab-wide shutdown, and then officials discover those disks never existed, that isn’t a “cowboy” culture. That is pure incompetence on many levels.   The regents cannot afford to let the labs slide anymore. There must be extensive questioning and a large-scale overhaul of lab management. It is important for the regents to take a step back, completely evaluate the programs and then prepare to take the labs through another 63 years.   The UC has already made some strides toward reconstruction, including a nearly ten-fold spending increase on management fees. But that is not enough.   In the past, the Daily Bruin has said that despite one’s feelings toward nuclear research, it was better for the labs to be run by the UC than another institution.   But this also means that the labs need to reflect the UC’s commitment to quality, students and community research as opposed to focusing on helping construct weapons of mass destruction.   This means the creation of additional student programs, internships, scholarships and fellowships for students to study at the labs, and the conducting of beneficial nuclear research.   It is upsetting that the regents decided not to address student and protester concerns. One can only hope they do a more thorough and transparent job of laying the groundwork for the management of Los Alamos. © 1995 - 2005 by The California Aggie. All ***************************************************************** 74 lamonitor.com: Richardson appeals to scientists to stay The Online News Source for Los Alamos CAROL A. CLARK, , Monitor Staff Writer Gov. Bill Richardson appealed to local scientists to hang in there and not retire. "Wait until we see the final decision," he urged during a town hall meeting Friday. "We are going to fight very hard, myself and the congressional delegation, so don't make precipitous decisions - keep your powder dry." Richardson said DOE needs to realize it's not in the country's best interest to lose our scientists. He said he opposes the stand-alone pension outlined in the RFP saying it was another unneeded layer like the NNSA. "I opposed the NNSA saying it was a mistake and it's being proven now," he said. "We need to keep the benefits and the retirement the way it is - people like it so why mess with something that's working?" Richardson called on scientists to speak out about what they want. A woman in the audience asked him what they were supposed to do. "People are speaking out by deciding to retire," she said. Richardson told her the scientists need to mobilize and say, "This is what we want or we're going to retire - there is leverage in that." "The state appreciates you, the country appreciates you, you're doing important work - especially now with North Korea and Iran and the loose nukes," he said. Interim Laboratory Director Robert Kuckuck joined Richardson at the meeting. They had both attended an earlier meeting with LANL workers in at TA-3 Friday before moving to Fuller Lodge for the public talk. Kuckuck said in an interview after the meeting that the country is redefining the labs right now. "They were redefined in the '40s and '50s and they're being redefined now," Kuckuck said. "Are they an academic university science lead lab or an aerospace corporation lab and I personally see that as two very different situations?" Rep. Jeannette Wallace, R-Los Alamos, addressed the lab hierarchy through Richardson and Kuckuck saying it needs to open its lines of communication with the community. "We are a separate community from the lab and we want you to talk to us as a community," Wallace said. "We don't like surprises. All of northern New Mexico is important and we want the Lab to communicate with us all the time." Wallace told Kuckuck and Richardson that years ago the Lab held monthly meetings with the community but that practice died. Councilor Jim West worked at LANL for 33 years and said there used to be a community partnership with the Lab that no longer exists. "We want a chair at the table when decisions are being made," West said. Council Chair Fran Berting said a committee is working on suggestions for how the Lab and the community can better communicate. Wallace added, "We're not just blaming the Lab, we're blaming DOE and we're blaming everybody. In a recent all hands meeting reported in the LANL Newsletter by Brooke Kent, Kuckuck said it felt "awesome to be here" and called Los Alamos the "shrine" of the nation's weapons complex. In the article, Kuckuck outlined three overarching priorities. + Changing the external perception of Los Alamos. + Advancing an atmosphere of trust, respect, civility and communication. + Addressing employees' uncertainty about the changes ahead. "I will be telling you everything I learn ... as soon as I have it," Kuckuck promised the employees. On Thursday, UC regents voted 11-to-one to compete for the LANL contract it has managed since 1943. Kuckuck, a retired physicist with more than 40 years of nuclear weapons work said he is enthusiastic about UC getting the contract. Bill Richardson said the University of California and Bechtel National are the best team to manage the Laboratory. Richardson also said he supports bringing childcare to the lab to help attract and retain younger scientists. He supports a new civic center for Los Alamos as long as the community does, adding that the community needs to get behind it. And Richardson said he supports heath care facilities to help people deal with stress and other emotional issues. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************