***************************************************************** 07/19/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.165 ***************************************************************** 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 Bellona: Iran wants to question former Russian Nuclear Energy Minist 2 Daily Times: Russia and Iran agree on nuclear plant probe 3 IRNA: EC chief: Peaceful use of nuclear technology, Iran's legitimat 4 MNA: Iran will resume enrichment if nuclear negotiations with EU rea 5 IPS-English NORTH KOREA-NUKE PROGRAM: Six-party talks to open 6 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea to resume nuclear talks 7 Korea Herald: Six-party talks set for next Tuesday 8 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: 6-party talks scheduled to be open-ended 9 IPS-English POLITICS:India, US Open Can of Nuclear Worms 10 IPS-English POLITICS-US: Upgraded Ties with India Roil 11 Economist.com: Welcome to the nuclear club | 12 Japan Times: Ford mulled pulling nukes from ships to shield Japan fr 13 Guardian Unlimited: Singh: India 'Responsible Nuclear Power' 14 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Reverses Nuclear Policy for India NUCLEAR REACTORS 15 US: NIRS: JULY 25: Senate Call-in Day! Help Ani DiFranco, Indigo Gir 16 US: NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Palisades Nuclear Plant Environme 17 US: Platts: Conferees agree on nuclear section of energy bill 18 US: NRC: Sunshine Act; Meetings 19 allAfrica.com: Nigeria: IAEA, Unesco, Others Back Nigeria's Nuclear 20 US: APP.COM: Reactor might have to retool 21 US: Clarion-Ledger: Be cautious in use of nuclear power 22 US: NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Vermont Yankee Nuclear Po 23 US: NRC: Public Meeting To Discuss the Safety Evaluation Report and 24 US: Newsday: Indian Point siren system deactivated for 6 hours after 25 canada.com network: refurbishment of Point Lepreau plant 26 CBC New Brunswick: Lord hears both sides of Lepreau debate NUCLEAR SECURITY 27 Moscow Times: Adamov Caught in Iran Probe 28 US: SignOnSanDiego.com: Power plant worker fails Breathalyzer 29 RIA Novosti: Adamov's defense team still has two arguments to 30 BBC: Fear at planes near power 31 Mos News: Former Russian Nuclear Minister Adamov to Remain in Swiss NUCLEAR SAFETY 32 US: 3 Million Plus Killed By Radiation In USA, Women More Vulnerable 33 [du-list] Iraq's descent into bombing quagmire -Have your say- 34 US: [NukeNet] 3 Million Plus Killed By Radiation In USA, Women 35 [du-list] Depleted Uranium: States Take Action to Protect 36 Bangkok's Independent: Industry manufactures uncertainty to distort 37 Yokwe: US NGO's Support Marshall Islands Cause at Senate Hearing 38 Yokwe: Senate Committee to Review US Nuke Legacy in Marshall Islands 39 VietNam News: Cancer on the rise in children NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 40 US: [shundahaialert] Nuke News on the Skull Valley Indian 41 AU ABC: Rann voices concern over nuclear waste dump 42 US: Deseret News: Utah nuclear site would imperil U.S. 43 Las Vegas RJ: Agency plansspecial trainsfor waste site 44 Las Vegas RJ: Subpoenaon the wayfor DOE, Porter says 45 Bellona: Thorp officials open with Bellona as they work to restore U 46 Bellona: Commentary: Nuclear Basketball 47 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca dust suit allowed to continue 48 Las Vegas SUN: DOE: Trains destined for Yucca would only carry 49 Las Vegas SUN: Porter seeks more Yucca documents 50 US: Times Herald: lawmakers push for federal takeover of West Valley 51 AU ABC: Australia Institute doubts waste dump operation. 52 AU ABC: Territorians urged not to panic over radioactive waste dump 53 News & Star: Sellafield scheme saves Ł1m 54 US: Las Vegas SUN: DOE says dedicated trains to be used for nuclear 55 Las Vegas SUN: Rep. Porter announces subpoena for Yucca Mountain doc PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 56 [NukeNet] Watchdog Groups Submit Bid for LANL Contract Today 57 Albuquerque Tribune: Los Alamos bidders tout their strengths 58 Seattle Times: Hanford plant gets deadline for plan to end construct 59 Olympian: Hanford officials face deadline on plan to halt plant cons 60 lamonitor.com: LANL contract bids are in 61 lamonitor.com: Little Boy returns home ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Bellona: Iran wants to question former Russian Nuclear Energy Minister Adamov, arrested in Switzerland The Russian and Iranian supreme audit institutions will investigate the considerable delay in the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant, the head of the Russian Audit Chamber said in an interview on national television. 2005-07-18 13:10 The Russian and Iranian supreme audit institutions will investigate the considerable delay in the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant, the head of the Russian Audit Chamber said in an interview on national television, as reported by RIA News. After his recent trip to Iran, Sergei Stepashin told the Rossiya TV channel, "My Iranian colleague and I have agreed to carry out a parallel investigation into why this project has been delayed." "We have reached unpleasant conclusions. A certain organization, Atomstroiexport, was established under the Nuclear Energy Ministry in 1998. This organization acted as an intermediary. Then Kakha Bendukidze (a well-known Russian oligarch of Georgian origin who became the Georgian Economic Minister under President Mikhail Saakashvili) acquired the company. After that, the state lost all its positions in the company." "Iran has many questions for that company," Stepashin said. Fortunately, it has undergone a change in ownership and now belongs to Gazprombank. This means that it is a state-run organization now. Iran also has questions it wants to ask former Russian minister for nuclear energy Adamov (currently under arrest in Switzerland on fraud charges brought by the U.S.). Iran says that several heavily funded programs have never been implemented." "We are waiting for our Iranian colleagues (to send us) documents and we will study them very closely with our specialists," Stepashin said. "I think the Russian Prosecutor General's Office should study this case very carefully." The head of the Audit Chamber said that he expected the multi-billion Bushehr nuclear power plant to be operational by the end of next year. "This would allow Russia to continue working in Iran, including in its nuclear market. In the next 80 years, Russia could make about $80-100 billion from its projects in Iran," Stepashin said. Both the United States and Israel have objected to the building of the Bushehr reactor, which could go online at the end of next year, as they claim Iran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons and that having such a facility will be a proliferation risk. Russia signed a cooperation agreement with Iran in 2002 that opened the way for the construction of up to five reactors, including another one at Bushehr, over the coming decade. 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 ***************************************************************** 2 Daily Times: Russia and Iran agree on nuclear plant probe Wednesday, July 20, 2005 MOSCOW: Moscow and Tehran are investigating the role of a former Russian minister in the misappropriation of millions of dollars and the delay in the construction of Iran’s first nuclear power plant, the president of Russia’s audit chamber said on Sunday. “We agreed on a parallel probe into the reasons why it took so long to implement this project. And we have reached not very pleasant conclusions,” Sergei Stepashin told the state-owned Rossia television channel. Russia is helping Iran build the Bushehr nuclear power plant, over the strenuous objections of the United States and Israel. Tehran wants to question former Russian nuclear energy minister Yevgeny Adamov, arrested in Switzerland two months ago, about his alleged involvement in embezzlement linked to the work at Bushehr, said Stepashin, who recently visited Iran. “The Iranians have many questions for former minister Adamov, because, according to their data, several projects worth a lot of money, millions of dollars, were paid for but have not been implemented,” Stepashin said. Adamov, who was a minister from 1998 to 2001, was arrested in Switzerland last May at the request of the United States and is still being held there. Moscow has requested his extradition to Russia to answer charges of embezzlement. The US justice department accuses him and an accomplice of having misappropriated, between 1993 and 2003, nine million dollars the United States paid Russia to improve security in its nuclear facilities. Stepashin particularly criticised the part played the AtomStroiExport company, which he said had been set up in 1998 under the authority of the Russian nuclear energy ministry and was acting as an intermediary for Russia’s nuclear programs in Iran. “We are waiting for our Iranian colleagues (to send us) documents and we will study them very closely with our specialists,” Stepashin said, adding that the Russian general prosecutor’s office might also take an interest in them. Both the United States and Israel have objected to the building of the Bushehr reactor, which could go online at the end of next year, as they claim Iran is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons and that having such a facility will be a proliferation risk. Bushehr, which will be Iran’s first nuclear power reactor, is being built under an agreement between the Russian and Iranian governments for 800 million dollars. Russia signed a technological cooperation agreement with Tehran in 2002 that opened the way for the construction of up to five reactors — including a second one at Bushehr — over the coming 10 years. afp Daily Times - All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 3 IRNA: EC chief: Peaceful use of nuclear technology, Iran's legitimate right - Tehran, July 19, IRNA Iran-Australia-Rafsanjani Chairman of the Expediency Council Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said here Tuesday that it is the legitimate right of Iran to make use of nuclear technology for peaceful purses. In a meeting with Australian Ambassador to Tehran Gregory Lawrence Moriarty, he said the current negotiations between Iran and three European countries should continue based on international rules and regulations. Criticizing prolongation of talks on uranium enrichment, he said Iran never ignores its legitimate right to benefit from peaceful application of nuclear technology and is to convince the international community of its peaceful plans. Referring to the current developments in Iraq, he said Iran has given priority to restoration of security to Iraq and meeting the urgent demands of the Iraqi people. Iran is to play its crucial role in reconstruction of Iraq in the long run, he underlined. The current mutual relations between Iran and Australia should be further bolstered, he said, adding that the two sides should help create balance in their economic ties by increasing the current level of trade exchange between the two countries and the Australian side should help implement development projects in Iran. Iran has adopted a moderate policy in its domestic and foreign diplomacy which meets the country's interests, he said. The Australian ambassador, for his part, lauded Iran's positive stands on current developments in Iraq and Afghanistan and said Australia attaches importance to the significant role of Iran in regional developments. He said "We believe that the country's legitimate right should be respected." Since the country's economic prospect seems very bright, Australian businessmen have voiced willingness to invest in Iran, he said. The Australian businessmen hope to witness further expansion of economic cooperation in mining, oil, gas and educational sectors between the two countries. ***************************************************************** 4 MNA: Iran will resume enrichment if nuclear negotiations with EU reach impasse Tehran:08:08,2005/07/20 TEHRAN, July 18 (MNA) -- The nuclear issue has nothing to do with the formation of President-Elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s cabinet, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said here on Monday. Commenting on the possibility that the European Union would postpone the presentation of its plan on Iran’s nuclear program until the formation of Ahmadinejad’s government, Asefi told reporters at his weekly press briefing, “As the EU deadline approaches, we enter a critical situation, so we have arranged informal negotiations with the Europeans to expedite the matter.” The nuclear issue has nothing to do with the formation of Ahmadinejad’s cabinet because continuing the negotiations is incumbent upon the next president, he added. Iran will resume nuclear activities if the results of the negotiations with the EU are not satisfactory, he explained. However, Asefi expressed hope that the EU’s plan would clearly recognize Iran’s legal rights and thus prevent the negotiations from reaching an impasse. The EU is supposed to present its plan between August 1st and 6th, but if it does not recognize Iran’s right to enrich uranium, that would be unacceptable and Iran would then resume enrichment activities at the Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF), the Foreign Ministry spokesman said. Asefi stated that Iran had no plan to negotiate with the United States on the nuclear issue, adding that the members of the Iranian nuclear negotiating delegation were appointed by the Supreme National Security Council and not by the president and therefore they would not be replaced. The Foreign Ministry spokesman stated that the recent visit of Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari was a response to the visit of Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi to Iraq and said that satisfactory negotiations were held on oil, commercial cooperation, industries, pilgrimages, and other topics. Iran will not send pilgrim caravans to Iraq at this point in time because of the security situation in that country, Asefi explained. Iran’s close relations with Iraq have nothing to do with the United States and will not have a negative impact on Iraq’s relations with the U.S., he added. He went on to say that Iran had always sought friendly relations with Muslim and Arab countries and had established close relations with these countries during the presidencies of Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Mohammad Khatami. The expansion of Iran’s relations with Iraq will also have a positive impact on its relations with other Arab countries, Asefi added. The Foreign Ministry spokesman also criticized the U.S. and the EU for interfering in Iran’s domestic affairs by meddling in the legal case against imprisoned Iranian journalist Akbar Ganji. The U.S. should not speak about the human rights situation in other countries because it is itself guilty of institutionalized human rights violations, he observed, adding that the Ganji case is a domestic affair of the Islamic Republic and hopefully an appropriate solution will be found. The Judiciary is an independent organization and Iran will not let any foreign country interfere in its domestic affairs, Asefi emphasized. SA/HG End MNA © 2003 Mehr News Agency ***************************************************************** 5 IPS-English NORTH KOREA-NUKE PROGRAM: Six-party talks to open Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:31:04 -0700 NORTH KOREA-NUKE PROGRAM: Six-party talks to open next week Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM) SEOUL, July 19 (WAM) - A new round of six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program will begin on July 26 in Beijing, South Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman Lee Kyu-hyung made the announcement in a statement on Tuesday. The new talks come after a 13-month deadlock in the negotiations that bring together the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia. He made no mention of how long the talks will last, however. The widespread view has been that next week's talks will be open-ended. (WAM) ***************************************************************** 6 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea to resume nuclear talks Staff and agencies Tuesday July 19, 2005 North Korea will resume international nuclear arms talks in Beijing next week after a gap of more than a year, the South Korean foreign ministry announced today. The talks have been stalled since the communist North walked out of the previous round of negotiations last June, accusing the US of "hostility" and "insincerity". Pyongyang rejected Washington's demands for it to begin dismantling its nuclear weapons in return for food aid and other assistance. It said it feared a US invasion if it agreed to scrap its existing weapons. The North agreed to return to the talks only after being assured that the US recognised its sovereignty. Earlier this month, it said it would resume the six-nation negotiations, and today's announcement confirms talks will begin on July 26. The previous three rounds of discussions - which began in 2003 - lasted for several days, but failed to result in any breakthrough. South Korea is pressing for this set of talks to be more flexible and to last longer - possibly for up to a month or more. In a statement, the South Korean foreign ministry said Seoul planned to "play a progressive and active role in making substantial progress ... for resolution of the North Korean nuclear problem". China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the US have sought to use the meetings to persuade the North to abandon its nuclear weapons. The nuclear crisis began in late 2002, when US officials accused North Korea of running a secret uranium enrichment programme. In February this year, Pyongyang publicly said for the first time that it had nuclear weapons, and it has since made moves that would allow it to harvest weapons-grade plutonium from its main nuclear reactor. Some experts believe North Korea has enough plutonium to make at least six bombs, but it has never tested any weapons that would confirm its potential arsenal. Analysts argue that the prospects of progress at next week's talks are not good. Some believe the six-nation negotiations are going nowhere, and have called on Washington to hold direct talks with Pyongyang. In Tokyo, the Japanese prime minister, Junichiro Koizumi, today said his country remained committed to normalising diplomatic relations with North Korea. Mr Koizumi visited Pyongyang three years ago, when the two countries agreed to reconcile, but relations have since stalled over the nuclear issue and Tokyo's demands for more information about the fate of several Japanese allegedly abducted by North Korea. The South Korean president, Roh Moo-hyun, said yesterday that the US held "the final key" to a solution at the talks. Earlier this month, South Korea revealed that it had offered energy aid to the North as an incentive for it to give up its nuclear weapons. The offer - of 2,000 megawatts of electricity and half a million tonnes of grain - was praised by the US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice. Washington has said it would offer diplomatic recognition and trade to North Korea only after international inspectors verified that the country had completely dismantled its nuclear programme. The North Korean regime's main newspaper said yesterday that Pyongyang and Washington should agree to coexist and respect each other at the restarted talks. "The talks should not be ones for their own sake," the Rodong Sinmun newspaper said. "One side should not be allowed to use the talks for achieving the sinister purpose of disarming the other party." Meanwhile today, in a move likely to anger North Korean officials, campaigners were to meet at a Washington conferenceon North Korean human rights. The conference, organised by the non-partisan Freedom House group, has been partially funded by the US government. Washington officials had been expected to appoint a special envoy for North Korean human rights, who had originally been expected to appear at the conference. However, an announcement about an appointment has been delayed because of anxieties over Pyongyang's possible reaction and how that could affect the nuclear talks. There was a sign of improved relations between North and South Korea yesterday when fibreoptic communications cables across the border were joined. Linking Seoul and Pyongyang, they will be used next month for a first video reunion of families torn apart by the 1950-53 Korean war. They were one of a series of measures agreed during cabinet level talks between North and South Korea last month. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 7 Korea Herald: Six-party talks set for next Tuesday The Foreign Ministry said yesterday that the fourth installment of the six-party talks will open on Tuesday at Diaoyutai, the Chinese government's guesthouse in Beijing. Representatives from the six member countries - the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia - will be gathering for the first time in 13 months after Pyongyang called off a boycott of the talks earlier this month. China has hosted the last three rounds of the talks at the same venue since 2003. No date has been set yet on when the talks will finish. Six-party talks in the past have lasted three to four days but this time most of the member countries share an understanding that the negotiations could last longer if needed. Allies of the six-nation talks have also begun discussing ways to change the format of the negotiations which have been futile in the past three rounds. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said on Monday the United States has been talking with South Korea and Japan about changing the form of the six-party talks. McCormack, however, refused to comment on whether this could be the last chance to solve the standoff, and added the focus was on making progress. "That is where our focus has been, and that is making this a productive round in which we do our part to make progress and see if we can move this process forward," he said. South Korea believes it is crucial to see a substantial result in the talks by at least drawing out talks-for-the-sake-of-talks promise on North Korea's nuclear dismantlement and consequent economic, security and other assurances from the other parties. Contents of the outcome are likely to be prioritized over the format of the announcement of the result at the end of the talks. With the talks starting on Tuesday, the North Korean delegation led by Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye-gwan is likely to arrive in Beijing by Monday at the latest. The South Korean team flies to the venue on Sunday. Representatives of the two Koreas are likely to meet informally upon their arrivals, as was usually done in the past negotiations. (angiely@heraldm.com) By Lee Joo-hee 2005.07.20 ***************************************************************** 8 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: 6-party talks scheduled to be open-ended July 20, 2005 KST 12:29 (GMT+9) July 20, 2005 ¤Ń Announcing officially that the six-party talks intended to end the North Korean nuclear crisis would resume July 26, the South Korean Foreign Ministry said yesterday that the negotiations in Beijing would be open-ended with the participants now focused on achieving results. A South Korean official said yesterday that the countries participating in the talks ˇŞ the two Koreas, China, Russia, Japan and the United States ˇŞ have agreed that the negotiations needed to bring tangible results. "Considering that the talks are resuming after more than a year, participants are very determined to get visual results rather than just hollow statements," said the official. "There is a sense of urgency here that we might not get another shot at resolving the issue through diplomatic means, if the talks fail this time." After a 13-month stalemate and almost no advance in the earlier talks, Pyongyang said last month that it would return to the negotiation table. The South Korean Foreign Ministry said no specific date had been set for the new round of talks to end. Diplomats hope an open-ended session will provide greater flexibility and opportunity for compromise. Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-soon will lead South Korea's delegation to the talks. While welcoming the news of Pyongyang's return to nuclear negotiations, Washington officials, who have been cautious about the prospects of the talks, say they do not want to see another fruitless round. The North, which hopes to address its chronic energy and food problems through aid offers in return for dismantling its nuclear weapons, has signaled its willingness to see some real progress in the negotiations. Ursula Stenzel, head of an EU parliamentary delegation, who visited Pyongyang last week, quoted North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Kim Gye-gwan as saying that Pyongyang wanted "not ceremonial, but substantial, talks." by Brian Lee africanu@joongang.co.kr> Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. ***************************************************************** 9 IPS-English POLITICS:India, US Open Can of Nuclear Worms Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:31:04 -0700 ROMAIPS AP IP DV SC BW EN POLITICS:India, US Open Can of Nuclear Worms Analysis by Praful Bidwai NEW DELHI, Jul 19 (IPS) - More than 30 years after the United States walked out of a nuclear cooperation agreement with India, because it conducted an atomic test, the two countries have agreed to resume collaboration in civilian nuclear energy. A joint-statement issued by US President George W. Bush and visiting Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Washington on Tuesday said the US would now ''work with friends and allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy and trade with India.'' Essentially, this means that Washington has now accepted India as a nuclear weapons-state (NWS) although it is euphemistically referred to as ''a state with advanced nuclear technology''. That would entail a dilution of the global nuclear regime, founded on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which only recognises five NWSs. All five crossed the atomic threshold before 1967 while India became a self-declared NWS only in 1998. The US-India agreement is likely to run into problems on the supply side, in the US and in the Nuclear Suppliers' Group comprising 44 relatively industrialised states as well as on the recipient side - India. Under the agreement signed between Bush and Singh, the US has promised to sell nuclear materials and equipment to India and also to involve it in 'advanced' areas of research. Interestingly, this could mean a role for India in the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) which will experiment with fusion reactions that release energy when nuclei are forced together ű unlike fission in which nuclei are split to release energy. In return, India would ''assume the same responsibilities'' and ''acquire the same benefits and advantages as other leading countries with advanced nuclear technology'' that could only be read as nuclear weapon states. Besides ''working to prevent the global proliferation of weapons of mass destruction'', India would take a series of steps towards ''identifying and separating civilian and military nuclear facilities and programmes.'' India would also be required to file a declaration regarding its civilians facilities with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and place them under its safeguards, continue its ''unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing'' and work with the US for the ''conclusion of a multilateral Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty''. India would also ''secure nuclear materials and technology through comprehensive export control legislation'' and through ''adherence to Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG) guidelines'' although it is not a member of either grouping. There are deep divisions within the US establishment over restructuring the global nuclear order to accommodate India. For instance, security experts like Ashley J. Tellis advocate that the US should integrate India into the global non-proliferation regime by treating it as a de facto nuclear state and transferring nuclear technology to new facilities, but under safeguards. Others like George Perkovich argue that the ''the US and others should not adjust the nuclear non-proliferation regime to accommodate India's desire for access to nuclear technology ŕ The costs of breaking faith with non-nuclear weapons states such as Japan, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, Sweden and others who forswore nuclear weapons [are] too high to warrant accommodating India's nuclear desires''. These states are also NSG members and could put up stiff resistance to Bush's promise to relax the global non-proliferation regime. The NSG's guidelines are tougher than many IAEA safeguards. Resistance is likely from within the Indian establishment too. ''The first problem with the agreement is that it misses the point about the extremely limited scope for meaningful nuclear cooperation between India and US,'' argues A Gopalakrishnan, a nuclear engineer and former chairman of India's Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (IAERB). ''The US has no worthwhile current expertise in the design, construction, operation, maintenance or safety of any of the type of reactors existing or envisaged in the Indian nuclear power programme,'' Gopalakrishnan said. India's reactors include two obsolete US-built enriched uranium-boiling water reactors more than a dozen reactors which burn natural uranium with heavy water, and fast-breeder reactors. The US has no commercial natural uranium-based heavy water reactors, the mainstay of the Indian nuclear power programme. While India could change its nuclear technology trajectory from natural to enriched uranium and import US-made reactors this would make it too dependent as India has not been able to enrich uranium in large enough quantities. External dependence is unacceptable to many Indian policy-makers, especially in the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), which has had an unpleasant experience with procuring enriched uranium fuel for two US- built reactors at Tarapur, near the western port city of Mumbai. India does need raw uranium too because its existing mines are rapidly depleting and there is popular resistance to the opening of new mines. Importing uranium will need relaxation of NSG guidelines and the US has promised to bring this about. ''Yet, it is far from clear that the other 43 members of the NSG will agree,'' says a high-level DAE source, who requested anonymity. ''In the past, the NSG failed to reach a consensus on supply of enriched uranium for Tarapur. The guidelines demand full-scope safeguards under the IAEA. This is something we in the DAE are unwilling to fall in line with''. The same source said it is difficult to isolate India's civilian nuclear facilities and activities from military ones. Often, the two occur in the same location or laboratory. So having IAEA inspectors will interfere with India's ''sovereignty''. ''Besides most DAE scientists would be loath to subject, say, fast- breeder reactors to IAEA safeguards. They are the next stage in our energy independence plans, and will pave the way for the use of thorium, of which India has an abundance. We in the DAE believe in the doctrine of self-reliance and independence in matters nuclear,'' the source said. However, this belief is not supported by facts. In the past, India has lawfully imported or clandestinely bought nuclear technology or materials from diverse sources like the US, China, the former USSR, Russia, France, Norway and Britain. But the idea of nuclear self-reliance remains an article of faith with many DAE officials and scientists. One of them, A.N. Prasad, a former director of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, has been quoted as saying that allowing IAEA safeguards ''goes against the national interest''. Thus the Indo-US deal does not have the full support of the principal Indian agency responsible for its execution. It is also likely to run into rough weather politically because there is no broad consensus on the issue of safeguards or conformity with NSG and MTCR guidelines. There is the trickier issue of India agreeing to extend its moratorium on conducting nuclear weapons tests. In 1995-96, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty was vehemently opposed by a cross-section of political parties but after the 1998 blasts, India unilaterally declared a moratorium on further tests. Reiterating that commitment in a joint declaration with the US is sure to raise fears about loss of ôsovereignty” and vulnerability to pressure from Washington and is fraught with political consequences at home. The emphasis in the agreement on promoting nuclear power to meet ''growing global energy demands in a cleaner and more efficient manner'' is likely to invite opposition from India's environmentalist movement. Environmentalists have pointed to the grave hazards posed by nuclear technology through its propensity for serious accidents, and the problem of high-level radioactive wastes which remain menacing for tens of thousands of years. ( (END/IPS/AP/IP/DV/SC/BW/RDR/05) = 07191545 ORP009 NNNN ***************************************************************** 10 IPS-English POLITICS-US: Upgraded Ties with India Roil Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:15:03 -0700 ROMAIPS AP NA IF IP POLITICS-US: Upgraded Ties with India Roil Strategic Waters Jim Lobe WASHINGTON, Jul 19 (IPS) - This week's agreement by U.S. President George W. Bush to sell advanced nuclear technology to India, coming three weeks after the signing of a 10-year bilateral defence agreement that makes New Delhi eligible to buy sophisticated U.S. military equipment, confirms a major policy shift with global as well as regional implications, according to experts here. On the one hand, the Bush administration appears to have definitively turned its back on key elements of a 30-year strategy to discourage non-signatories of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) from going nuclear, as well as its traditional "tilt" toward Pakistan in the South Asian balance of power. Although Washington agreed in March to sell Pakistan advanced warplanes that it has long sought, Islamabad announced Monday it was putting off a scheduled visit to the White House next week by Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, although officials there denied that it was related to the new Indo-U.S. agreement. At the same time, the two agreements mark a qualitatively new stage in efforts by the administration to transform India into a de facto U.S. ally that can be used as a counterweight to an emerging China, which is depicted increasingly by a variety of forces here, especially the Pentagon, as the biggest long-term threat to maintaining U.S. hegemony in Asia. "This is seen as another brick in the anti-China containment strategy," according to Joseph Cirincione, a foreign policy analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who also called Bush's decision to sell nuclear fuel and technology to Delhi "a huge mistake." "It curries favour with India but undermines almost every U.S. non-proliferation goal and will make it much harder to get the international cooperation we need to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons," he told IPS, adding that it will now be much easier for Russia to defend its nuclear sales to Iran. "It definitely raises questions about U.S. non-proliferation policy," agreed Arjun Makhijani, director of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER). "Many countries that want civilian nuclear technology but that also feel insecure without nuclear weapons will now wonder what is the substance of U.S. policy beyond treating those who have them lightly and those who don't with force." The nuclear agreement, which capped a state visit here by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, was the latest and most dramatic step in a bilateral courtship that began shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Delhi's Cold-War ally. It gained momentum in the late 1990s when Washington became actively engaged in defusing tensions between India and Pakistan, and accelerated after the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The importance of Singh's three-day visit was underlined by the red-carpet treatment he was accorded. It included an address to a joint session of Congress Tuesday in which the Indian leader vowed that his country "never will be a source of proliferation of sensitive technologies," as well as a formal state dinner Monday night -- "the first big White House social event in two nearly two years" -- hosted by a U.S. president whose hatred of dressing up for fancy occasions is well-known. Although Singh did not receive everything he wanted -- the administration declined to publicly support India's bid for a permanent U.N. Security Council seat or lift its opposition to the construction of a pipeline that will transport natural gas from Iran through Pakistan to India -- Bush's agreement to supply nuclear fuel and technology was hailed by the Indian press as a historic breakthrough and confirmation of Delhi's emergence as a major world power. India, which never signed the NPT, shocked the world when it exploded a nuclear device in 1974, and then again in 1998 when it conducted three underground nuclear tests that were quickly followed by one by Pakistan, bringing tensions between the two countries to a boil. The U.S. responded to the 1974 test by cutting off bilateral nuclear cooperation and creating the Nuclear Supplier's Group (NSG), now 44 nations strong, that has agreed not to transfer sensitive nuclear technology to non-NPT states or to those that have not accepted "full-scope" inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of all their nuclear facilities. After the 1998 tests, the administration of former President Bill Clinton imposed economic sanctions against India. They were repealed after the 9/11 attacks at roughly the same time that Bush lifted a ban on U.S. military aid and sales to Pakistan first imposed in the early 1990s when his father concluded that Islamabad had, for all practical purposes, built a nuclear weapon. Nuclear experts here said Monday's accord -- under which India agreed to put its civilian, but not its military, nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards -- threatens the NSG, in particular. "The whole concept was, 'Let's not reward countries that build nuclear weapons,"' said George Perkovich, another nuclear analyst at Carnegie who also specialises in South Asia. "We want other countries to join us in enforcing rules, but then if we break them, we could weaken other countries' willingness to enforce those rules that we want to enforce, leading them, for example, to do what we don't want them to do," he added, citing the possibility that China may sell nuclear technology to Pakistan which, like India, is not an NPT member. Perkovich and others stressed that Monday's agreement amounts so far only to a statement of intention and that several hurdles could still block its consummation. The U.S. Nonproliferation Act (NPA) currently bans transfers of sensitive nuclear equipment to countries that refuse IAEA monitoring, so that Bush will have to ask Congress to amend the law. Whether lawmakers will do so is unclear, but early reaction among some influential Democrats was distinctly negative. In addition, Bush is expected to ask the NSG, some of whose members, such as France and Russia, are likely to strongly oppose any change, to amend its rules, according to Cirincione. "If he can get others to agree to change the rules, then it's not objectionable," said Perkovich. "But if he can't, and then he goes ahead and does it anyway, then he's breaking established rules, and then you have serious problems." These obstacles to fulfilling Monday's agreement were not the only reason, according to Perkovich, why what he called "the tremendous amount of hype and euphoria" that has marked this week's summit may be a bit misleading. "The U.S. is correct to recognise India's growing importance and improved relations, but we're overlooking real differences that remain," he said, particularly in the area of trade. Indeed, one of the architects of Bush's policy, Ashley Tellis, has warned that Washington's failure to follow through on its stated intentions could quickly deflate the expectations -- and the influence of U.S. boosters -- on the Indian side. Conversely, "given the difficult changes in U.S. policy and law required to satisfy New Delhi, it will become increasingly obvious over time that the Bush administration will have diminishing incentives to accept these burdens if India is unable to demonstrate a new willingness to ally itself with American purposes," according to a recent study by Tellis, a former top official in Washington's embassy in Delhi. According to Makhijani, much now depends on how willing the Bush administration is to accept that India will resist being "moved around the geo-political chessboard," particularly with respect to its desire to build the Iran-India pipeline and to avoid confrontation with China. "While the U.S. hopes that India will be a bulwark against China, the Indians have made clear this won't happen," he said. "The relationship will be on a good course if the U.S. recognises that." ***** +Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (http://www.carnegieendowment.org/) +Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (http://www.ieer.org/) +Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/) (END/IPS/NA/AP/IP/IF/JL/KS/05) = 07192353 ORP016 NNNN ***************************************************************** 11 Economist.com: Welcome to the nuclear club | Tuesday July 19th 2005 From The Economist Global Agenda Indian officials are hailing a breakthrough in relations with America following a meeting in Washington, DC between Indias prime minister, Manmohan Singh, and George Bush. America has come close to accepting India, which has not signed international non-proliferation treaties, as a full nuclear power FOR months, American officials have been insisting that there is no higher priority for George Bushs second term in office than expanding and broadening our relationship with India. Their Indian counterparts, finding themselves in a diplomatic sweet spot, where it seems every country in the world is courting them, have preened themselves at the superpowers attentions. But its promises have rung rather hollow: America remains committed to its strong alliance with Indias nuclear-armed neighbour and rival, Pakistan; it refuses to endorse Indias chief foreign-policy goal, a permanent seat on an expanded United Nations Security Council; and co-operation in military and nuclear technology has been thwarted by Indias status as a nuclear power, which tested atomic weapons in 1998 but has never signed up to the international non-proliferation regime. On this last issue, at least, India can now point to a big step forward. In a joint statement published after the meeting between Mr Bush and Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, on Monday July 18th, and subject to last-minute haggling even as the two men spoke to the press, America agreed that as a responsible state with advanced nuclear technologya euphemism for the bombIndia should acquire the same benefits and advantages as other such states. This would open the way for what the statement calls full civil nuclear energy co-operation with Indiasuch as fuel supplies and the transfer of technology. [Country Briefing] India, Pakistan, United States [Websites] The White House reports on the meeting between President Bush and India's prime minister Manmohan Singh. Although America has so far refused to back India's bid for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, it is offering to recognise India as a nuclear power, in return for regular inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. America's State Department outlines its relations with India and Pakistan. This is hugely important for India. One of the biggest constraints on the continuing success of its fast-growing economy may be an electricity shortage. It urgently needs both new generating plants and fuel to fire them. Nuclear energy, which at present accounts for only about 3% of the countrys total generation, is, in many Indian eyes, an attractive alternative to coal and expensive, imported oil and gas. Such practical considerations aside, it is a symbolic victory that India is celebrating. For decades it has faced sanctions because of its nuclear-weapons programme. Now, Americas president has promised not just to persuade its Congress to change laws impeding co-operation but also to consult other countries about adjusting international rules. Mr Bush is, in effect, offering to help India, which became a nuclear power as a rogue, become a respectable bomb-wielding citizen. In return, India has promised to adopt the same responsibilities as other nuclear powers, including opening its civilian nuclear facilities to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency and maintaining its moratorium on nuclear testing. Americas concession to India is all the more remarkable in the light of the likely reaction in Pakistan, which, unlike India, has an appalling record of (allegedly unofficial) nuclear proliferation. It will be miffed that its ally is giving India privileges it does not enjoyand certain to ask for the same. Pakistan, however, will be pleased that Americas love affair with India does not extend to open support of its Security Council bid. Of the main candidates for a permanent seat in an expanded council, only Japan has won American endorsement. Mr Bush went no further than to agree that international institutions should reflect changes that have taken place since the Security Council was set up in 1945. Officials now argue that a vote in the UN on the issue should not take place until there has been a broader reform of the UN. Despite that disappointment, Indian officials are jubilant that they have achieved dehyphenationa decoupling of its relations with America from the India-Pakistan dispute, and from Americas close ties with Islamabad. This reflects both Indias emergence as an economic force to be reckoned with and the rise of its neighbour, China. Although Indias economy is only about 40% the size of Chinas, its fast growth and young population mean that its global importance can only grow. Also, the development of its information-technology and outsourcing industries have put it on the map: just as the boss of any big American firm needs to tell his shareholders a China story, so he now needs an India strategy too. One of the features of Mr Singhs visit is the launch of a new forum of Indian and American chief executives. American and Indian officials both stress that the two countries relationship is independent of their respective relations with China. Yet Americas stated ambition to help India become a major power in the twenty-first century cannot be viewed in isolation from apprehensions about Chinas looming might. Nor can Indias determination to secure good relations with America be separated from its own long-term suspicions of China, with which it is at present enjoying something of a second honeymoon. Both India and America recognise that, as democracies, they should have common interests. These were obscured by the legacy of the Cold War, which saw India lean towards the former Soviet Union, and America play the China card. The inevitable Indo-American rapprochement was further delayed by the attacks on America on September 11th 2001 and by the subsequent importance of Pakistan in the war against terror. Now, at last, India and America find themselves on the same side. ***************************************************************** 12 Japan Times: Ford mulled pulling nukes from ships to shield Japan from 'transit' fallout Tuesday, July 19, 2005 WASHINGTON (Kyodo) U.S. President Gerald Ford mulled the removal of all nuclear weapons from the U.S. Navy's Seventh Fleet in 1976 out of concern there could have been a major backlash in Japan, according to U.S. documents and senior administration officials at the time. There was even fear the Japanese government could collapse should a then secret bilateral pact that allowed nuclear-equipped U.S. military vessels to stop in or pass near Japan be discovered, the documents show. The Seventh Fleet operates in the Far East. Although the Ford administration did review policies regarding the transport of nuclear weapons into Japanese ports, in the end it decided to continue allowing warships with such arms to enter Japanese waters. Nevertheless, observers said the mere fact that removal of the weapons was considered indicated the U.S. administration at the time took the political risk of nukes in Japan seriously. According to a State Department document found at the U.S. National Archives dated Jan. 16, 1976, and marked secret, the passage of the fleet's nuclear vessels through Japan was potentially the biggest danger to the bilateral relationship. In documents exchanged by the two governments on implementation of Article 6 of the 1960 bilateral security treaty -- which grants U.S. forces permission to use facilities and areas in Japan -- the U.S. was to hold "prior consultations" with Tokyo whenever the military wanted to bring nuclear weapons to Japan. To date, no such consultations have ever taken place, and the Japanese government's position is that, because there were never any prior consultations, no nuclear arms have ever entered Japanese territory. But other documents, including U.S. government documents, have shown that another secret pact was made when the security treaty was revised in 1960 that exempted the passage of nuclear-armed ships through Japanese waters or ports of call from prior consultation. The U.S. side termed this action "transit," and distinguished it from storage and deployment, which was described by the phrase "introduction." In 1974, retired Rear Adm. Gene La Rocque told Congress that all vessels capable of carrying nuclear weapons did so, creating an uproar in Japan. The 1976 State Department document said that if the existence of the secret agreement was discovered, it could lead to such events as the collapse of the Liberal Democratic Party's power, an increase in the influence of opposition parties hostile to Japanese-U.S. defense cooperation and a loss of trust in bureaucrats. In addition to such political risks, the then head of the U.S. Pacific Command questioned the military value of such arms and proposed the option of removing nuclear weapons from Seventh Fleet ships, according to the document. The Japan Times: July 19, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 13 Guardian Unlimited: Singh: India 'Responsible Nuclear Power' From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday July 19, 2005 7:01 PM AP Photo DCMC102 By WILLIAM C. MANN Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - India is a resolute U.S. partner in the war on terrorism and a responsible nuclear power, India's prime minister told Congress on Tuesday as he promoted new nuclear cooperation between the two countries. Manmohan Singh, in an address to a joint meeting of Congress, spoke broadly of how the world's oldest and largest democracies, once estranged by Cold War politics, were ``natural partners.'' There is ``a convergence in our perceptions of a rapidly transforming global environment, bringing us much closer together now than at any time in the past,'' Singh said, mentioning collaboration ranging from developing high-tech industries to helping tsunami victims. But it was his remarks on nuclear energy cooperation that drew the most attention, coming a day after President Bush, at a White House meeting with Singh, offered U.S. help in India's civilian nuclear program. For the United States to help with India's civilian power program - perhaps including supplying fuel for India's nuclear reactors at Tarapur near Bombay - Congress would have to approve changes in U.S. law. Objections are expected, given India's refusal to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. India remains one of only four countries with nuclear weapons that have not signed the treaty. India exploded its first nuclear device in 1974. Three more blasts in 1998 led to sanctions by the United States, Japan and Germany. ``Cleaner energy resources, including nuclear power, are vital for the future of both our economies,'' Bush said. ``India's track record in nuclear nonproliferation is impeccable,'' Singh said to applause from the crowded House chamber. ``India, as a responsible nuclear power, is fully conscious of the immense responsibilities that come with the possession of advanced technologies, both civilian and strategic.'' The speech to the joint meeting of the House and Senate, only the eighth by a foreign visitor in the last five years, preceded a day of events on Capitol Hill, including a lunch with lawmakers, a meeting with members of the House International Relations Committee and sessions with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and other leaders. Standing before Vice President Dick Cheney, the president of the Senate, and House Speaker Dennis Hastert, Singh listed oil and gas exploration, farm and water programs, AIDS programs and the fight against terrorism as other areas where the two countries can work together. He also pressed India's case for a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council, an idea that does not now have U.S. support. ``You would agree with me that the voice of the world's largest democracy surely cannot be left unheard on the Security Council when the United Nations is being restructured,'' he said to applause. Singh's speech was the first by an Indian leader since former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in 2000. Such occasions are typically reserved for the United States' closest allies. ``The relationship between our two nations has never been stronger,'' Bush told Singh on Monday during an elaborate White House welcome, complete with a fife-and-drum corps in full Revolutionary-era regalia. Singh was honored Monday night with a grand White House dinner - only the fifth of Bush's presidency and the first since his re-election. On the Net: Congress: http://www.congress.gov CIA Factbook on India: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/in.html Countries with nuclear weapons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List-of-countries-with-nuclear-weapo ns Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 14 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Reverses Nuclear Policy for India From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday July 19, 2005 12:46 PM AP Photo WHRE105 By WILLIAM C. MANN Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, winning reversal of a longstanding U.S. policy against helping countries develop nuclear programs, is ready to outline for Congress his aspirations for the world's largest democracy. Singh's speech, scheduled for members of the House and Senate Tuesday, marked only the eighth time a foreign leader has addressed Congress in the past five years. Such occasions are typically reserved for the United States' closest allies. ``The relationship between our two nations has never been stronger,'' Bush told Singh on Monday during an elaborate White House welcome, complete with a fife-and-drum corps in full Revolutionary-era regalia. During an Oval Office meeting, the two leaders broke new ground on nuclear power, with Bush offering U.S. help in India's civilian nuclear program despite its military nuclear capabilities and its refusal to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. India remains one of only four states that have not signed the treaty. According to a joint statement issued after their meeting, Bush ``stated that as a responsible state with advanced nuclear technology, India should acquire the same benefits and advantages as other such states.'' India exploded its first nuclear device in 1974. Three more blasts in 1998 led to sanctions by the United States, Japan and Germany. Monday's joint statement committed Bush to work on getting Congress to approve changes in U.S. law that would allow the United States to help with India's civilian power program, including the possibility of supplying fuel for India's nuclear reactors at Tarapur near Bombay. ``Cleaner energy resources, including nuclear power, are vital for the future of both our economies,'' Bush said. Later, during a luncheon for Singh and his wife, Gursharan Kaur, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said, ``We welcome India as a global partner, and we look forward to the continued strengthening of democratic institutions, values and peace because this partnership will prosper and move forward.'' Singh was honored Monday night with a grand White House dinner - only the fifth of Bush's presidency and the first since his re-election. Already, Singh's responses to the Bush administration glad-handing suggest that the feeling is mutual. ``Ladies and gentlemen, the refashioning of this bilateral relationship is not merely a matter of diplomatic process,'' he said at Rice's luncheon. ``What we have embarked upon is, therefore, not just for tomorrow, but I sincerely hope and believe that it is for generations to come.'' Still, the U.S.-India friendship clearly has its limits: As expected, Singh failed to win Bush's support for India's bid for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. Bush told Singh the United States doesn't want to vote on enlarging the Security Council until more sweeping changes are made at the United Nations, which has been beset by scandals, said Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns. Singh sought to play down the differences with Bush. ``In our talks, the president and I were of one mind that the contemporary reality must be fully reflected in the central organs and decision-making processes of the U.N.,'' he said. He picked up one ally in Congress, however. Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., senior Democrat on the House International Relations Committee, took the floor of the House ``to press again for strong U.S. support for India to become a permanent member,'' which he said would be ``long-overdue recognition by the international community of India's rightful place as a great democracy.'' Bush and Singh announced they also had agreed on cooperation in space and high-technology commerce. ^--- Associated Press Writer Nedra Pickler contributed to this report. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 15 NIRS: JULY 25: Senate Call-in Day! Help Ani DiFranco, Indigo Girls, James Cromwell, Winona LaDuke and more to oppose the energy bill and Private Fuel Storage waste dump! - NIRS July 18, 2005 For more info, contact: Michael Mariotte, NIRS 202-328-0002 JULY 25: Senate Call-in Day! Help Ani DiFranco, Indigo Girls, James Cromwell, Winona LaDuke and more to oppose the energy bill and Private Fuel Storage waste dump! On July 25, Ani DiFranco, The Indigo Girls, James Cromwell, Joan McIntosh, Winona LaDuke and Skull Valley Goshute tribal members Margene Bullcreek and Lena Knight will be spearheading a national lobby day against the energy bill and the proposed Private Fuel Storage (PFS) high-level waste dump on Goshute land in Utah. They, along with members of DC-based environmental groups, will be holding a press and congressional briefing, and then meeting with individual Senate offices throughout the day in an effort to bring out the truth about the billions of dollars of nuclear funding contained in the energy bill and about the backroom maneuvering and dealmaking—and lack of congressional oversight—that has brought the unjust PFS project close to final approval. You can support their efforts by making July 25, 2005 a National Senate Call-in Day. We ask each one of you, even if you've called your Senators before, to call them on July 25 with two messages: 1. Vote against the energy bill when it returns to the Senate. No taxpayer funding of the nuclear power industry. 2. Urge their colleagues on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee to hold hearings and investigate wrongdoing by the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs in its approval of the PFS/Skull Valley Goshutes lease agreement. A little background on the lease agreement: the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved the lease agreement between the tribe and the dump company just three days after receiving it. Public Citizen recently filed a Freedom of Information Act request to the BIA asking for all documents used in its decision. The BIA responded it had no such documents in its records, and that only its since-retired Utah director could identify any documents used to justify his approval of the dump. This appears to violate BIA's legal responsibility to serve as trustee for the Skull Valley Goshute tribe and its individual members, especially concerning a matter as fraught with danger as high-level radioactive waste transportation and storage. Then: ask five of your friends to make similar calls, and ask them to ask five more friends. Let's flood the Senate with calls on July 25! We can stop the energy bill and PFS! Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121 Toll-Free: 1-888-355-3588 or 1-877-762-8762 For more background on the energy bill and/or PFS, visit www.nirs.org-30- ***************************************************************** 16 NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Palisades Nuclear Plant Environmental Issues for License Renewal News Release - Region III - 2005-03 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region III No. III-05-034 July 19, 2005 CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold two public meetings Thursday, July 28, in South Haven, Mich., on the environmental review of Nuclear Management Companys application to renew the operating license for Palisades Nuclear Plant. The plant is located at Covert, Mich. The public is invited to attend and comment on environmental issues the NRC should consider in its review of the proposed license renewal. The meetings will be at Lake Michigan College, 125 Veterans Blvd., South Haven. There will be two similar sessions, one in the afternoon from 1:30 p.m. until 4:30 p.m., and one in the evening from 7 p.m. until 10 p.m. In addition, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour prior to each meeting to answer questions and provide additional information about the process. However, formal comments on environmental issues cannot be accepted during the informal sessions. For planning purposes, those who wish to present oral comments at the meeting are encouraged to contact Robert Schaaf of the NRC by telephone at 800-368-5642, extension 1312, or by email at PalisadesEIS@nrc.gov. People may also register to speak before the start of each session. Individual comment time may be limited by the time available. The meetings will include an overview and NRC staff presentation on the environmental process related to license renewal. Members of the public will then be given the opportunity to present their comments on what environmental issues the NRC should consider during its review. Under NRC regulations, the original operating license for a nuclear power plant is issued for up to 40 years. The license may be renewed for up to an additional 20 years if NRC requirements are met. The current operating license for the Palisades plant will expire on Mar. 24, 2011. Nuclear Management Co. submitted its application for license renewal on Mar. 31, 2005. The application and other related documents are available for public review at the South Haven Memorial Library (314 Broadway St., South Haven, MI 49090). They are also available in the NRC Public Document Room at NRC Headquarters, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, and on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati ons/palisades.html An existing NRC document, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, (NUREG-1437), assesses the scope and impact of environmental effects that would be associated with license renewal at any nuclear power plant site. The NRC staff is gathering information at these meetings for a supplement to the generic environmental impact statement that will be specific to Palisades. It will contain a recommendation regarding the environmental acceptability of the license renewal action. At the conclusion of the information-gathering process, the NRC staff will prepare a summary of conclusions and significant issues and will send a copy to interested persons who participated in the scoping process. The summary will also be available for public review at the local libraries and accessible electronically at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. The NRC staff will then prepare a draft environmental impact statement supplement for public comment and will hold a public meeting to solicit comments. After consideration of comments received on the draft, the NRC will prepare a final EIS supplement. Members of the public may also submit written comments on the scope of the Palisades-specific supplement to the generic environmental impact statement. Comments should be submitted by Aug. 22, 2005, either by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Mail Stop T-6-D-59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001, or by email to: PalisadesEIS@nrc.gov. Last revised Tuesday, July 19, 2005 ***************************************************************** 17 Platts: Conferees agree on nuclear section of energy bill + The nuclear section of the energy bill was among the first sections that House and Senate negotiators were able to reach agreement on. A Senate aide called it "one of the easier" issues in the legislation because the provisions were considered non-controversial. The section, if adopted as written, would renew the Price-Anderson Act an additional 20 years, and authorize $1.25-billion over the next 10 years for research and construction of an advanced nuclear cogeneration reactor at the Idaho National Laboratory. It would also further enhance the security of nuclear facilities through a package of measures designed to better arm guards, tighten background checks for plant employees, and increase criminal sanctions for an attack on nuclear or fuel facilities. Funding authorization for nuclear energy research and development programs and establishing loan guarantees or other incentives for new construction would be contained in a separate tax section, which has not yet been completed. Washington (Platts)--18Jul2005 Copyright © 2005 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 18 NRC: Sunshine Act; Meetings FR Doc 05-14207 [Federal Register: July 19, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 137)] [Notices] [Page 41441-41442] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19jy05-88] Date: Weeks of July 18, 25, August 1, 8, 15, 22, 2005. Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Status: Public and Closed. Matters to be Considered: Week of July 18, 2005 11 a.m.--Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. Private Fuel Storage (Independent Spend Fuel Storage Installation) Docket No. 72-22-ISFSI; unpublished Board order (April 25, 2005) (Tentative). b. Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3), Docket Nos. 50-336-LR & 50-423-LR [[Page 41442]] (Tentative). Week of July 25, 2005--Tentative Thursday, July 28, 2005: 1:30 p.m.--Discussion of Security Issues (Closed-Ex. 1). Week of August 1, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 1, 2005. Week of August 8, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 8, 2005. Week of August 15, 2005--Tentative Tuesday, August 16, 2005: 10 a.m.--Meeting with the Organization of Agreement States (OAS) and the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors (CRCPD) (Public Meeting) (Contact: Shawn Smith, (301) 415-2620). This meeting will be webcast live at Web address-- . 1 p.m.--Discussion of Security Issues (Closed-Ex. 1). Week of August 22, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 22, 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: David 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 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: July 14, 2005. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 05-14207 Filed 7-15-05; 10:10 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M ***************************************************************** 19 allAfrica.com: Nigeria: IAEA, Unesco, Others Back Nigeria's Nuclear Energy Drive Vanguard (Lagos) July 19, 2005 Luka Binniyat Abuja The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), United Nations Educations Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Embassies of Canada and the United States have proclaimed that the incorporation of power generation from nuclear and coal energy into the Nigeria's electric power generation is the most viable option to attaining a sufficient and sustainable power regime in Nigeria. In a communiqué issued over the weekend from the just concluded Public Presentation and National Workshop on the National Energy Policy, which was attended by the afore mentioned, Dr. Nkong-Njock of the IAEA, stated that the shortage of the current energy generation for the present and future energy demand of Nigeria requires the establishment of cost effective and friendly environmental systems of energy production under which nuclear can play an important role. Already, the IAEA has provided Nigeria with a Nuclear Reactor and a Tandem Accelerator last year, all in the quest to teach Nigeria the basic lesson of attaining nuclear energy generation. Speaking at the occasion, Presidential Adviser on Petroleum and Energy, Dr. Edmund Daukoru said he was confident in the National Energy Policy as put together by the Energy Commission of Nigeria. He however, called for the promotion of alternative energy sources to enrich the nation"s energy profile The communiqué, which was signed by the Director-General of the Energy Commission of Nigeria (ECN), Professor Abubakar Sambo also commended the Federal Government for the adoption of the National Energy Policy (NEP) and called on the Government to take necessary steps to ensure full implementation. The Stakeholders strongly requested for the immediate commencement of work for the development of the National Energy Master Plan based on the NEP using appropriate due process mechanisms with the widest stakeholder participation in order to have an enduring energy policy focus for the country. Power and Steel Minister, Liyel Imoke stated that the mere existence of the policy would not do magic unless its provisions are meticulously implemented. Chairman of the forum, Professor (Senator) Iya Abubakar, who also doubles as the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Science and Technology, drummed for the realization a concrete Energy Master plan and also expressed the stand of the National Assembly to the policy stating, that all energy sub sector policies must be subsumed in the current NEP. In his overview of the NEP, the Director-General of ECN, Professor Abubakar Sambo called for the cooperation of the stakeholders to ensure orderly development of the policy, even as the Minister of Science and Technology, Professor Turner Isoun urged all participants to fully support the implementation of the NEP in all its ramifications. Copyright © 2005 Vanguard. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). ***************************************************************** 20 APP.COM: Reactor might have to retool Asbury Park Press Online COOLING TOWER: State could require "eco-friendly" system PURPOSE: To safeguard wildlife from heated water, intakes Reactor might have to retool Published in the Asbury Park Press 07/19/05 BY NICHOLAS CLUNN AND TODD BATES STAFF WRITERS Although Oyster Creek nuclear power plant officials likely will spend the next two years convincing federal regulators to keep the Lacey reactor open past 2009, they also may have to consider spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a cooling tower. The state Department of Environmental Protection has yet to renew a permit needed by the plant to use water from the south branch of the Forked River to cool the 650-megawatt reactor, raising the prospect that it could require the cooling tower instead. Such towers have been hailed by environmentalists as more "eco-friendly" and are in use elsewhere. State environmental officials in New York have proposed that two cooling towers be built at the Indian Point nuclear power plant, located about 25 miles north of Manhattan, if federal regulators renew the operating licenses of the two reactors there. Furthermore, 44 of the nation's 103 commercial reactors use cooling towers, although the hyperbolic structures were installed during the original construction at each plant, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute, an advocate for the industry. At issue is how Oyster Creek, the nation's longest-running reactor, cools itself. Since the plant opened in 1969, it has used an open-loop system. Under this design, river water is pumped into the plant and then discharged — now slightly warmer than when it came in — into a body of water. Cooling towers are used in what is called a closed-loop system. This means that discharged water is piped to the top of a cooling tower and then sprayed. At this point, the water either evaporates or falls to the tower's base for reuse in the plant. In either case, the water is needed to cool steam used in the reaction process. Reactors create steam, which spins a turbine, which turns a generator, which then creates electricity. The possibility of the DEP requiring a closed-loop system comes as plant owner AmerGen prepares to apply to the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a 20-year renewal of the Oyster Creek operating license. Without a renewal, the plant likely would close in 2009. Concern for fish At a news conference last year, six environmental groups and several fishermen called on state environmental officials to require a closed system for Oyster Creek. They cited an accident in 2002 in which 5,800 fish died after water leaving the plant exceeded 100 degrees. "When they talk about 5,000 fish, they killed more fish than an angler could kill in a lifetime," said Thomas P. Fote, legislative chairman of the Jersey Coast Anglers Association, one of the groups that have called for the closed system. The force of water being pumped into the plant also can kill aquatic life by either pinning animals against intake grates or sucking them into the system. Following the news conference, DEP Commissioner Bradley M. Campbell said his department would consider requiring a closed-loop system in light of the fish kill. On Monday, DEP spokesman Fred Mumford wouldn't say if a decision has been reached. An amendment to the federal Clean Water Act calling for a drastic reduction in the number of organisms killed by intake systems, such as the one at Oyster Creek, could bolster a case for a closed system there. Power plants, however, could comply with the new rule without building cooling towers, said Mary T. Smith, director of the Engineering and Analysis Division in the Office of Water at the federal Environmental Protection Agency. Alternatives include installing screens and other equipment to protect fish. Plants also could satisfy the conditions of the act through wildlife restoration, she said. At Oyster Creek, plant workers watch for turtles that may get pinned against grates blocking the tubes that suck water into the plant, said Gina Scala, plant spokeswoman. If they find one, the plant can call marine mammal experts, who will rush to the plant. "They'll do a whole evaluation of them if they are injured," she said. "They also do rehabilitation." Scala said closed cooling systems also can harm aquatic life. The mortality rate for organisms that travel through them is 100 percent, she said. Cites 1989 report In rebutting the need for a closed system at Oyster Creek, Scala also pointed to a 1989 report concluding that effects of discharges in the existing system were small and had "no adverse consequences" to Barnegat Bay. The report, completed by Maryland-based consultants Versar Inc., was commissioned by the DEP, known then as the Department of Environmental Protection and Energy, to evaluate studies done by Oyster Creek's operator, which was then run by GPU Nuclear Corp. Officials at Entergy, which owns the Indian Point reactors, also are opposed to the idea of building a closed system. A draft permit issued by the New York state Department of Environmental Conservation in 2003 calls for two cooling towers, one for each reactor. According to department figures, the cost of the building the towers is likely to cost about $740 million, not including $145 million in operation and maintenance costs. Entergy's perspective is that Indian Point has $100 million in technology already in place to help save fish and aquatic invertebrates, said Elise N. Zoli, a partner in the Goodwin Procter law firm in Boston and a lawyer for Entergy Nuclear Northeast. "The vast majority of creatures survive and survive well in going through the plant," she said. Nicholas Clunn: (609) 978-4597 or nclunn@app.com the Asbury Park Press ***************************************************************** 21 Clarion-Ledger: Be cautious in use of nuclear power July 19, 2005 Its difficult for me to think of nuclear power as environmentally friendly or safe ("Nuclear power benefits Mississippi," July 7 letter). The mining, processing, shipping, storage and the onsite use is dangerous. The spent fuel is very toxic and could create many toxic compounds that make greenhouse gases look like Playdough. Our energy needs require a proper cost and safety assessment of nukes. We need to promote truly safer sources and just use nuclear power for medical purposes. Charlie Brenner Jackson Copyright ©2005 Clarionledger.com All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 22 NRC: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power FR Doc E5-3833 [Federal Register: July 19, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 137)] [Notices] [Page 41440-41441] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19jy05-86] Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering modifying previous approvals, granted pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 20.2002 (previously 10 CFR 20.302(a)), for on-site disposal of slightly contaminated material at Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee), as requested by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the licensee). Vermont Yankee is located in Windham County, Vermont. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would modify the previously-granted approvals for on-site disposal of slightly contaminated material to increase the current approved annual volume limit of 28.3 cubic meters of soil/sand to a new annual volume limit of 150 cubic meters of soil/sand. In addition, the licensee has requested a one-time approval for on-site disposal of the current backlog inventory of approximately 528 cubic meters of soil/sand. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated October 4, 2004, as supplemented on January 17, 2005. The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed action is needed to dispose of slightly contaminated soil/sand on-site. Current restrictions on the annual volume of slightly contaminated soil/sand that can be disposed on-site, coupled with several plant facility projects in recent years, have resulted in the accumulation of a backlog of slightly contaminated earthen material that is awaiting disposal by land spreading on previously-approved on- site disposal areas. The current approved annual volume limit of 28.3 cubic meters of soil/sand for disposal was based on licensee estimates of soil and sand collected from road and walkway sweepings inside the Protected Area following each year's winter cleanup (i.e., the current annual limit does not account for future site excavation and construction activities). Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the proposed action will be bounded by the conditions for the on-site disposals previously reviewed and approved by the NRC. The staff's safety evaluation will be provided as an enclosure to the letter to the licensee approving the proposed action. [[Page 41441]] The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off-site. There is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. The licensee will continue to use the designated and approved areas of its property for disposal. Determination of the radiological dose impact of the new material to be disposed has been made based on the same dose assessment models and pathway assumptions used in previously-approved applications for Vermont Yankee. The NRC staff's review of the proposed action concluded that the bounding dose conditions for the previously-approved materials will not be exceeded. The maximum dose from the radionuclides in the material was determined to be less than 1 millirem per year to the maximally exposed individual and less than 5 millirem per year to an inadvertent intruder. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non- radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. If the proposed action is denied, the licensee may be required to ship the material to an off-site low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. The costs associated with off-site disposal greatly exceed the cost of on-site disposal with no significant benefit to the environment. Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for Vermont Yankee. Agencies and Persons Consulted On April 25, 2005, the staff consulted with the Vermont State official, William Sherman, of the Department of Public Service, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated October 4, 2004, as supplemented by letter dated January 17, 2005. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly-available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 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 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of July 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Richard B. Ennis, Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-3833 Filed 7-18-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 23 NRC: Public Meeting To Discuss the Safety Evaluation Report and Final FR Doc E5-3834 [Federal Register: July 19, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 137)] [Notices] [Page 41441] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19jy05-87] Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed National Enrichment Facility in Lea County, NM AGENCY: United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of public meeting in Eunice, New Mexico. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will be holding a public meeting in the Eunice Community Center, Eunice, New Mexico, to discuss the Safety Evaluation Report (SER), NUREG-1827, and Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), NUREG-1790, for Louisana Energy Services' (LES') proposed National Enrichment Facility (NEF) in Lea County, New Mexico. The SER and FEIS document the NRC staff's findings during the safety and environmental review for the proposed NEF. Both documents are available on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/ . Purpose: This meeting will provide an opportunity to hear a summary of, and to ask questions about, the staff's review of LES' application presented in the SER and FEIS. Time/Date: The public meeting will be held on August 2, 2005, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Place: Eunice Community Center, 1115 Avenue I, Eunice, New Mexico. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy C. Johnson, Mail Stop: T-8F42, Special Projects Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Telephone: (301) 415- 7299, and E-mail: tcj@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12 day of July, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. James W. Clifford, Acting Chief, Special Projects Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. E5-3834 Filed 7-18-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 24 Newsday: Indian Point siren system deactivated for 6 hours after power loss New York City - AP New York Newsday.com Tuesday, Jul 19, 2005, 11:37 PM EDT NEW YORK NOW: By JIM FITZGERALD Associated Press Writer WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. -- The sirens that are meant to warn thousands of people of an emergency at the Indian Point nuclear power plants stood useless for nearly six hours Tuesday morning when power was lost to a signal transmitter and the failure went undiscovered. There was no emergency, and the 156 sirens were not needed during the outage, which lasted from 2 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. But "the bottom line is it's inexcusable," said Larry Gottlieb, a spokesman for Indian Point owner Entergy Nuclear Northeast. "That system should never be down for any time." He said the cause of the outage was not known but there was "no evidence of sabotage." Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano, an Entergy critic who has been demanding a backup power system for the sirens, said, "This is almost like the Keystone Kops. They're handling a nuclear plant and this is how they deal with sirens?" Entergy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission were investigating the failure, and Spano said he was asking the Federal Emergency Management Agency to investigate, too. "We've told Entergy a number of times we want the sirens replaced or upgraded to a point where they are reliable," Spano said. "How much can we push these guys? Maybe they'll listen now." State Assemblyman Ryan Karben, of Rockland County, concurred, saying the siren system needs to be replaced. "Residents don't feel very safe and secure without this vital warning system," he said. The 156 sirens, in Westchester, Putnam, Rockland and Orange counties, are meant to alert residents within 10 miles of the plants to tune in broadcasts about an emergency. The sirens are part of an emergency plan that anti-Indian Point activists deride as woefully inadequate for the populous New York City suburbs. Gottlieb said, "The public was never in danger," claiming that if a plant emergency had occurred the failure of the sirens to sound would have been noticed and a 12-hour battery would have been brought in to activate them. In addition, the plan calls for trucks with loudspeakers to notify residents of an emergency if the sirens don't. Gottlieb said that at about 11:15 p.m. Monday, power went out to a 300-foot tower on the Indian Point grounds in Buchanan that holds weather recording equipment and the transmitter that sends the signal to activate the sirens. There were two backups for the transmitter power: A diesel generator kicked in and supplied power until its fuel ran out, and then a one-hour battery switched on. But the battery ran out at about 2 a.m. Tuesday. That final loss of power generated no alarm and was not noticed by any patrol on the grounds, Gottlieb said. At 5:30 a.m., operators at the Indian Point 2 plant became aware of the problem, and a mobile 12-hour battery was brought in. It took until 7:45 a.m. to switch it on, and then the main power was restored an hour later, Gottlieb said. NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the commission would investigate why there was a lag between when power was lost and when the loss was discovered. "Why did they not become aware that the backup was activated?" he asked. Gottlieb said Entergy is open to upgrading the siren system and has spent $4 million on improvements. "We want to find out which siren system is the model for the country or build our own model system if that's what it takes," he said. "But it might not mean scrapping what we already have." Copyright © 2005, The Associated Press Copyright Newsday Inc. ***************************************************************** 25 canada.com network: refurbishment of Point Lepreau plant Fort St. John - Kevin Bissett Canadian Press Tuesday, July 19, 2005 SAINT JOHN, N.B. -  In a meeting that was more about optics than energy, more than 150 people gathered Monday to tell Premier Bernard Lord what to do with New Brunswick's aging nuclear power plant. The meeting was called after the federal government announced last week that it won't help the province pay for the proposed $1.4-billion refurbishment of the aging Point Lepreau generating station near Saint John. Ottawa said it couldn't fund the project without setting an expensive precedent that would cause other provinces to seek a similar deal. Lord reacted angrily to the decision last week, saying the province had been misled and betrayed by Ottawa into believing a deal was coming. While the province hasn't made its final decision on what to do with Lepreau, the premier has said all along that he prefers refurbishment over construction of a new coal-fired power plant. Most of the business and labour leaders entering Monday's closed-door meeting were in support of the project, and didn't expect to hear anything new. Darryl Goyetche, president of the Saint John Board of Trade, said he expects the provincial government to proceed with the project. "Even without the participation of the federal government, we believe the business case for refurbishment from an environmental perspective, financially, and diversity of supply, is too strong," he said. "Refurbishment must proceed." Ross Galbraith of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers said the province must keep Lepreau running to protect the many direct and indirect jobs that rely on it. "We can ensure that this project gets done on time and on budget, and that's how we can do our part, and we've got the right people to do that," said Galbraith. The union represents 640 of the 700 employees at Point Lepreau. But not everyone in the meeting was supportive of refurbishment. Environmentalist David Thompson of the New Brunswick Conservation Council said the province should use the opportunity now to get rid of obsolete technology. "If Lepreau goes ahead, it's just going to suck up all the available capital, and we may only see a few token windmills around, and the odd renewable energy project," he said. Despite his government's decision on funding, Saint John Liberal MP Paul Zed remains a supporter of refurbishment, and attended the meeting. "I feel that Mr. Zed was hung out to dry by his own government," said Lord. "He made statements in the past knowing his government was supportive, and in the end they changed their mind, and that's very difficult for him as an MP." Zed is to meet Wednesday with officials of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. to discuss the future of Lepreau. "I'm very hopeful there are other trees to shake within the federal government and that perhaps through AECL or the government of Canada, working together with the premier, I want to be part of developing another solution that results in refurbishment of Lepreau," said Zed. Lord said if Zed can find any help, it will have to be soon. He said the provincial cabinet will make its decision when it meets on Thursday of next week, and will announce the decision the next day. Point Lepreau generates one third of the province's electricity. It came on line in 1983 and faces the end of its life in 2008 unless it is refurbished. © Canadian Press 2005 Copyright © CanWest Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. CanWest Interactive Inc. is an affiliate of CanWest Global Communications Corp. ***************************************************************** 26 CBC New Brunswick: Lord hears both sides of Lepreau debate www.cbc.ca Last updated Jul 19 2005 09:08 AM ADT CBC News The premier of New Brunswick heard from people for, and against, refurbishing the Point Lepreau nuclear generating Monday in Saint John. Bernard Lord spent the afternoon in Saint John, meeting with union, business and labour leaders. Ottawa turned down the province's request last week for hundreds of millions of dollars to refurbish the aging nuclear power plant. New Brunswick is now considering doing the job itself. Business leader Stephen MacMackin told the premier refurbishing is New Brunswick's best available option. He said the reality is, whether or not the province goes with nuclear energy or fossil fuel, the cost of power is going up. "That's something we're going to have to learn to live with," said MacMackin. "There's lots of options but the reality is this is the only option we can do at this time, and the one that can give us a good base-load of energy when we need it." David Thompson, of New Brunswick's Conservation Council, said he was one of the few voices at the meeting against refurbishing. He's worried about the long-term environmental effects of nuclear energy, and said the province needs to stop looking to one big power generating station to solve its problems. "There is no one source of power that's going to replace or eliminate any of the large sources but only a diversified mix," said Thompson. Lord said some have accused him of taking too long to make a decision on Point Lepreau. He said his original timeline is reasonable, given how big a decision this is. "I have to allow NB power to do their work," he said. "They're going to come to us with their decision early next week." The premier said his cabinet will discuss Point Lepreau at their meeting next Thursday, and he'll announce his decision the following day. + FROM July 15: Lord will decide on Lepreau in 2 weeks + FROM July 15: Lepreau's loss may be Belledune's gain + FROM July 14: Ottawa says no to Lepreau funding Copyright © CBC 2005 ***************************************************************** 27 Moscow Times: Adamov Caught in Iran Probe Tuesday, July 19, 2005. Issue 3211. Page 5. Probe By Lyuba Pronina Staff Writer Damir Sagolj / Reuters Adamov will be investigated for delays at Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant. Investigators will probe former Nuclear Power Minister Yevgeny Adamov for his possible role in delays at the controversial nuclear power plant that Russia is building in Iran, the head of the Audit Chamber said Sunday evening. Adamov, who has been in a Swiss prison since May, is caught in an extradition tug-of-war between Washington and Moscow. A ruling on Adamov's detention by Switzerland's highest court is expected to be made public on Tuesday. Adamov faces charges of fraud and money laundering in the United States. But since his arrest, Moscow has scrambled to seek his extradition from Switzerland. Remarks by Audit Chamber chief Sergei Stepashin on Rossia television suggested that the authorities were redoubling their efforts to return Adamov to Russia -- and not let him be extradited to the United States because of national security concerns. Stepashin, who returned from a trip to Iran last week, said that Tehran had initiated its own investigation into the financing of the $1 billion Bushehr nuclear power plant, which Moscow began building 10 years ago and Washington claims is being used by Iran as a cover for a nuclear weapons program. "We have agreed ... to conduct parallel probes into why this project has not been completed. The deadline is being constantly pushed back," Stepashin said. "We came to some conclusions that were not very pleasant." A spokeswoman for the Audit Chamber said on Monday that "it is early to comment, as the probe has not begun yet." She said that on Friday the Audit Chamber had decided to conduct the Bushehr probe in the third quarter of the year. The chamber has already found that 655 million rubles ($24 million) allocated for the purchase of equipment have been misspent by Atomstroiexport, the Russian contractor of the Bushehr station, Interfax reported on Monday. Adamov set up Atomstroiexport in 1998, and the company was later bought by Kakha Bendukidze's United Heavy Machinery and recently recovered by the state through the purchase of Gazprombank. "The Iranian side has a lot of questions for this company ... and for former Minister Adamov as well because according to their data, a few programs that have been paid for -- millions of dollars -- have not been completed," Stepashin said. "We are now waiting for materials from our Iranian colleagues in the near future. We will study them carefully with our experts at the Federal Atomic Energy Agency, and I think they will make for some serious work for the prosecutor general." A source at Atomstroiexport said Monday that Stepashin's comments came as a surprise. The Bushehr reactor, which is to become fully operational at the end of next year, is only three to four months behind schedule, mostly because of delays in payment by the Iranians, the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the case. "We are putting all our efforts into catching up with the original schedule, and the Iranian side is reacting adequately to that," the source said, adding that there was no connection to the Adamov case. "I would not take at face value what the Iranians are saying," said Alexei Arbatov, a specialist on nuclear nonproliferation at the Carnegie Moscow Center and a former State Duma deputy. "It has to be seriously checked, including Adamov's possible involvement." © Copyright 2005 The Moscow Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 28 SignOnSanDiego.com: Power plant worker fails Breathalyzer UNION-TRIBUNE July 19, 2005 SAN ONOFRE  A maintenance engineer at the nuclear power plant lost his access privileges and was put on administrative leave after failing a Breathalyzer test Friday morning. The 47-year-old man had worked for Southern California Edison at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station since 1989, a plant spokesman said. His duties included installing devices that monitor heat and pressure at the two reactors, spokesman Ray Golden said. The company's threshold for blood-alcohol levels for employees is .04, or half the state limit for driving. Golden declined to give the engineer's name or the level at which he tested. The engineer was placed on unpaid administrative leave for at least two weeks until results of a blood test are returned, Golden said. © Copyright 2005 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 29 RIA Novosti: Adamov's defense team still has two arguments to prove arrest was illegal 20/07/2005 Geneva, July 19 (RIA Novosti, Yekaterina Andrianova) - Switzerland's supreme court of instance has ruled that additional hearings should be held on the appeal against the arrest of Yevgeni Adamov, a spokesman for the Swiss Federal Justice Department said. The former Russian nuclear energy minister was arrested in Bern, the Swiss capital, on May 2 this year, at the request of the U.S. Justice Department. The Federal Court in Lausanne has concluded that the ex-minister entered the country as a private individual and was not afforded any immunity as a foreign witness. Other arguments being put forward by Adamov's defense team to prove that his arrest was illegal are now to be considered by the Federal Criminal Court in Bellizona. The lawyers claim Adamov should be immune from prosecution because he is a former senior government official and because the U.S. case against him is politically motivated. The Bellizona Court will also be looking into the defense team's appeal against Adamov's second arrest, which was at the request of the Russian authorities. The appeal was filed on June 17. Under the ruling of the Lausanne Court, Adamov shall remain in Swiss custody until the Federal Justice Department makes a decision on his extradition. The ex-minister can still use his right to opt for a simpler extradition procedure, but if he does not, it will be up to the Justice Department to decide whether he should be handed over to the U.S. or to Russia. The U.S. made its extradition request on June 24. The Americans accuse Adamov of misappropriating $9 million that was allocated for nuclear security programs in Russia. Russia submitted its extradition request to Switzerland on May 17, after initiating legal proceedings against Adamov on charges of fraud and abuse of his office. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 30 BBC: Fear at planes near power Last Updated: Tuesday, 19 July, 2005 [Dungeness B power station] Dungeness' power stations are just five miles from Lydd Airport A no-fly zone around two nuclear power stations in Kent should be extended, according to campaigners opposing the expansion of a nearby airport. Aircraft arriving at or leaving Lydd Airport cannot fly within a mile and a half of Dungeness A and B. Planes near the power stations en route elsewhere must be two miles away. Campaigners want the same limit applied to planes heading for or leaving Lydd but airport bosses said there is no need to change the restrictions. The planned expansion of Lydd Airport, five miles from the power stations, would see larger planes such as Boeing 737s able to land there for the first time. Obviously with the increas activity the risk of an accident happening will increase Louise Barton, Lydd Airport Action Group The Lydd Airport Action Group, which opposes the plans, has claimed the prospect of planes of that size flying so near to nuclear power stations makes the expansion dangerous. Spokeswoman Louise Barton said: "We're talking about an airport that has very low activity levels at this point in time, but is gearing up, if their plans come to fruition, to ultimately be almost as large as Luton Airport. "This airport has operated with light aircraft, basically aircraft under six tons, and they are proposing to increase the activity quite aggressively and they will be bringing in the 737s, which are over 40 tons. [Lydd airport protesters] Protests against expansion at Lydd have been going on for some time "Obviously with the increased activity the risk of an accident happening will increase. "What we want is to maximise safety in the area and one way to do this is to increase the restrictions to the standard two miles." Lydd Airport management said monitoring had shown that no "incursion incidents" by aircraft had been reported. The statement went on to say: "The imminent upgrade to full air traffic control will improve safety considerably, enabling the airport to ensure a safe flight path away from the restricted Dungeness area. "Equipment is also being installed that will help controllers to monitor the flight paths of aircraft." ***************************************************************** 31 Mos News: Former Russian Nuclear Minister Adamov to Remain in Swiss Custody — Court - NEWS - MOSNEWS.COM Yevgeny Adamov, frame from the First Channel television Former Russian Nuclear Minister Adamov to Remain in Swiss Custody — Court Created: 19.07.2005 12:29 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 12:29 MSK MosNews Russian former nuclear minister, Yevgeny Adamov, was ordered to remain in custody by a Swiss court Tuesday, the Itar-Tass news agency reported. The Federal Court of Switzerland ruled Monday that Adamov, held in the country following a U.S. call for his extradition, was to remain in detention. The court satisfied an appeal filed earlier by Switzerland’s Federal Office of Justice protesting a decision by the Federal Criminal Court which had ruled that Adamov’s arrest amounted to a violation of international conventions on personal immunity. Adamov will stay in a Swiss prison pending a ruling on his extradition, the Swiss authorities said in a statement. Adamov, 65, was detained in Switzerland in early May, after the U.S. demanded his exradition on fraud and money laundering charges. In the United States the former Russian atomic energy minister stands accused of diverting Department of Energy funds to bank accounts in the U.S. states of Delaware and Pennsylvania. Adamov was appointed energy minister under Boris Yeltsin. He was removed from his post by President Vladimir Putin in 2001 during an investigation by Russian lawmakers that accused him of benefiting from business dealings while serving as minister. Write us: info@mosnews.com Copyright © 2004 MOSNEWS.COM ***************************************************************** 32 3 Million Plus Killed By Radiation In USA, Women More Vulnerable Than Men Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:19:07 -0400 >The study estimates that if 100,000 people are exposed to a given dose, it will create 410 fatal cases of >solid cancers in men and 610 in women. The population of the USA is just over 290 million people. Multiplying the 100,000 figure quoted in the study by 2,900 [10 times 290] and the 410 fatal cases of solid cancers [leukemia is excluded here for some reason- WHY?] in men and 610 fatal solid solid cancers in women we come up 1,189,000 male cancer deaths just from solid cancers. Again, no data for whatever reason[s] on non-solid cancers. For women, 610 fatal solid cancers times 2,900 is 1,769,000 fatal solid cancers. This I assume is for "just" one year. This is just in the USA. Adding 1,769,000 to the aforementioned 1,189,000 solid male cancers this totals 2,958,000 male and female fatal solid cancers. Can anyone verify that this is per annum? Again, how many more people are killed by radiation of non-solid cancers? >The report, issued by the National Academy of Sciences, incorporates nearly 15 years of new data on atomic bomb survivors in Japan. The atomic bomb studies are based on lies. "The Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists" has exposed this. Puruse http://www.thebulletin.org for the facts on this. There should also be something up on this at: http://www.mothersalert.org/moreinfo.html and/or http://www.mothersalert.org http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/19/science/19radi.html? With New Data, a Debate on Low-Level Radiation a.. E-Mail This b.. Printer-Friendly c.. Reprints By MATTHEW L. WALD Published: July 19, 2005 WASHINGTON, July 18 - A report on the health effects of small doses of radiation has renewed a debate on the way exposure is regulated and how the public should regard such doses. The report, issued by the National Academy of Sciences, incorporates nearly 15 years of new data on atomic bomb survivors in Japan. It makes only small changes in estimates of the number of fatal cancers that can be expected from a given radiation dose, but it reinforces the idea, opposed by some experts, that even tiny doses may add slightly to risk. The report also gives more detail on cancer cases, concluding that women are more likely than men to contract the disease, given equal doses. The study estimates that if 100,000 people are exposed to a given dose, it will create 410 fatal cases of solid cancers in men and 610 in women. While the report does not discuss explicitly why women seem to be more vulnerable, the data tables show a high incidence of cancer in female organs and in the breast. That finding raises the question of whether radiation protection regulations should be rewritten with women in mind, said Arjun Makhijani, a nuclear physicist who runs a foundation that is highly critical of some government nuclear programs. For example, he said, nuclear power plant workers are limited to a dose of 5 rems per year, a measurement that counts the amount of radiation energy absorbed by flesh, adjusted for different types of radiation. Perhaps, Dr. Makhijani suggested, it should be 3.5, to reflect the idea that women are one-third more sensitive. But most power plant workers absorb far less than that amount, experts say. At the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Donald A. Cool, a senior adviser to the commission on radiation safety, said that the committee's new report would be considered, along with others that are being prepared, but that the exposure standards were already "prudent." He noted that those standards were stated two ways, with absolute numbers and with a separate requirement that exposures be "as low as reasonably achievable." Even though radiation has been intensively studied since the atomic bombings in Japan 60 years ago next month, the effects of low doses are still much in dispute. The study chairman, Dr. Richard R. Monson of the Harvard School of Public Health, said that while this study varied slightly from the last one, in 1990, the actual rates could be two or three times as high or half as great as the values given, so they were essentially equal. A medical radiation expert not involved in the study, Robert J. Barish of New York, said the problem was that the association between radiation and cancer was "very weak" at low doses. "You're measuring a small effect and that could be confounded by all kinds of things," he said. The report, issued late last month, makes clear that the main sources of radiation exposure are natural, not manufactured; for example, it points out that average annual radiation dose in the United States is about three millisieverts, units used for measuring biological damage. But there is wide variation. People living at sea level, for example, are better shielded from cosmic rays. Some people absorb doses from naturally occurring radiation in rocks and minerals. As a result Florida residents may receive about 2 millisieverts a year, and people in northeastern Washington State, 17 millisieverts. About 82 percent of radiation exposure is from natural sources, and of the human-generated part, 58 percent comes from medical X-rays and another 21 percent is therapeutic exposures, the report points out. Consumer products account for 16 percent; occupational exposure and fallout are 2 percent each, and aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle are 1 percent. The report recommends, among other steps, following the health of people given whole-body scans, which give off doses of radiation much larger than X-rays, to learn about the effects of small doses. But opponents of nuclear power seized on the decision of the report's authors to continue to support the idea that no dose is without risk. The report said that its observations were consistent with an explanation of the relationship of dose to cancer called "linear no-threshold." In that model, used to explain the effect of doses that are too small to cause immediate sickness, each time the dose is cut in half, the cancer risk is cut in half, with no lower limit. This is in contrast to other hazards, like some chemicals, in which small exposures appear to have no effect but larger ones can be fatal. The report was a disappointment for some in the nuclear industry who have argued that no excess deaths are observed for small doses. "It just didn't look at reams and reams and reams of the most relevant data," said Theodore Rockwell, a veteran of the World War II project to build the first nuclear bombs and later the first nuclear submarines. He pointed out that the French counterpart of the National Academy of Sciences recently backed away from the idea that small doses were meaningful, concluding instead that radiation damage occurs when the doses become large enough to overwhelm the body's defenses. Other nuclear professionals took some comfort in some of the findings, though. Peter F. Caracappa, who is the radiation safety officer at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, said the report "makes very clear that the risks from low doses are very small." "I'd say vanishingly small, for the kinds of doses that are typically incurred from operating nuclear power plants," he said. Dr. Makhijani, though, said the report showed that human-generated doses were very important, even if they were far smaller than the natural ones, simply because they were imposed involuntarily. "From your neighbor, you're not willing to be punched in the nose," he said, drawing a parallel to industrial activities that cause radiation exposure, "even though God may do very much worse to you." ***************************************************************** 33 [du-list] Iraq's descent into bombing quagmire -Have your say- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:35:24 -0700 Mention the DU ! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4692881.stm By John Simpson BBC world affairs editor Here in Baghdad, it's beginning to feel like a critical moment. In the last week this city has seen 22 car bombs, with 10 on a single day - last Friday. Not far from Baghdad, at Musayyib, between Hilla and Karbala, nearly 100 Shia Muslims were killed. The shadowy resistance movements seem to be operating on a new and much more ambitious level. Last summer, and in the summer of 2003, there were similar peaks, though much lower ones: The ferocious heat seems to produce new reserves of anger and violence here. As I flew in, sitting in the aircraft cockpit, Baghdad lay dark and irregular, like a blotch of ink, straight ahead of us. Below lay the ribbon of road from the south. In the months after the US-led invasion of Iraq we used to drive up that road to get to Baghdad. By the beginning of 2004 that was already becoming much too dangerous, and we had to fly. Notorious road The pilots looked at each other, and the plane went into a fierce dive, down towards the military airfield on the south-west of the ink-blotch. We straightened out, then banked so steeply to the left that everything loose skidded across the cockpit floor. Then a sudden turn, equally heart-wrenching, in the other direction. During the hour-long flight the pilots scarcely spoke to me. Ever since an RAF Hercules went down north of Baghdad, six months ago, air crews have concentrated totally on the job of getting their planes in safely. The plane door opened, and we clambered out. The air was as hot as an electric heater: 50C, even in the late afternoon. The sun glared down angrily through the haze, reddish and inflamed like a nasty wound. On average as many people are now dying here every day as were killed in the London bombings Ahead of us lay the most dangerous stretch of road in the world: the highway from Baghdad to the airport. Two car bombs had just been discovered along it. Another change since I was last here, a few months ago: the Iraqi national police were out in force along the road, stopping cars of particular makes, and particular colours; that's how they found the two car bombs before they went off. Yet the greater numbers of police haven't stopped the bombers; on the contrary, they have given the bombers a new target - the police checkpoints themselves. I visit Baghdad at least four times a year, to see how things are developing. Since the fall of Saddam in May 2003, and the capture of Baghdad, after which major operations were declared over, I have been here eleven times. Each time the security situation has been markedly worse than the time before. 'Endless' bombers Briefly, after the election in January, which brought an Iraqi government to power, things seemed to improve; then, after some weeks of fewer bombs and fewer deaths, the level of attacks rose again. Now it is higher than it has been at any time since May 2003. The supply of suicide bombers seems endless. Two separate campaigns appear to be going on: the Baathist resistance movement which Saddam Hussein planned and provided vast stocks of weapons and money for, is targeting the Iraqi army and police, and to a lesser extent the American and British forces. As far as anyone can tell, this is the larger and better equipped of the two main underground movements. The other is the extremist religious movement headed (we assume) by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, which announced last year that it was associating itself with al-Qaeda. Foreign Muslims in sizeable numbers have come into the country to support it. Intelligence officials in Baghdad say this group gives the appearance of being more active, because it apparently has a policy of claiming responsibility for major attacks whether or not it has actually carried them out. But to be honest, who does what is largely a matter of guesswork. 'Civil war' Someone, though, is deliberately targeting Shia Muslims. Last Friday's attack in Musayyib was carried out by a suicide bomber driving a hijacked petrol tanker. It exploded outside the Shia mosque. Both of the main streams of resistance, the Baathists and the supporters of al-Qaeda, are predominantly Sunni, and both seem to believe that they will benefit if the security crisis here turns into an outright civil war between Shias and Sunnis. The January election, which for a time seemed to improve the situation, has actually made things more difficult in one way. Since the Sunnis tended to boycott the vote, the result put political power into the hands of the two other main groups in Iraq, the Shia Muslims and the Kurds. The US and British governments saw the invasion of Iraq as a liberation, a way of getting rid of a particularly nasty regime. Instead, things are getting much worse. The casualty figures mean that on average as many people are now dying here every day as were killed in the London bombings nearly two weeks ago. It has become a civil war, fought out with car bombs and shots to the head, while the foreign forces, US and British and the rest, look on, incapable of stopping it. This isn't how things were supposed to turn out here. If you would like to comment on John Simpson's article, please send us your views using the form below. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your comments: I have watched with admiration John Simpson's brave attempts to bring us reports from a host of situations, and his report from Iraq is chilling. When will Bush and Blair and Howard realise that the war is a lost cause? Brian, Melbourne, Australia As usual, Mr Simpson hit the nail right on the head. The options for the UK and US are growing fewer by the day. It is obvious that the foreign troops cannot be pulled out now or in the foreseeable future. Alan S, Herefordshire Thanks for the article John. It really bothers me to see this going on everyday. We've had 2 minutes silence for London - but what about the people who are dying everyday in Iraq. I can't imagine living in that... Justin, UK ---------- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.1/51 - Release Date: 7/18/05 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] 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/ ***************************************************************** 34 [NukeNet] 3 Million Plus Killed By Radiation In USA, Women Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:36:08 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) >The study estimates that if 100,000 people are exposed to a given dose, it will create 410 fatal cases of >solid cancers in men and 610 in women. The population of the USA is just over 290 million people. Multiplying the 100,000 figure quoted in the study by 2,900 [10 times 290] and the 410 fatal cases of solid cancers [leukemia is excluded here for some reason- WHY?] in men and 610 fatal solid solid cancers in women we come up 1,189,000 male cancer deaths just from solid cancers. Again, no data for whatever reason[s] on non-solid cancers. For women, 610 fatal solid cancers times 2,900 is 1,769,000 fatal solid cancers. This I assume is for "just" one year. This is just in the USA. Adding 1,769,000 to the aforementioned 1,189,000 solid male cancers this totals 2,958,000 male and female fatal solid cancers. Can anyone verify that this is per annum? Again, how many more people are killed by radiation of non-solid cancers? >The report, issued by the National Academy of Sciences, incorporates nearly 15 years of new data on atomic bomb survivors in Japan. The atomic bomb studies are based on lies. "The Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists" has exposed this. Puruse http://www.thebulletin.org for the facts on this. There should also be something up on this at: http://www.mothersalert.org/moreinfo.html and/or http://www.mothersalert.org http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/19/science/19radi.html? With New Data, a Debate on Low-Level Radiation a.. E-Mail This b.. Printer-Friendly c.. Reprints By MATTHEW L. WALD Published: July 19, 2005 WASHINGTON, July 18 - A report on the health effects of small doses of radiation has renewed a debate on the way exposure is regulated and how the public should regard such doses. The report, issued by the National Academy of Sciences, incorporates nearly 15 years of new data on atomic bomb survivors in Japan. It makes only small changes in estimates of the number of fatal cancers that can be expected from a given radiation dose, but it reinforces the idea, opposed by some experts, that even tiny doses may add slightly to risk. The report also gives more detail on cancer cases, concluding that women are more likely than men to contract the disease, given equal doses. The study estimates that if 100,000 people are exposed to a given dose, it will create 410 fatal cases of solid cancers in men and 610 in women. While the report does not discuss explicitly why women seem to be more vulnerable, the data tables show a high incidence of cancer in female organs and in the breast. That finding raises the question of whether radiation protection regulations should be rewritten with women in mind, said Arjun Makhijani, a nuclear physicist who runs a foundation that is highly critical of some government nuclear programs. For example, he said, nuclear power plant workers are limited to a dose of 5 rems per year, a measurement that counts the amount of radiation energy absorbed by flesh, adjusted for different types of radiation. Perhaps, Dr. Makhijani suggested, it should be 3.5, to reflect the idea that women are one-third more sensitive. But most power plant workers absorb far less than that amount, experts say. At the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Donald A. Cool, a senior adviser to the commission on radiation safety, said that the committee's new report would be considered, along with others that are being prepared, but that the exposure standards were already "prudent." He noted that those standards were stated two ways, with absolute numbers and with a separate requirement that exposures be "as low as reasonably achievable." Even though radiation has been intensively studied since the atomic bombings in Japan 60 years ago next month, the effects of low doses are still much in dispute. The study chairman, Dr. Richard R. Monson of the Harvard School of Public Health, said that while this study varied slightly from the last one, in 1990, the actual rates could be two or three times as high or half as great as the values given, so they were essentially equal. A medical radiation expert not involved in the study, Robert J. Barish of New York, said the problem was that the association between radiation and cancer was "very weak" at low doses. "You're measuring a small effect and that could be confounded by all kinds of things," he said. The report, issued late last month, makes clear that the main sources of radiation exposure are natural, not manufactured; for example, it points out that average annual radiation dose in the United States is about three millisieverts, units used for measuring biological damage. But there is wide variation. People living at sea level, for example, are better shielded from cosmic rays. Some people absorb doses from naturally occurring radiation in rocks and minerals. As a result Florida residents may receive about 2 millisieverts a year, and people in northeastern Washington State, 17 millisieverts. About 82 percent of radiation exposure is from natural sources, and of the human-generated part, 58 percent comes from medical X-rays and another 21 percent is therapeutic exposures, the report points out. Consumer products account for 16 percent; occupational exposure and fallout are 2 percent each, and aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle are 1 percent. The report recommends, among other steps, following the health of people given whole-body scans, which give off doses of radiation much larger than X-rays, to learn about the effects of small doses. But opponents of nuclear power seized on the decision of the report's authors to continue to support the idea that no dose is without risk. The report said that its observations were consistent with an explanation of the relationship of dose to cancer called "linear no-threshold." In that model, used to explain the effect of doses that are too small to cause immediate sickness, each time the dose is cut in half, the cancer risk is cut in half, with no lower limit. This is in contrast to other hazards, like some chemicals, in which small exposures appear to have no effect but larger ones can be fatal. The report was a disappointment for some in the nuclear industry who have argued that no excess deaths are observed for small doses. "It just didn't look at reams and reams and reams of the most relevant data," said Theodore Rockwell, a veteran of the World War II project to build the first nuclear bombs and later the first nuclear submarines. He pointed out that the French counterpart of the National Academy of Sciences recently backed away from the idea that small doses were meaningful, concluding instead that radiation damage occurs when the doses become large enough to overwhelm the body's defenses. Other nuclear professionals took some comfort in some of the findings, though. Peter F. Caracappa, who is the radiation safety officer at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, said the report "makes very clear that the risks from low doses are very small." "I'd say vanishingly small, for the kinds of doses that are typically incurred from operating nuclear power plants," he said. Dr. Makhijani, though, said the report showed that human-generated doses were very important, even if they were far smaller than the natural ones, simply because they were imposed involuntarily. "From your neighbor, you're not willing to be punched in the nose," he said, drawing a parallel to industrial activities that cause radiation exposure, "even though God may do very much worse to you." _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 35 [du-list] Depleted Uranium: States Take Action to Protect Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:44:22 -0700 Articles : Iraq Depleted Uranium: States Take Action to Protect Their Soldiers and Veterans Tue, 19 Jul 2005 06:17:50 -0700 _NEWS IMAGE_ DU rounds By Kevin Zeese Louisiana passes law giving returning veterans the right to get tested Louisiana recently passed legislation giving all returning veterans the right to get a best practices health screening test for exposure to depleted uranium. Interviewed here is Bob Smith, one of the activists that helped make this bill possible. He is with the Louisiana Activist Network. He is also I am a member of Veterans for Peace and the Viet Nam Veterans Against the War. Born a Texan and raised in a Navy family with three siblings, moved to Louisiana in 1977 a few years after returning from Viet Nam. He worked with adolescents in a psychiatric hospital where he met his wife, a co-worker, returning to the military and retired eight years ago as a Command Sergeant Major. He became actively involved the day Congress gave the President unconstitutional, power to make war on Iraq and has been active ever since in the peace movement and with the Presbyterian Church. Zeese: What made you pursue legislation regarding depleted uranium in Louisiana? Smith: As a twenty year veteran I have been concerned about veterans health since I returned from Viet Nam. From first hand experience I knew the treatment of veterans by our country was highly inadequate after their service. Each year after Gulf War I, more and more veterans were being diagnosed with a mysterious illness, Gulf War Syndrome (GWS) without significant research for cause and effect much like what happened with Agent Orange contamination. I learned about how the government dealt with Agent Orange contamination during the eighties as an outreach counselor at the VA’s Viet Nam Veterans Outreach Center or Vet Center here in New Orleans. We were actively involved in trying to alert the VA to the effects of Agent Orange contamination. For twenty five years a government study done by the Rand Corporation denied any cause and effect between Agent Orange and health problems experienced by veterans and their offspring. Just this week the VA has finally recognized the connection between Agent Orange and diabetes. Remember the last troops returned from Viet Nam over thirty years ago. Worth mentioning is that the same Rand Corporation now denies any cause and effect between depleted uranium contamination and health. Late last year after a lot of reading I found out about depleted uranium. In January at the Jazz Funeral for Democracy, a peace march in New Orleans organized by the Louisiana Activist Network, I met a young Gulf War I veteran, Dennis Kyne. He talked with me about what he knew first hand as a combat medic about illnesses of our veterans even before they returned home and what he has found out about DU since returning home. I then did more research and studying. In March I met Leuren Moret, a geoscientist, who reaffirmed everything that Dennis Kyne had told me and reaffirmed what I had been reading. I then did more research and studying including conversation with Doug Rokke. Doug was the overall supervisor in charge of the clean-up after Gulf War I and is an expert in depleted uranium. Thirty to forty percent of his team are now dead. I then became concerned about what could be done to bring this issue out into the public conversation. Leuren told me about a young lady in Connecticut, Melissa Sterry, who was doing something about it. Working with Rep Patricia Dillon of Connecticut they were introducing a bill to have all of their state’s veterans tested. The always unselfish Melissa willingly shared a copy of the Connecticut bill with me. Melissa had been a member of a depleted uranium clean-up team after Gulf War I. She herself was very sick and had six of her eight team members die since returning home. All six were less than thirty-five years old. Taking the Connecticut bill, changing the name to a Louisiana bill, and making a few minor amendments preceded a call to my Louisiana congressperson, Rep. Jalila Jefferson-Bullock. The submission deadline was less than twenty-four hours after our meeting. Rep. Juan LaFonta sponsored and Rep. Jefferson-Bullock co-sponsored the bill. The deadline was made. Zeese: What does the legislation accomplish? Smith: The legislation will allow all returning veterans to have the right to get a best practices health screening test for exposure to depleted uranium. The test will use a bioassay procedure involving sensitive methods capable of detecting depleted uranium at low levels and the use of equipment with the capacity to discriminate between different radioisotopes in naturally occurring levels of uranium and the characteristic ratio and marker for depleted uranium. This test will determine if a soldier has been contaminated. It will prevent mis-diagnosis so soldiers are not given the wrong medications that usually make them sicker. It will allow the contaminated soldier to decide about parenting further offspring who have an increased chance of serious birth illnesses or defects. The bill also prescribes a reporting mechanism from the Louisiana’s Attorney General to the legislature that requires that awareness sessions and training have been done as required by Army regulations. Zeese: What tips do you have for activists in other states interested in pursuing this in their state? Smith: Stay focused. Depleted uranium testing is for discovery of contamination of a very hazardous material made from radioactive nuclear waste. This is something that truly supports the troops. Remind your elected representatives of that often. Read, study, and discuss with the experts and others experienced in this type of legislation. Other advocates should remember that the weapons manufacturers do not want this in the public. They make a lot of money off this death bringing material. Likewise the military does not want to give up these very effective offensive weapons regardless of how it effects our soldiers or civilians, enemy soldiers, or the environment. Although we did not encounter resistance from those two potential adversaries, weapons manufacturers or the military, others might and they should be prepared to bring in experts. Having veterans testify helps. Another veteran, Ward Reilly, from Baton Rouge was instrumental in helping get the bill through committee. Zeese: What were some of the challenges you faced with this legislation and how did you overcome them? Smith: The only real obstacle we encountered was educating our representative. We knew we would have to educate her and do it quickly but fortunately she agreed to a minimum one-hour meeting. We were lucky as both representatives cared deeply about our troops and taking care of them after they come home. There were no other obstacles. Zeese: What are your next steps? Smith: We have been having awareness sessions at coffeehouses and public events to educate the public, either by passing out literature, making educational speeches, posting literature on the internet, or showing documentaries. We are also communicating with advocates in other states by sharing information, resources, networking, and offering tips to help. And if that doesn’t work I may just stand on top of the roof and scream out the truth. Note: I retired after 20 years in the Army and National Guard as a Command Sergeant Major, serving three tours in Viet Nam as a Special Forces Green Beret and was mobilized for Desert Storm. Education includes a Bachelor of Arts in Sociology and a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering. Currently employed as an engineer living in New Orleans with Julie my wife and life partner for over twenty-six years and our dog, Maggie. Member of Veterans for Peace, Viet Nam Veterans Against the War, and the Louisiana Activist Network. Kevin Zeese is a director of Democracy Rising. You can comment on this column on his blog spot at DemocracyRising.US . For more on DU, see GNN’s book True Lies. Authors Lappé and Marshall travel to Iraq to conduct their own radiation tests. 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/ ***************************************************************** 36 Bangkok's Independent: Industry manufactures uncertainty to distort health risks Wed, July 20, 2005 GUEST COLUMNIST: Published on July 20, 2005 To many scientists and policymakers in Washington, the revelation this month last month that Philip Cooney, chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, had rewritten a federal report to magnify the level of uncertainty on climate change came as no surprise. Uncertainty is easily manipulated, and Cooney - a former lobbyist with the American Petroleum Institute, one of the nation’s leading manufacturers of scientific uncertainty - was highly familiar with its uses. As an epidemiologist with a special interest in occupational diseases, I share a fundamental problem with the scientists who are studying climate change. Our ability to conduct laboratory experiments is limited; we can’t go out and intentionally expose people to carcinogens any more than climatologists can measure future temperatures. Instead, we must harness “natural experiments”, collecting data through observation only. We then build models from this data, and use these models to make causal inferences and predictions, and, where possible, to recommend protective measures. By definition, uncertainties abound in our work; there’s nothing to be done about that. Our public health and environmental protection programs will not be effective if absolute proof is required before we act. The best available evidence must be sufficient. Otherwise, we’ll sit on our hands and do nothing. Of course, this is often exactly what industry wants. That’s why it has mastered the art of manufacturing uncertainty, of demanding often impossible proof over common-sense precaution in the realm of public health. The tobacco industry led the way. For 50 years, cigarette manufacturers employed a stable of scientists willing to assert (sometimes under oath) that there was no conclusive evidence that cigarettes cause lung cancer, or that nicotine is addictive. An official at Brown & Williamson, a cigarette maker now owned by RJ Reynolds, once noted in a memo: “Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public.” Toward that end, the tobacco manufacturers dissected every study, highlighted every question, magnified every flaw, cast every possible doubt every possible time. They also conjured their own studies with questionable data and foregone conclusions. It was all a charade, of course, because the real science was inexorable. But the uncertainty campaign was effective; it delayed public health protections, and compensation for tobacco’s victims, for decades. The tobacco industry, left without a stitch of credibility or public esteem, has finally abandoned that strategy - but it led the way for others. Every polluter and manufacturer of toxic chemicals understands that by fostering a debate on uncertainties in the underlying science and by harping on the need for more research - always more research - it can avoid debating the actual policy or regulation in question. It is now unusual for the science behind a public health or environmental regulation not to be challenged. In recent years, corporations have mounted campaigns to question studies documenting the adverse health effects of exposure to, among others, beryllium, lead, mercury, vinyl chloride, chromium, benzene, benzidine and nickel. Manufacturing uncertainty is a business in itself. You too can launch a pretty good campaign. All you need is the money with which to hire one of the main players in the “product-defence industry”, many of whose stalwarts first honed their craft defending cigarette smoke. These firms will hire the scientists, throw the mud, crank up the fog machine. A classic case is beryllium, a lightweight metal useful in nuclear weapons. For many years it has been clear that workers exposed to beryllium levels below the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration standard can develop chronic beryllium disease. When the OSHA tried to lower the standard, the industry hired Exponent, a leading product-defence firm to focus on all the things we don’t understand, calling for more research before OSHA could act. Meanwhile, workers are still exposed at the old, unsafe level, and are still getting sick. Among themselves, these product-defence lobbyists and their clients make no secret of what they’re doing. Republican political consultant Frank Luntz wrote in a memo, later leaked to the media: “The scientific debate remains open . . . Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly.” Decades from now, this campaign to manufacture uncertainty will surely be viewed with the same dismay and outrage with which we now look back on the deceits perpetrated by the tobacco industry. But will it be too late? Michaels, a professor at the George Washington University School of Public Health, served as assistant secretary of energy between 1998 and 2001. David Michaels Los Angeles Times Privacy Policy © 2000 Nation Multimedia Group 44 Moo 10 Bang Na-Trat KM 4.5, Bang Na district, Bangkok 10260 Thailand Tel 66-2-325-5555, 66-2-317-0420 and 66-2-316-5900 Fax 66-2-751-4446 Contact us: File attachment not accepted! ***************************************************************** 37 Yokwe: US NGO's Support Marshall Islands Cause at Senate Hearing Everything Marshall Islands :: http://www.yokwe.net Jul 19, 2005 - 11:38 PM Over 30 NGO's from across the United States have signed-on to a letter urging Congress to respond to the nuclear legacy of US testing in the Marshall Islands with "moral and legal fairness," ensuring that the Marshallese people receive the same care, clean-up and protection as American citizens. The July letter was addressed to Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Pete M. Domenici and Minority leader Jeff Bingaman. The diverse group of organizations, representing citizens from across the United States, also issued a similar statement in May to the House committees. The letter commends the Committee for holding the hearing and encourages them to apply "the same standards of care, safety, redress of grievances and justice that Congress has adopted with respect to the effects of nuclear testing in the US mainland" to the people of the Marshall Islands. Marshallese should receive the same level of health care as US Downwinders, Atomic Veterans, or Department of Energy workers exposed to radiation. Clean-up and radiation protection standards should mirror locations in the US, such as Hanford, Washington. Compensation for personal injuries should also be paid in full as is required for the Downwinders (rather than the pro rata currently used in the RMI due to an insufficiency of funds). The US government must also find the means to compensate private property owners for the damage to their lands as is required in this country, stated the letter issued by the Nuclear Peace Foundation. US organizations that have signed on to the letter include: American Friends Service Committee, Atomic Mirror, Center for Health, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Citizen Alert Environment & Justice (CHEJ), Educators for Social Responsibility Metro, Global Peacemakers Association, Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE) Public Fund, Ho`okipa Network, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Kak'oo Na Kupuna 'O Kohala, Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy, Military Toxics Project, Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, Nuclear Policy Research Institute, Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, Nuclear Watch of New Mexico, Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, Peace Farm, Peace Links, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Portsmouth/Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety and Security, Proposition One Committee, Santa Barbara Society of Friends, Secure World Foundation, Snake River Alliance, Solidarity Committee of the Capital District, Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment), Upper Hudson Peace Action, US Peace Council, Western States Legal Foundation, Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom US Section. --Compiled by Yokwe Online, from letter forwarded from RMI Embassy, Washington, D.C. ©Aenet Rowa, webmaster - yokwenet@aol.com Powered by PostNuke ***************************************************************** 38 Yokwe: Senate Committee to Review US Nuke Legacy in Marshall Islands Everything Marshall Islands :: http://www.yokwe.net Jul 19, 2005 - 11:38 PM A Senate oversight hearing to receive testimony regarding the effects of the U.S. nuclear testing program on the Marshall Islands is scheduled for Tuesday, July 19, at 2:30 p.m. The hearing is in response to a pledge to consider the Republic of the Marshall Islands' Changed Circumstances Petition following the US Administration's review. The Petition was submitted over 5 years ago to Congress. Tomorrow's hearing, convened by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, will be the second congressional hearing on the issue since the authorization of the new Compact of Free Association between the US and RMI. RMI officials and witnesses presented a case for the changed circumstances before the House Resources and International Affairs Asia and Pacific Subcommittee on May 25. A large contingent of Marshall Islanders, including representatives of the four nuclear testing impacted atolls, traveled to Washington, D.C. for the hearing, many of who will be in attendance for the Senate hearing. The RMI believes there are "moral, legal and scientific grounds for additional funds for the Nuclear Claims Tribunal, healthcare programs and the loss of property." In January 2005, the US administration rejected the Petition, stating that according to its review, there were no grounds for changed circumstances, and that the two nations had signed an agreement for a full and final settlement for US nuclear testing compensation to the Islands. The State department witness reiterated this decision in his testimony before the House hearing. Several new US agency reports are lending a favorable outlook for the Marshall Islands cause. Even low radiation doses are harmful, states the National Academy of Science report released in June. A US National Cancer Institute investigation, requested by Congress, estimates that there will be 500 more cases of cancer in the Marshall Islands' exposed population. During the Cold War Era, over a 12 year period, the US performed 67 tests in the Marshall Islands, depositing a legacy of disease and displacement that still impacts today. Witnesses for the Marshall Islands, scheduled to appear before the Senate Committee, are Minister of Foreign Affairs Gerald Zackios, Dr. Neal A. Palafox of the John A. Burns School of Medicine at the University of Hawaii, and James H. Plasman, Chairman, Nuclear Claims Tribunal. Howard Kravitz, Acting Assistant Secretary of the U.S. State Department, Thomas Lum of the Congressional Research Service, Dr. Kiyohiko Mabuchi of the National Cancer Institute, and Dr. Steve Simon are expected to testify. --by Aenet Rowa, Yokwe Online, July 18, 2005 ***************************************************************** 39 VietNam News: Cancer on the rise in children (19-07-2005) A doctor prepares to transmit fluid to fifteen-year-old blood cancer patient Nguyen Khanh Duy. — VNA/VNS Photo Thanh Vu HA NOI — The number of children afflicted with cancer has risen rapidly in recent years, said Dr Bui Ngoc Lan of the Central Paediatric Hospital. The hospital last year provided cancer treatment to 1,700 children between the ages of five and 15, according to hospital statistics. The hospital annually receives about 200 affected children from different provinces around the country. This does not include another 100-150 children who come to the hospital for medical examinations each month. Leukemia is the leading form of cancer treated. Only 10 per cent of children affected by leukemia recover their health. Others succumb to the disease because they are not diagnosed early. Malignant brain tumour is the second leading type of cancer treated at the hospital. This disease is often found in children under 15 years of age. Causes of brain tumours are uncertain, but surveys indicate that children who have previously received radioactive treatment are more likely to suffer from the disease. Symptoms can include headaches, morning sickness and vomiting, mood swings, memory loss, and convulsions. Most children affected by cancer only go to the hospital to seek treatment when they are in critical condition, so treatment is more difficult and expensive, and mortality rates are higher. Dr Nguyen Thai Son, deputy director of Saint Paul Hospital in Ha Noi, acknowledged that providing treatment to children afflicted with brain tumours is complicated by late diagnosis. About 90 per cent of patients are only hospitalised once they have suffered complications such as nervous disorders. As a result, Son said, they can only survive 1-2 years after operation. High costs Dieu Thu, 15, is receiving medical treatment for cancer at the tumour ward of the Central Paediatric Hospital. Dieu Thu’s parents revealed it cost them VND10 million when Thu received treatment for the first time. Follow-up chemotherapy treatments are about VND3 million to VND4 million each. Total fees for eight courses of treatment were nearly VND100 million. Nguyen Thu Trang, also 15, suffers from leukemia and has gone to the Central Paediatric Hospital for blood transfusions every month for the past three years. Her father said it has cost his family over VND50 million. Cancer specialists said the greatest difficulty in providing treatment to affected children is the lack of equipment to early diagnose different kinds of cancer in children. — VNS Copyright by Viet Nam News, Vietnam News Agency 11 Tran Hung Dao Street, Hanoi, Vietnam Editor in Chief: Tran Mai Huong Tel. 84-4-9332316; Fax: 84-4-9332311 E-mail: vnnews@vnagency.com.vn Publication Permit: 599/GP-INTER Granted by the Ministry of Culture and Information on April 9, 1998. ***************************************************************** 40 [shundahaialert] Nuke News on the Skull Valley Indian Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:35:53 -0700 Dear Friends, Here is the latest on the proposed Skull Valley Private Fuel Storage high-level nuclear waste dump, on the small Goshute Indian Reservation in Utah. We still need all the help we can get to resist this project and to maintain the other nuclear resistance/Indigenous Environmental Justice projects still in progress. You can donate online on the upper left hand corner of our website: www.shundahai.org. Much love, Pete U.S. Transportation Dept. prepares for nuke hauls - http://www.shundahai.org/PFS_USDOT_Approve0718-05.htm Nuclear execs tout Yucca, but Curtis says Utah could get the waste - http://www.shundahai.org/nuke_news_062905.htm Shundahai Network www.shundahai.org P.O. Box 1115 Salt Lake City, UT 84110 Phone- 801.533.0128 Fax- 801.533.0129 shundahai@shundahai.org Online Fundraising Store- www.cafepress.com/shundahainet If you are a Myspace user, you can now add us! www.Myspace.com/shundahai Shundahai is a Newe (Western Shoshone) word meaning "Peace and Harmony with all Creation" ***************************************************************** 41 AU ABC: Rann voices concern over nuclear waste dump Australian Broadcasting Corporation Online"> (ACST)Tuesday, 19 July 2005. 14:34 (AEDT)Tuesday, 19 July 2005. The row over a radioactive waste dump has flared again, with South Australia opposing the latest proposal. SA Premier Mike Rann says waste from Sydney's Lucas Heights reactor should be kept in New South Wales, not stored in a repository planned for Defence Department land in the Northern Territory. Mr Rann says he understands the Lucas Heights waste will be trucked through South Australia's far north on its way to the Territory, and he will campaign against it. "If you look at all the international reports about the disposal of radioactive waste, one of the prime issues that comes up is that the waste should be located close to the site of its production to avoid transportation," he said. "And so it makes no sense to transport radioactive waste thousands of miles." ***************************************************************** 42 Deseret News: Utah nuclear site would imperil U.S. [deseretnews.com] Tuesday, July 19, 2005 The plan by Private Fuel Storage to concentrate 44,000 tons of hot nuclear waste into one small area above ground at the Skull Valley Indian Reservation threatens our national security. Detonating a small nuclear bomb on that 1.5 square mile target would be equivalent to detonating an inconceivably enormous, dirty nuclear bomb. The radiation, carried by wind and the jet stream, could poison every man, woman and child across the entire United States east of Skull Valley. It is clearly foolhardy to concentrate such vulnerability into one location. It is the responsibility of all citizens of the United States to voice their concerns to stop this grievous risk to our national security. Cory Boyce Lehi © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 43 Las Vegas RJ: Agency plansspecial trainsfor waste site Tuesday, July 19, 2005 Department decides Yucca Mountainshould use dedicated rail service By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Energy Department said Monday it plans to ship nuclear waste to Nevada using dedicated railroad service rather than on trains that would carry other cargo too. The department, announcing part of its Yucca Mountain transportation policy, cited safety, security and cost benefits to using trains devoted solely to radioactive spent fuel in its shipping program for the proposed repository. A two-page policy statement indicated mixed-cargo trains might be used in some instances, but the agency plans to use dedicated rail "for its usual transport" of nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Several other issues remain outstanding, such as the Energy Department's plans to transport nuclear waste within Nevada and what type of protective casks will encase the radioactive materials during transport. An environmental impact study of a 318-mile railroad corridor from Caliente to the repository site in Nye County was expected in the spring but will be delayed until next year while government officials seek to address concerns of ranchers along the corridor, Energy Department spokesman Allen Benson said. The Association of American Railroads had urged the agency to ship nuclear waste on dedicated trains, which it said offered advantages such as not needing to be switched often at rail yards and being able to use advances in safety technology. The decision to use dedicated trains "was inevitable given national security and logistical considerations," said David Blee, executive director of the U.S. Transport Council, a nuclear waste shipping coalition. The agency said dedicated trains could travel faster to Nevada and enable the project to operate with fewer rail cars and fewer casks because equipment would not sit idle at rail yards. "Analyses indicated the primary benefit is the significant cost savings over the lifetime of the Yucca Mountain Project," the agency said. No figures were given. The agency's estimate is 3,500 rail shipments of radioactive spent fuel from commercial power plants and nuclear waste from government weapons plants. Robert Halstead, a transportation expert working for Nevada, said the the policy falls short of the "total commitment" to dedicated rail that had been urged by the state and the rail industry. Halstead said the numbers of shipments could be larger depending on the configuration of the dedicated trains. He challenged one of the department's safety arguments and said dedicated trains would not cut significantly into "dwell time" during which radioactive waste would sit at rail yards in Chicago; Memphis or Nashville, Tenn.; or Texas awaiting other nuclear cargo to fill out a trainload for the journey west. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., contended use of dedicated trains will make them bigger targets for attack. "The recent attacks in London and last year's train bombings in Madrid should be a stark reminder of the vulnerability of America's rail system," Berkley said. "Unfortunately, the Bush administration appears perfectly content to move forward on a plan that will paint a giant bull's eye on shipments of nuclear waste and on the communities through which they will pass." Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the Energy Department was putting the cart before the horse. "What the Department of Energy seems to be missing is that they have nowhere to ship the waste," Reid said in a statement. "Yucca Mountain is never going to open." Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 44 Las Vegas RJ: Subpoenaon the wayfor DOE, Porter says Tuesday, July 19, 2005 By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- A House committee chairman was readying a subpoena as the Department of Energy missed a deadline Monday for supplying Congress with documents for a Yucca Mountain investigation. Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., said the chairman of the House Government Reform Committee will issue a subpoena today to break a stalemate in an investigation of worker e-mail messages. The e-mails suggested quality assurance documents might have been falsified on the nuclear waste repository project. "The Department of Energy has continued to be uncooperative," Porter said after meeting with the chairman, Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va. Porter leads the subcommittee conducting the inquiry. Energy Department officials had offered to allow Porter and his investigators to review documents at agency headquarters. They have expressed concern that the Nevada lawmaker would make sensitive documents public, which they said could complicate the department's efforts to seek a repository license. "We have made these documents available over the past three weeks, also offering to make weekend arrangements or evening arrangements for them to see whatever documents they want to see," agency spokesman Craig Stevens said. "They have yet to reach out." Porter rejected the offer and called it an "insult to Congress." The seeds of the dispute were planted early in April. Energy Department officials were said to be angered when, over their objections, Porter released documents given to his federal work force and agency organization subcommittee several weeks after Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman revealed the e-mails. Since then, an Energy Department investigation has tentatively concluded the allegations in the e-mails did not compromise Yucca Mountain science or decisions by President Bush to designate the Nevada site for nuclear waste burial. Joseph Hevesi, a hydrologist who wrote many of the e-mails, testified before Congress last month that he did not falsify documents. He said he had a reputation of being "flippant in my e-mail." Porter, like most elected Nevada leaders, is a Yucca Mountain opponent and has expressed skepticism of DOE's pronouncement the program has a clean bill of health. Other state officials have expressed hope that the subcommittee's inquiry would uncover science or management flaws that could be brought up during licensing. Stevens did not say Monday how department would respond to a subpoena. Porter said the subpoena would demand documents he had requested to see in April, including personnel records of the three scientists who have been identified as primary e-mail authors and the research to which they contributed. Porter had asked for a copy of a 5,800-page draft license application the DOE had been preparing for the repository. Attorneys for the Energy Department and Nevada are in a legal dispute before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission over access to the same document. On Monday, DOE acting general counsel Eric Fygi questioned why Porter's subcommittee needed to see the draft license paperwork. "This sort of draft document is quite unrelated to those that chronicle activities of federal employees," Fygi said in a letter sent to the subcommittee. Fygi said he feared the panel's document requests "could metastasize without discrete bounds" to encompass other Yucca licensing material. The agency "has attempted to balance the concerns of the department with the needs of the committee," Stevens said. "We want to make sure we follow the letter of the law to make sure we are following the proper steps of the licensing process." Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 45 Bellona: Thorp officials open with Bellona as they work to restore UK nuke reprocessing facility They could not be more specific as the approach to setting the results of the accident right are a first-time event, and plant operators do not wish to be pinned down by a particular deadline, as much of the plant’s technical re-evaluation has to literally be invented as works progress. But according to officials from both British Nuclear Group (BNG) —which now operated Sellafield under the authority of the newly formed Nuclear Decommissioning Authority as of April 1st this year—the aim is to get the plant functioning again, contrary to previous reports in the British media. BNF has meanwhile published a public report on the incident that is unprecedented in its self-criticism and depth, which is available on the and BNG web sites.--> Thorp officials open with Bellona as they work to restore UK nuke reprocessing facility WEST CUMBRIA, England—In the first visit to the Thorp reprocessing facility at Sellafield in West Cumbria by an environmental NGO since an April spill of radioactive liquid, the Bellona foundation found Thorp to be in stabile condition as officials and engineers there work to bring it back online. Shown above is the ruptured pipe that leaked some 83 cubic meters of uranium, plutonium and nitric acid liquor onto the fuel clarification cell floor at Sellafield’s Thorp reprocessing facility over a period of nine months. Beneath the visible crack is the top of Thorp’s Accountancy tank B, which was photographically inspected on April 18 when an unexpected weight loss in the tank’s contents promoted the investigation. The ruptured pipe itself measures 40 millimeters in diameter. This photograph represents the first publication of the rupture inside the Thorp fuel clarification cell, which British Nuclear Group Sellafield released to Bellona on July 8th. BNG Charles Digges, 2005-07-07 15:51 There is as yet, according to Thorp plant technicians, no set date as to when or if the reprocessing unit will come into operation again. Repairing damage that occurred during an April 18th pipe rupture in what is called the plant’s fuel clarification cell is set to take “months” officials at the Thorp plant told Bellona Web on a visit to Thorp this week. They could not be more specific as the approach to setting the results of the accident right are a first-time event, and plant operators do not wish to be pinned down by a particular deadline, as much of the plant’s technical re-evaluation has to literally be invented as works progress. But according to officials from both British Nuclear Group (BNG) —which now operated Sellafield under the authority of the newly formed Nuclear Decommissioning Authority as of April 1st this year—the aim is to get the plant functioning again, contrary to previous reports in the British media. BNF has meanwhile published a public report on the incident that is unprecedented in its self-criticism and depth, which is available on the and BNG web sites. Thorp Leak at Sellafield continued unchecked for 9 months say British nuclear officials and media The leak of 20 tonnes of plutonium and uranium liquid mixed with nitric acid discovered last month at Sellafield’s controversial Thorp reprocessing facility had apparently been going on undetected for nine months, constituting one of Britain’s worst nuclear mishap in years, Britain’s The Independent and UK nuclear officials said Monday. British media and Bellona Web conversations with highly placed NDA officials previously indicated that the new decommissioning body had been considered shutting it down after it publicised a highly radioactive leak of 83 cubic meters of plutonium, uranium and nitric acid onto the floor of the plant’s clarification cell—an incident the construction of the cell is designed to handle. Plant officials say it is designed to hold more than 250 cubic meters of leaked liquor. A final decision on whether or not the Thorp plant will, in fact, go back on line, is dependent on the decision of the British Government based on BNG calculations as to how much money it will cost to put the plant back into operation. The NDA will weigh these considerations as well, and make its own independent recommendation. What is the clarification cell? Thorp’s fuel clarification cell comprises a stainless steel-lined space 60 metres long, 20 metres wide and 20 metres high and its concrete walls are 2 to 3 metres thick to absorb radiation. BNG Sellafield said the cell was designed to withstand the possibility of a leak and, because stainless steel does not dissolve in nitric acid, the leak has been contained. There has been no radiation dose to Sellafield workers as a result of the leak and no release of radioactivity into the atmosphere, confirmed a spokesman for UK’s Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII). Thorp’s raw materials are the used fuel rods from nuclear power stations. After receipt at Thorp, they are stored for several months to allow the radioactivity of short-lived fission products to decay to safer levels. The tubular rods are then cut up into small chunks and lowered in baskets into strong nitric acid. The uranium, plutonium and fission products dissolve and the remnants of the steel rods are removed. But the fluid remaining from the process, called liquor, still contains small shards of steel, or tailings, from burrs created as the rods were chopped up. So the liquor must be centrifuged to get rid of the steel contaminants, a process called clarification. It is at this clarification stage that the leak occurred. Radioactive leak closes Thorp reprocessing plant at Sellafield A highly radioactive mixture of plutonium and uranium fuel that was dissolved in concentrated nitric acid leaked through a fractured pipe into an enormous steel chamber late last month, forcing the closure of Sellafield’s Thorp reprocessing plant by UK nuclear authorities, British nuclear officials confirmed Monday. Chronology of the incident The chronology of the incident is as follows: On April 18th, a camera inspection of the clarification cell was initiated to determine why one of the two so-called accountancy tanks was experiencing a drop in the level of plutonium and uranium. Measurements of how much liquor each of the tanks hold are taken by weight. During the camera inspection process it was noted that liquor had been leaking onto the floor of the clarification cell for as long as nine months through a single pipe leading into accountancy tank B. It was first suspected that a manufacturer’s welding error had been the cause of the leak. But further investigations shows that, though the leak in the 40 millimeter wide pipe—one of several dozen running into the accountancy chamber—had occurred near a welding point, it was a matter of metal fatigue that had caused the rupture. The radioactive liquor has long been drained from the floor of the facility, and the task now, according to Thorp engineers, is no longer determining the cause of the accident and cleaning it up, but looking forward to making the complicated system of pipes and tanks workable again—and how to avoid similar incident in the future. Next steps Specifically, said one Thorp engineer, technicians will be examining the gravimetric approach to measuring the amount of liquor in the accountancy tanks. When Thorp was commissioned in 1994, one of its unique features distinguishing it from other plants was that the amount of liquor held in the accountancy tanks was measured by weight. This means that the maze of pipe-work leading into the tanks has to move horizontally and vertically to accommodate rising levels of liquor in the accountancy tanks It is in this design scheme that Thorp engineers interviewed by Bellona Web think the fault for the accident may lie, because more motion that is applied to the pipes, the more likely they are to succumb to metal fatigue. As NDA and BNG officials described it, the pipe rupture was roughly akin to taking a standard aluminum soda can and bending it several times in the middle. “Eventually, after doing this for some time, you will crack the can,” said one Thorp engineer. He was quick to emphasise, however, that, of the numerous pipes running into the accountancy tank, only one had ever faced such a crisis, and the the tubular walls of the ruptured pipe are certainly several millimeters thicker than the walls of a soda can. Nonetheless, inspections of pipe integrity are on going. One option for ensuring the further safe usage of Thorp is to fix the entire assembly of pipe works and tanks in place rather than relying on gravimetric accountancy procedures. Accountancy would then take place under more standard methods such as regular measurements of the accountancy tanks’ contents of uranium and plutonium. The seven stage scale of ranking nuclear indcidents and accidents. IAEA Public notification could have been improved, says BNG NDA and BNG officials interview by Bellona Web openly admitted that they had dropped the ball somewhat on notifying stakeholders, or interested parties, about the incident. Even though BNG officials had held local public consultations locally in the weeks following the incident, it was not made pubic nationally until the London Guardian ran something of a scare piece on the incident on May 2nd. After Bellona’s visit this week, the organisation can confirm that much of the information contained in the Guardian piece was exaggerated. BNG officials were regretful that they were not quicker to notify the public and international governments—among them the Norwegian government, which was taken off guard by the Guardian piece—and offered Bellona Web its apologies for not communicating events sooner. “We were not being secretive,” said one BNG official. “It was simply that our early assessments, given that the entire incident was contained and no plant or public personnel were affect, did not warrant an international alarm.” BNG officials, however, especially under the guidance of the NDA have pledged to be more forthcoming with stakeholders in the future. Nonetheless, the event was classified as a “serious incident,” which corresponds to level three on seven level International Nuclear Event Scale (INES) that was developed in the wake of Chernobyl. As a level three event, the Sellefield spillage classified at one step below an “accident.” A rating of “4” corresponds to “an accident without serious off-site risk.” NDA and BNG officials interviewed during Bellona Web’s incident expressed surprise that the Thorp incident—which was entirely contained and resulted in no external or employee exposure to radiation—had been ranked so high. But technicalities within the language of the rating scale itself officially pushed it up to a “3” incident. 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 ***************************************************************** 46 Bellona: Commentary: Nuclear Basketball An international conference on Multilateral Technical and Organizational Approaches to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle with the Aim of Strengthening Nonproliferation Efforts, organized by Rosatom and the IAEA, took place in Moscow, July 13—15. Prior to the start of the conference, the head of Rosatom, Aleksandr Rumyantsev, and a representative from the IAEA, Yuri Sokolov, held a press conference, at which our correspondent was present. Aleksander Rumyantsev and Yuri Sokolov Grigory Pasko, 2005-07-19 16:43 For starters, here are two lyrical digressions, the first of which is rather high-minded. Half an hour before the press conference, I bore witness to an activist from Greenpeace, having ascended the towering pedestal of the God of Trade, which stands before the location of the conference, the World Trade Center in Moscow. He hurried not when returning to the sinful earth, upon which two policemen and two World Trade Center security guards awaited him. IAEA Conference in Moscow Causes Anxiety among Environmentalists Vladimir Chuprov, an expert from the Greenpeace, is confident that the widely formulated topic actually signifies another discussion on the construction of an international nuclear waste repository in Russia. Above, by the statue of the God Hermes, a banner with the English words “Here they sell our future” waved in the breeze. Finally the activist descended, and was arrested. The second of my digressions is more down-to-earth. Every time I arrive at an event hosted by Rosatom, I see well dressed people and tables, generously set for the coffee break. I know perfectly well that I, a journalist, will be given a bulging press-release packet filled with a program, a nice little nametag and some other junk, after which I will be lead into a beautiful conference room. Then the main figures of the press-conference will begin taking questions. But they rarely give to-the-point, concrete, sincere, exact, certain, or even full or objective answers, because honestly, as it seems to me, they really couldn’t care less what we write, or even if we write anything at all. They have their own games, their own rules, and their own parties. The Russian people, however, and their representatives in the media, seemingly don’t get to join them. Apparently, someone told them one time that the nuclear industry is the domain of the chosen, and that much, or better yet all of it, should be shrouded in secrecy. There is one principle to their thought process: the less you know, the better you sleep at night. Greenpeace activist hanging the poster before the beginning of the conference At the very beginning of the event, the head of Rosatom, Aleksandr Rumyantsev, noted that the general purpose of the conference was to come to some conclusion after a year-long discussion of a proposal made by the head of the IAEA, Mohammed el-Baradei, for the creation of an international accord on atomic energy among current nuclear-capable nations. A secondary goal mentioned by Rumyantsev was to discuss the “problems of non-proliferation.” And with that, Rumyantsev ended his speech. IAEA Deputy Director Yuri Sokolov was more talkative, thanking Rumyantsev for his description of the situation with the agency’s problems, as well as of the problems of development and distribution of nuclear technology. (I later listened to my dictaphone recording several times, but found nothing of the sort in Rumyantsev’s speech). Russia specifically, noted Sokolov, has many years of experience supplying nuclear fuel to other nations and then guaranteeing the return of spent fuel back to Russian soil — experience that dates back to the Soviet period. Furthermore, the IAEA knows that Russia’s legal code, which allows the importation of spent nuclear fuel, may be of some use, as proposed by Mr. el-Baradei. For this reason, Mr. el-Baradei supports the conference and its aims. Thus, Sokolov was more or less understandable and sincere, as opposed to Mr. Rumyantsev, who earlier had been question by reporters on his opinion of the Greenpeace demonstration and of the confirmation of Rosatom’s desire to construct a nuclear waste isolation plant in Russia. His only answer was, “may these people’s statements remain on their consciences.” This question was repeated twice more later on, but journalists were greeted only by the response that similar facilities for the storage of spent nuclear fuel already exist in the US and in Finland. Sokolov added to Rumyantsev’s answers, stating that the entire volume of spent nuclear fuel from, for example, France, could be squeezed into the space of a basketball court. He was very adamant on this point, repeating that he meant specifically a basketball court, not a football field. Later, much was said about the stable development of various nations, about the development of the nuclear power industry, about the fact that in Russia, public toilets are better lit than the entire nation of Ghana, a country where the demand for energy is 80 watt/hours per capita per annum, about the need to resolve many technical problems and that atomic energy presents the solution. About the creation an international isolation site for spent nuclear fuel in Russia—not a word was said. On the problematic condition of Russia’s nuclear industry—silence. About the existence of poor ecological conditions in the areas near nuclear power plants—nothing. No concrete numbers regarding the amount of spent fuel that has accumulated within Russia were mentioned, nor was the necessity of serious reform throughout the nuclear industry discussed even once. To an awkward question posed by one of the journalists Rumyantsev responded with a reproach, stating, “you’re a journalist, aren’t you? You’re supposed to work with the facts.” Meanwhile, or so it seemed to me, the director himself assiduously avoided the very same facts. Except for one: that the conference had begun. Sokolov further addressed the issue of the overall volume of the world’s spent nuclear fuel, adding that, if one were to gather all the spent fuel assemblies together in one place, they would be roughly equal in size to an average four-story, three-entryway apartment building. And, he continued, if one were to make a prediction for the next few centuries, all of the world’s spent fuel would fit into the space of one football field. Rumyantsev had no comment on the possible location of said football field. At the end of the press-conference, one person noted that the head of Rosatom “catches the ball quite well.” I don’t have any idea what he was talking about, but I can say that Rumyantsev certainly knows how to parry concrete questions with vague answers. For some reason — of course this is out-of-place — I couldn’t help but remember the former head of the Ministry of Atomic Energy, Evgeny Adamov: he was another one that knew how to get away from difficult questions. So far, however, his skills have failed to help him get out from behind bars. 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 ***************************************************************** 47 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca dust suit allowed to continue July 18, 2005 LAS VEGAS SUN A federal class action lawsuit alleging that Yucca Mountain contractors didn't warn workers of the hazards of silica dust can go forward, a federal judge ruled on Friday. U.S. District Judge James Mahan denied a motion brought by Bechtel Corp. and others to dismiss the case, according to Mahan's office. The suit, filed in March 2004, was brought on behalf of former Yucca Mountain employees who were involved in drilling at Yucca or who were allegedly exposed to silica in the Yucca Mountain tunnel. One of the plaintiffs named in the suit, Greg Griego, worked at Yucca Mountain for almost a decade beginning in 1993 and was previously diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease can include chronic bronchitis and emphysema and is caused by tobacco smoke as well as dust and chemicals, according to the federal National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 48 Las Vegas SUN: DOE: Trains destined for Yucca would only carry nuclear waste Today: July 19, 2005 at 11:17:36 PDT By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Trains moving nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain will carry only waste destined for the repository and no other freight, the Energy Department said Monday. The department decided last year it would use its "mostly rail" transportation option, which includes building a 319-mile rail line through Lincoln County, but the department had been largely silent until now about details of its waste-shipping plans. Using what it calls "dedicated train service," the department's train shipments will take only high-level radioactive waste from Energy Department sites and used fuel from commercial reactors. Under the alternative plan, trains could have a spent fuel cask on one car and anything else shipped via train, from cars to cows to carrots, in another. General freight trains could still be used, but the department will prefer the dedicated option to haul waste to the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, according to Monday's announcement. The department said in a document circulated to congressional offices and other stakeholders that dedicated trains will be safer due to strict regulations and less time in transit. The trains will be shorter, which will allow for better monitoring along the routes and less time idling in rail yards. There is also a "significant cost savings" with dedicated trains, according to the department. The Association of American Railroads has not taken a position on whether nuclear waste should be shipped to Yucca Mountain or if it should be shipped by rail. "But if it is going to be shipped by rail, it should move in dedicated trains," said association spokesman Tom White. White said railroads are required by law to move the waste if the government needs it moved. Nuclear waste has been moved by rail in the past and the industry knows how to do it, he said. Nevada officials strongly oppose the proposed repository and do not want to see any shipments come to Nevada, but Bob Loux, executive director of the state's Agency of Nuclear Projects, said dedicated trains are the better option. "DOE had been resistant to the idea," Loux said. "The bigger question is: Why are they announcing this now?" The project still faces numerous legal, regulatory and financial problems that have plagued it since its inception two decades ago. It was supposed to open in 1998, then 2010 and now is not likely to open until 2012 at the earliest. Bob Halstead, the state's transportation consultant, said that as far as Yucca Mountain transportation issues go, the dedicated train question was second only to the matter of whether full-scale testing would be done on the casks in which the waste is to be shipped. "Dedicated trains are a no-brainer," Halstead said. "They should have made a big public announcement with bells and whistles and neon signs and fireworks that they were doing this." Kevin Kamps, spokesman for Nuclear Information and Resource Service, an anti-Yucca group, likewise says that dedicated trains should be the only option. Mixing high-level waste with other freight would be a "disaster in the making," Kamps said. But the Energy Department seems to be leaving itself the option of using mixed-cargo shipments by arguing that both dedicated and mixed shipments are safe, Kamps said. According to the policy statement, "DOE shipments have been and will continue to be made securely using both DTS and general freight service." "They're trying to play both sides of the fence," Kamps said. "They're definitely leaving themselves an out for some reason.' Halstead said this matter has always been a public relations problem for the department because the public seems to prefer dedicated trains but the department never took a position on it. If the department was solely going to use dedicated trains, it would have made a bigger deal out of it. He suspects the timing of the announcement had to do with a National Academy of Sciences meeting this week by a panel studying nuclear waste transportation. The meetings are closed and they are working on a report. He said the department may have also received word that a Transportation Department study on dedicated trains -- which has been going on for 15 years -- may be finished soon. He estimated using dedicated trains could cost up to 40 percent more than the alternative, but the higher costs could even out over time based on using fewer casks and other factors. Department spokesman Craig Stevens said making the decision on the trains now will allow the department to move forward with outreach to states and tribes regarding routing, planning and training. Yucca critics have long complained about the department's lack of notification to potentially affected cities along the routes where waste will be moved. Nevada's congressional delegation does not want to see any trains, dedicated or otherwise, bring waste to Nevada. "The recent attacks in London and last year's train bombings in Madrid should be a stark reminder of the vulnerability of America's rail system," Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said. "Unfortunately, the Bush administration appears perfectly content to move forward on a plan that will paint a giant bull's-eye on shipments of nuclear waste and on the communities through which they will pass. Given the current lack of resources for securing America's rails, this is the height of irresponsibility and will leave our families in danger." Nevada senators said the Energy Department's announcement did not ease their fears about the dangers of shipping waste. "It's not a solution because we don't want the waste coming there in the first place," Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called the DOE policy announcement a "smoke screen" to disguise concerns about transporting tens of thousands of tons of radioactive waste. "What the Department of Energy seems to be missing is that they have nowhere to ship the waste. Yucca Mountain is never going to open," Reid said. "This latest make-believe attempt further demonstrates that there is no real plan. In this so-called policy, DOE turns a blind eye to the most serious of threats like a terrorist attack or accident, and does not bother to factor in that a number of plants cannot ship by rail, nor is there a rail in Nevada running to the proposed site." All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 49 Las Vegas SUN: Porter seeks more Yucca documents Today: July 19, 2005 at 11:17:36 PDT By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Energy Department will be subpoenaed to submit Yucca Mountain project documents, including the draft license application, to a House subcommittee's investigation into potential falsified research at the site. This marks the second subpoena issued by House Government Reform Committee Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., at the request of Rep. Jon Porter. Porter, R-Nev., is chairman of House Federal Workforce and Agency Organization subcommittee, which is conducting the investigation. Porter's subcommittee covers all federal workforce issues, so the alleged employee fraud and project mismanagement falls under his jurisdiction. "It's unfortunate the congressman has chosen this route," said department spokesman Craig Stevens. "All the information he has requested has been available to any member of his subcommittee or staff for three weeks. We feel we have been fully cooperative to the committee." Eric Fygi, the department's acting general counsel, wrote in a letter sent to Porter on Monday that he does not understand how the draft license application falls under Porter's committee's jurisdiction. "This sort of draft document is quite unrelated to those that chronicle activities of federal employees," he wrote. The department had until 4 p.m. Monday to submit the draft and numerous other documents. Porter has been requesting them since April, but the department would only allow him or his staff to go to the department's headquarters building to view certain documents. This was unacceptable to Davis and Porter. "Based upon their track record, there is no doubt in my mind there would have been another excuse," Porter said. "I will use every tool I have available to me. I assume they are hiding something." Porter wants hard copies of the draft license application and other scientific documents to see how science that was potentially compromised by government employees may have worked its way into final research on the project. The department announced in March that it had discovered e-mails written by several U.S. Geological Survey employees that suggest they falsified work on water flow research, a critical safety component to the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Through the subpoena, Porter also wants employment records and organizational charts to know who to interview next, who was in charge during what time periods and figure what was going on that employees felt they had to "fudge" information, as one of the e-mails said. "I am very concerned for the employees. Many have told us they were not aware of the investigation until they read about it in the newspaper," Porter said. He wants to make sure no one was coerced into doing anything or not told information. Porter already subpoenaed Geological Survey scientist Joe Hevesi, one of the e-mail authors, to testify at the June 29 hearing. Hevesi said under oath that he did not falsify any documents. The department agrees Porter can see some of the documents, but does not understand why he needs physical copies, as opposed to viewing them at headquarters, Fygi wrote. Fygi wrote that the department has to balance its responsibilities under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and its responsibility to the committee. The act, the law that guides the Yucca project, protects some documents while requiring others to be made public. Fygi wants to avoid "impairment" of the future Yucca Mountain licensing proceedings by giving documents to a congressional subcommittee "totally outside the legal protections afforded parties before the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act." "It would be as though on the eve of complex civil litigation by the government, a congressional subcommittee demanded documents pertinent to the matter to be tried in court with a view to deciding by itself what documentary materials would be disclosed, instead of the decision being made by the court in accordance with traditional legal safeguards," Fygi wrote. The department will eventually make many more documents public once it finalizes its document collection again, but Nuclear Regulatory Commission judges are still fine tuning what documents get what protection under the law. Fights over Yucca documents have been ongoing since last year. The department said its document database required by law was complete, but Nevada attorneys challenged it and won. Now the department, Nevada and other parties are trying to get on the same page as to what documents need to go into the database and their format. Nevada attorneys today were to appear again before a panel of the commission's Atomic Safety Licensing Board that specifically deals with Yucca issues before the department files its license application. The panel is expected to issue criteria for the database soon, and the department want to finalize the collection by the end of the year at least. Meanwhile, Nevada could get an answer soon in its own quest for the draft license application. Nuclear Regulatory Commission judges want additional and specific information from the department to support its arguments that it does not have to make the draft public. Attorneys for the department and the state appeared before the board last week arguing over the draft. The judges sent a request Monday for specific timelines on who looked at the draft, how it was reviewed and other details. Nevada wants the draft license application to see what final decision the department had prepared for the final version. Decisions on the repository's exact design, safety features and other issues would only be made in the application, so a draft would hold at least clues to where the department was going with the project. If Porter gets the draft application, he said there are legal steps that would have to be satisfied before he could turn it over to the state. "That would have to be determined at that time," Porter said. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 50 Times Herald: lawmakers push for federal takeover of West Valley cleanup Olean, N.Y. - News - 07/19/2005 - County By RICK MILLER, The Times Herald 07/19/2005 LITTLE VALLEY — Three Cattaraugus County lawmakers want the full County Legislature to back a congressional bill for the federal takeover of the West Valley Demonstration Project. District 5 Republican legislators, including Legislature Chairman Gerard “Jess” Fitzpatrick of Ellicottville, Jerry E. Burrell of Franklinville and Gary Felton of Machias, are seeking backing for the bill introduced earlier this month by Rep. John R. “Randy” Kuhl, R-Hammondsport. The West Valley Remediation Act of 2005 would supersede 1980’s West Valley Demonstration Project Act, which successfully cleaned up more than 600,000 gallons of highly-radioactive liquid waste. The radioactive waste was separated from the liquid and mixed with molten glass to form solid logs that are stored in steel containers in the process building. The bill sponsored by Rep. Kuhl, HR 3101, would direct the Department of Energy to take possession of the Western New York Nuclear Service Center and conduct and pay for full cleanup of the site. New York State currently pays 10 percent of the cleanup costs at the former Nuclear Fuel Services nuclear fuel reprocessing site. So far, according to the bill, the state has paid more than $200 million. No environmental impact statement on the scope of the future cleanup has been finalized. The bill states the uncertainty over federal responsibility may impede progress for completion of the cleanup. The bill would also require the DOE to dig up and remove from the site the two huge underground tanks that held the radioactive liquid waste. The DOE is not currently planning to remove the tanks, but has proposed filling them with concrete. The House bill states unless it is cleaned up, the site is likely to erode over the years, with contamination entering local creeks, Cattaraugus Creek and the Great Lakes. The resolution has been referred to the Public Safety and Finance committees, which meet Wednesday at 5:15 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. respectively. If approved, it would go to a vote of the full County Legislature on July 20. ©The Times Herald, Olean, N.Y. 2005 ***************************************************************** 51 AU ABC: Australia Institute doubts waste dump operation. 19/07/2005. ABC News Online "Australian Broadcasting Corporation Online"> Update: Tuesday, July 19, 2005. 7:32am (AEST) The Australia Institute says Territorians are right to worry about the way the Federal Government will run a radioactive waste dump planned for the Northern Territory. The independent policy research centre has released a report that has found the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act has been hopeless at protecting the environment. Research fellow Andrew Macintosh doubts the legislation will result in proper conditions being placed on the Territory's nuclear dump in relation to the transportation and storage of waste. Mr Macintosh says the legislation's track record does not inspire confidence. "It doesn't bode well for the way that this assessment process is going to operate," he said. "I mean I think when you look at how other actions have been dealt with under this process, it's pretty much been through traffic and I think the same thing's going to happen here." Mr Macintosh says in the past five years only 100 projects have had conditions placed on them under the Act. He says there is no reason to think the legislation will be any better applied in the case of the radioactive dump. "I don't think they'll put appropriate restrictions on how the waste is transferred to the Territory and how it is stored, and I also don't think they'll put appropriate conditions on how the whole site is operated," he said. ***************************************************************** 52 AU ABC: Territorians urged not to panic over radioactive waste dump - 19/07/2005 "Australian Broadcasting Corporation Online"> One of Australia's leading nuclear experts is urging Northern Territorians not to panic over a Federal Government plan to build a radioactive waste dump in the Territory. Three suggested sites for a low level dump are to be assessed for their hydrology, geology, Aboriginal heritage and closeness to communities. Dr Ron Cameron, from the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, says while international recommendations suggest it is safer to keep radioactive waste underground, it can be stored in other ways. "I think it's important to remember this is solid material, this is compacted very densely or in concrete," he said. "It's not liquid, so it doesn't flow anywhere even if the drums were to have any problems with them. "And if it's above ground and a drum does deteriorate you can always just repack it. "And water tables is one of the key issues you look at and generally sites with water tables close or nearby wouldn't be suitable for putting it below ground. So clearly those that would be more suitable would be those with deep water tables." ***************************************************************** 53 News & Star: Sellafield scheme saves Ł1m Published on 19/07/2005 By Pamela McGowan SELLAFIELD says it has saved more than Ł1 million since October last year bytargeting existing staff topriority projects. The new mobility process has seen a number of workers temporarily moved to complete key projects, maximising available resources. To date it has seen employees focus on priority work at the Sellafield and Calder Hall sites, as well as the low-level waste repository at Drigg. The British Nuclear Group pilot scheme aims to improve value for money in a bid to keep their current contract. The Sellafield site is now owned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which took over on April 1. But it employs a private contractor – BNG – to run the nuclear plant and its lengthy clean-up process. The mobility process was launched in October 2004 and one of its key projects was the refurbishment of the Magnox reprocessing plant. Thirty additional fitters were drafted in from other parts of the site, along with additional safety support. It meant that the start-up date came sooner than expected and the company completed the work in house, saving hundreds of thousands of pounds on contracts. A bigger initiative is now being planned, using up to 200 workers from Thorp. They will help accelerate the site’s clean-up and assist with priority work, including the Steam Refurbishment project – realising further savings of around Ł400,000. Paul Watson is leading the mobility process. He said: “There was some scepticism about the scheme at the start but people are willingly volunteering to be mobilised now. “As well as the actual savings, there have been other benefits, such as the shared learning and the exchange of ideas across the site.” Head of human resources, Peter Wooley, added that it is an excellent way of managing short term work variations. ***************************************************************** 54 Las Vegas SUN: DOE says dedicated trains to be used for nuclear waste shipments July 18, 2005 By ERICA WERNER ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON (AP) - Nuclear waste will be shipped to a national repository in the Nevada desert on dedicated railroad cars, rather than sharing trains with other cargo, the Energy Department announced Monday. Although general freight trains will be an option, DOE's policy will be to use dedicated trains for the estimated 3,500 shipments of spent nuclear fuel and high-level defense waste bound for the Yucca Mountain repository, the department said. The trains will carry waste from sites in some three dozen states to the repository planned 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. In addition to the train shipments, some 1,100 truck shipments will be needed, though they won't be affected by the transportation policy, officials said. Using dedicated trains will be cheaper and more secure than regular freight trains, department officials said. "The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management is adopting a policy to use dedicated trains for its usual shipments of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to the Yucca Mountain repository site in Nevada, when the repository is operational," Paul M. Golan, the agency's principal deputy director, wrote in a letter released to those involved with the project. Yucca Mountain is planned as a national repository for 77,000 tons of nuclear waste to be buried for 10,000 years and beyond. Funding shortages and other problems - including a recent controversy over possible paperwork fraud on the project - have delayed the opening date, now estimated for 2012 or later. On the Net: Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 55 Las Vegas SUN: Rep. Porter announces subpoena for Yucca Mountain documents July 18, 2005 By ERICA WERNER ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON (AP) - A Nevada congressman said he will subpoena documents from the Energy Department about possible paperwork fraud on the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. The department missed a Monday deadline set by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., to hand over documents, including personnel records of scientists on the project, organizational charts and research details. Porter, who chairs a House Government Reform subcommittee, said he met with the chairman of the full committee, Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., who agreed to subpoena the documents Tuesday. "We have asked for these documents since early April. They have been uncooperative," Porter said. "I'm going to use every tool I have available and turn over every stone to make sure we have all the information." An Energy Department spokesman said Porter and his staff can look at the documents at a department reading room. Department officials have expressed concern that if they give the documents to Porter he will make them public - something he did with the original documents indicating the possibility of fraud on the project. "It's unfortunate that the congressman has chosen to go this route, especially in light of the fact that all the information he has requested has been available to any member of his subcommittee or staff for three weeks," Energy Department spokesman Craig Stevens said. Porter said the offer to come and view the documents was "a continual insult to the U.S. Congress." Porter's panel has been investigating e-mails written from 1998 to 2000 by government scientists that suggest they made up facts and kept two sets of figures, one for themselves and one to satisfy quality assurance officers. The Energy Department disclosed the existence of the e-mails in March, and they are the subject of a scientific review and criminal investigations by the inspectors general of the Energy and Interior departments. Energy Department officials have reached a preliminary conclusion that the e-mails don't undermine the scientific justification for the dump planned for 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. In a letter to Porter on Monday, Energy Department Acting General Counsel Eric Fygi also expressed concerns that the inquiry by Porter threatened "to metastasize without discrete bounds to embrace all current and future Yucca Mountain licensing proceeding matters." Like the rest of the Nevada congressional delegation, Porter opposes Yucca Mountain, and he's been able to use his chairmanship of a subcommittee with jurisdiction over the federal work force and agency organization to mount an investigation. Yucca Mountain was approved by Congress and President Bush in 2002, and is planned as a national repository for 77,000 tons of spent commercial reactor fuel and high-level defense waste, to be buried for 10,000 years in the Nevada desert. Funding shortfalls and other problems, including the document controversy, have delayed the planned opening date to 2012 at the earliest. On the Net: Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 56 [NukeNet] Watchdog Groups Submit Bid for LANL Contract Today Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 18:20:11 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) for more information, contact Jay Coghlan, Director, Nuclear Watch of New Mexico, 505.989.7342 Marylia Kelley, Executive Director, Tri-Valley CAREs, 925.443.7148 for immediate release, July 19, 2005 Watchdog Groups Submit Bid for LANL Contract; Propose Radical Mgt. Changes to Reflect New National Security Priorities Santa Fe, NM. ---- Today, two non-profit organizations well-known as advocates for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) worker health and safety, the environment and nuclear non-proliferation formally submitted a jointly-prepared bid to manage the troubled New Mexico nuclear weapons laboratory by moving it in a new direction, toward cleanup and civilian science missions. Nuclear Watch New Mexico and Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) submitted their management proposal to the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration office in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Two other parties are also expected to submit bids by today's 2 PM mountain time deadline. One of the anticipated bidders, LANL's existing manager, the University of California (UC), has partnered with Bechtel, one of the world's largest construction corporations. That team has named Michael Anatasio, current Director of the Lawrence Livermore Lab (also managed by UC), as its designated director of Los Alamos. The other is Lockheed Martin, the world's largest defense contractor, which has partnered with the University Texas. That team has named Paul Robinson, ex-head of the Sandia National Laboratories, as its LANL Director. Lockheed already manages Sandia and co-manages the British Nuclear Weapons Establishment. Both Robinson and Anatasio have risen through the ranks of the nuclear weapons programs at their respective labs, effectively offering no real alternative to LANL's future missions. The nature of the UC/Bechtel and Lockheed Martin/UT bids to the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) may never be known. The Nuclear Watch New Mexico (NWNM) and Tri-Valley CAREs (TVC) team is making its bid public in order to help facilitate Los Alamos' recovery from its various scandals, direct the Lab toward meeting long-range national security needs, and to challenge our competitors. Rather than naming individuals to specific positions, NWNM/TVC propose to radically revamp the LANL management structure. The change in direction we would institute for LANL's programs flows directly from the revamped structure. Starting at the top, we propose to keep an overall Lab Directorship. Attached to the Director's Office we would add a Chief Officer for Whistleblower Protection. Currently eight Associate Directorships serve under the Director. We would transform Threat Reduction into Nuclear Nonproliferation, responsible for encouraging and verifying compliance with the NonProliferation Treaty at home and abroad. Under that new Associate Directorship we would subordinate Nuclear Weapons Programs, Weapons Physics, and Weapons Remanufacturing. This aligns with our proposed program of maintaining (but not advancing) nuclear weapons while they await dismantlement. We would also create a new Associate Directorship for Dismantlements. We propose to elevate both Environmental Restoration and Science to new Associate Directorships. The former would expedite comprehensive cleanup at LANL, in close cooperation with the New Mexico Environment Department. The latter would help restore "great science" at the Lab, with emphases on resolving pressing national and international security needs such as sustainable energy independence and addressing global climate change. Jay Coghlan, NWNM Executive Director, admitted, "In some cases we'll probably not see eye-to-eye with the NNSA, particularly on nuclear weapons programs. Nevertheless, we are hopeful that the agency will see the soundness of our basic approach of truly discouraging by concrete example the grave threat of nuclear weapons proliferation. Combined with the cost savings, diligence and integrity that we will bring to Lab management, we are confident that the NNSA and the nation will be pleased with our management sometime in the future." According to Marylia Kelley, Executive Director of the Livermore, California-based Tri-Valley CAREs, "One of our overarching goals is to illuminate the options that are available to all who are bidding for the LANL management contract. For example, our management proposal protects and values whistleblowers, and we challenge our competitors to do the same. Our proposal boosts the profile and footprint of the civilian sciences at LANL, and we call on our competitors to demonstrate how they, if chosen, would attract world-class science and scientists. Further, our bid emphasizes community participation and cleanup of the Cold War legacy of radioactive and toxic pollution at LANL. We fear that both our competitors will propose 'business as usual,' and we submit our bid to assert that LANL workers and the public deserve better." Although they too are nonprofit organizations, the NWNM/TVC team would voluntarily pay an estimated $80 million annually in New Mexico gross receipts taxes, nearly half of which goes to public education. UC has never paid taxes to New Mexico. In order to promote real management accountability, the NWNM/TVC team has declined indemnification from occupational and nuclear safety, fiscal management and environmental violations. Moreover, our team will not accept reimbursement of legal costs for whistleblower cases decided against us (contractors have had a virtually unlimited war chest to fight against whistleblowers). If our competitors truly want to embrace public service, they should pledge to do the same. -- 30 -- The NWNM/TVC bid and current and proposed LANL management organizational charts are available at www.nukewatch.org and www.trivalleycares.org. Marylia Kelley Executive Director Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) 2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA USA 94551 - is our web site address. Please visit us there! (925) 443-7148 - is our phone (925) 443-0177 - is our fax _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 57 Albuquerque Tribune: Los Alamos bidders tout their strengths Teams turn in proposals today By Sue Vorenberg Tribune Reporter July 19, 2005 The packages didn't come from Santa Claus, but officials will find a host of freshly delivered boxes this morning at the National Nuclear Security Administration's Albuquerque office. Their contents: Reams and reams of paper from the two teams bidding for the contract to operate Los Alamos National Laboratory. Their purpose: To explain why, exactly, either team should be given the lab's $79 million annual fee. Those teams, one led by the University of California and Bechtel Corp., the other led by Lockheed Martin and the University of Texas, had to hand in final proposals to operate the lab this morning. THE BIDDERS Two main bidders will vie for the $79 million annual fee to run Los Alamos National Laboratory. They are: University of California and Bechtel Corp. UC has managed the lab since it was founded in the 1940s. It is the nation's largest university system and also operates Lawrence Livermore and Lawrence Berkeley national laboratories. Bechtel is an international engineering, construction and project management company with $17.4 billion in revenues in 2004. UC and Bechtel would split lab management duties 50-50, with the help of minor partners. Lockheed Martin and the University of Texas UT is the nation's second-largest university system. Lockheed is the lead partner in the deal, with UT heading up the academic component of the team. Lockheed is primarily an international defense contractor with strengths in information technology, systems integration and training. It also runs Sandia National Laboratories. Lockheed reported 2004 sales of $35.5 billion. The work involved more than 50 people on either side, with the added input of more experts. The result is dozens of boxes that contain 20 copies of the report, which the agency will review. "We have somewhere between 30 and 40 boxes we're dropping off," said C. Paul Robinson, head of the Lockheed Martin team. "It can only be said that it's a herculean effort to write one of these things." Robinson this year stepped down as director of Sandia National Laboratories, which is operated by Lockheed Martin, to head the company's bid team. His competitor, Michael Anastasio, kept his job as director of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory while heading the UC team. One of the two men will become the new director of Los Alamos when a winner is decided Dec. 1. Both sides say it's their management teams, which include partnerships between businesses and universities, that set them apart and will help them fix managerial and business problems at the lab. "It was a fascinating process for me personally to get involved in a big competition like this," said Anastasio. "This is a brand-new team for the University of California. We believe it's a real partnership with Bechtel Corp. and UC, and our teammates BWX Technologies and Washington Group International." The University of California on its own has operated the lab for the past 62 years, but a series of scandals including missing classified material - which turned out to be an accounting error - and fraudulent use of purchasing cards led to the NNSA's decision to put the lab's operating contract up for bid for the first time in its history. "I think the place has suffered a lot over the last few years from a wide variety of incidents," Robinson said. "Certainly the shutdown (of the lab by Director Pete Nanos last fall because of the scandals) did not do well for them. I think the standard things I've got to do if we win is standard for any chief executive. We've got to earn the trust of the people, put forth a vision and follow it up with real leadership." Anastasio agrees that leadership is important at the lab. He added that firming up management and looking forward will be key to fixing morale problems related to the scandals and the bidding process. "Change is hard, no matter who you are, where you are or what it's about," Anastasio said. "That's difficult, but it's also the thing that promises an exciting future. I think Los Alamos will need to stop obsessing on the past and focus on the future. People at Los Alamos are excited at the opportunity to work on grand challenges and projects in the national interest. That's really why we're all here." No matter who wins, that change will be very real at the lab. Either way, it will be run by a limited liability corporation created by both business and academic partners. Lockheed's team includes two other industrial partners, CH2M Hill and Fluor Corp, but it has also put together a dream team of powerhouse universities to keep the focus on science at the labs, Robinson said. "Working with the University of Texas, we formed an LLC to manage the lab called the Los Alamos Alliance, and part of that is the Alliance Academic Network," Robinson said. "We have a list of about 30 universities that have joined us, including Johns Hopkins, the University of Colorado, University of Arizona, University of Michigan, Georgia Tech and others." The alliance is also courting MIT and Cal Tech, Robinson said. New Mexico's three major research universities have signed a partnership with the University of California team, but Robinson said if Lockheed wins, they would also be welcomed into the alliance. "We have assured the university presidents and regents that our network is an open network and that they are invited in whenever they are able to do so," Robinson said. "Those universities which we asked to join have expertise in relevant fields for Los Alamos. Those are physics, engineering, mathematics, computer science, materials science, nuclear engineering and geophysics. We tried to pick the best the country has." UC's team will draw on the largest university system in the country and will include corporate management partners that have the knowledge to fix the problems that led to NNSA's decision to bid the contract, Anastasio said. "We have extraordinary expertise in science and technology, but we're also bringing in partners to help address the areas we need to strengthen," Anastasio said. "That's around management, business and other functional areas." The next step for both candidates, which likely will happen in late August, will be to bone up for oral exams administered by NNSA, they said. "They'll have four questions for each of us as a team - at least that's what I understand at this point," Anastasio said. "They'll want to see how the team works together and what kind of leadership I provide, as well as what sort of answers we come up with." Both groups likely will pore over their own copies of the request for proposal, making sure all team members are familiar with what their side is offering, Anastasio and Robinson said. "We'll be making sure we can all recite the key provisions, and we'll be preparing for what we assume will be the selection board's version of Super Jeopardy," Robinson said. "There's one question the lab director has to respond to alone, while the rest will be for the team. So I'll be eating my Wheaties in preparation for that one." ***************************************************************** 58 Seattle Times: Hanford plant gets deadline for plan to end construction Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - Page updated at 12:00 AM The Associated Press RICHLAND  Officials with the U.S. Department of Energy at south-central Washington's Hanford nuclear reservation must submit an outline by Sept. 2 for halting work on the massive waste-treatment plant at the site, according to a memo by agency officials in Washington, D.C. The plant is the federal government's largest construction project, but skyrocketing costs forced the department to announce plans to halt some construction late last month. The move came as a congressional subcommittee requested an investigation into the rising costs of the plant, which is being built to treat millions of gallons of radioactive waste left from Cold War-era nuclear-weapons production. The Energy Department's Office of River Protection must submit a comprehensive plan to agency headquarters outlining an orderly halt to construction on the plant. The plan is due Sept. 2, said Charles Anderson, principal deputy assistant secretary for environmental management, in a memo to Roy Schepens, manager of the Office of River Protection. The memo also makes clear that any future decisions about key facilities for the plant will be handled in Washington, D.C., rather than at Hanford offices. In addition, all work authorizations and technical directions related to facilities that will handle highly radioactive waste will require Anderson's written approval, the memo said. Earlier this year, the Energy Department began to study the plant's design and cost estimate after a scientific review found that the force of the ground movements at the plant site during a severe earthquake would be 38 percent greater than previously estimated. Agency officials have said they are still working on new construction costs in light of those problems. The plant's cost was estimated at $4.35 billion before the contract was awarded in 2000. Already, the cost has grown more than 30 percent  to $5.8 billion. Congressional leaders have said the new problems could push the estimated cost closer to $10 billion and delays its start by four years. Under a cleanup pact signed by the Energy Department, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Washington state, the waste-treatment plant must be built by 2009 and fully operating by 2011. Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company ***************************************************************** 59 Olympian: Hanford officials face deadline on plan to halt plant construction Olympia, Washington Tuesday July 19, 2005 Tuesday July 19, 2005 THE ASSOCIATED PRESS RICHLAND -- Officials with the U.S. Department of Energy at south-central Washington's Hanford nuclear reservation must submit an outline by Sept. 2 for halting work on the massive waste treatment plant at the site, according to a memo by agency officials in Washington, D.C. The plant is the federal government's largest construction project, but skyrocketing costs forced the department to announce plans to halt some construction late last month. The move came as a congressional subcommittee requested an investigation into the rising costs of the plant, which is being built to treat millions of gallons of radioactive waste left from Cold War-era nuclear weapons production. The Energy Department's Office of River Protection must submit a comprehensive plan to agency headquarters outlining an orderly halt to construction on the plant. The plan is due Sept. 2, said Charles Anderson, principal deputy assistant secretary for environmental management, in a memo to Roy Schepens, manager of the Office of River Protection. The memo also makes clear that any future decisions about key facilities for the plant will be handled in Washington, D.C., rather than at Hanford offices. In addition, all work authorizations and technical directions related to facilities that will handle highly radioactive waste will require Anderson's written approval, the memo said. Earlier this year, the Energy Department began to study the plant's design and cost estimate after a scientific review found that the force of the ground movements at the plant site during a severe earthquake would be 38 percent greater than previously estimated. Agency officials have said they are still working on new construction costs in light of those problems. The plant's cost was estimated at $4.35 billion before the contract was awarded in 2000. Already, the cost has grown more than 30 percent -- to $5.8 billion. Congressional leaders have said the new problems could push the estimated cost closer to $10 billion and delays its start by four years. Under the Tri-Party agreement, a cleanup pact signed by the Energy Department, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Washington state, the vitrification plant must be built by 2009 and fully operating by 2011 following two years of testing. "The Waste Treatment Plant is central to fulfilling our obligations under the Tri-Party Agreement and a key part of our overall cleanup strategy at Hanford," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said in a prepared statement released Friday. "We are committed to its completion." For 40 years, the Hanford reservation made plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal. Today, work there centers on a $50 billion to $60 billion cleanup, to be finished by 2035. Much of the cleanup involves treating 53 million gallons of highly radioactive waste stewing in 177 aging underground tanks less than 10 miles from the Columbia River. The waste treatment plant will use a process called vitrification to turn the waste into glass logs for permanent disposal in a nuclear waste repository. ©2005 The Olympian ***************************************************************** 60 lamonitor.com: LANL contract bids are in The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor The Lockheed Martin partnership with the University of Texas system will include a consortium of 30 additional academic partners, their spokesman said today. The University of California-Bechtel partnership's new entity will be known as LANS (Los Alamos National Security, LLC), they reported. Proposals are due today in the competition to manage and operate Los Alamos National Laboratory, a role UC has played for more than six decades. Michael Anastasio, leading the LANS effort, said the UC-Bechtel proposal was delivered Monday to the prescribed office in Albuquerque. "We got a receipt and a picture," he said. C. Paul Robinson, the Lockheed Martin team's capture executive for the contract, said his team's basic package was delivered today and included 20 copies of the proposal in 30 large boxes. Robinson said the University of Texas System had led an effort to bring in a national consortium of educational research institutions, ranked by prominence and relevance to the LANL mission. The list, which was still being finalized before the 2 p.m. MDT deadline, includes Purdue, Johns Hopkins, Arizona and Arizona State, Colorado and Colorado School of Mines, Florida and Florida State, the Universities of Michigan and Wisconsin, Georgia Tech, and Carnegie Mellon, as well as Texas Tech and Rice University. "We have put on the table some real proposals and plans of how to raise the level of science at Los Alamos," Robinson said in a telephone interview today. "We jumpstart the acceleration of new technical ideas with a much larger network of great minds than the laboratory has used in the past." He said no New Mexico Universities are included because they have signed proprietary agreements with LANS, but that the intention is to create an open network, which the New Mexico schools will be invited to join should the Lockheed-UTS bid win. Anastasio, speaking by telephone today, said the LANS proposal was still a sensitive document because of the competition. "There are still a number of opportunities for each of the teams to take advantage," he said. On making the case for scientific excellence, Anastasio said, "Clearly, we're building on the excellence that exists there that UC has brought for 62 years. We have brought together experts committed to safety and technology and scientists committed to efficiency and sound management to do even more of the outstanding work that has been done in the past." Anastasio said his team had not encountered any insurmountable problems in putting their bid together. "We have the best team," he said, "people working at six of the eight National Nuclear Security sites." The National Nuclear Security Administration oversees the nuclear weapons complex for the Department of Energy and is responsible for the competition. To bolster criticism of management and operations problems at the laboratory, particularly during the most recent five-year contract period, LANS has partnered with BWX Technologies and Washington Group International. The Lockheed Martin-UTS partnership, in addition to the expanded consortium of universities, includes corporate partnerships with Fluor Corporation and CH2M Hill. According to the NNSA guidelines, both bids will be submitted by limited liability corporations, entities that are separate from their parent institutions and companies. Robinson addressed concerns that the governance of LANL by a profitmaking corporation might compromise the integrity of the laboratory's science. "The limited liability corporation will not make a profit of any kind; the members that have put this together will be paid a fee, depending only on how the laboratory operates and fulfills its mission," he said. "There is nothing under the control of a profitmaking institution." Robinson said he encountered many more problems that he anticipated at LANL and that the Lockheed Martin-UTS proposal includes a plan to open discussions with the workforce immediately, if they win the contract, "to get people enthused about their future again." He said an aspect of the proposal called for laying out ways to improve processes and save money in operating LANL. "We found a truly target-rich environment," he said. "If there is a surprise, it's how much can be saved in area after area." Anastasio said the proposal preparation process had demonstrated the shared values of the UC-Bechtel team. "We're in this for the service of the nation," he said. Each team will have a day of oral examinations in which they will, among other things, be given illustrative problems to solve. An award is expected in early December, to be followed by a six-month transition period. The current UC contract, set to expire September 30, has been extended to May 31, 2006, and the new contractor is supposed to take charge on June 1. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 61 lamonitor.com: Little Boy returns home The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor One of the icons of the Manhattan Project, a replica of the Little Boy atomic weapon, was restored to the Bradbury Museum Monday. The museum had displayed the weapons casing since moving into the building on Central Avenue, but it was removed after national security concerns heightened in the wake of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The casing, like the one housing the first atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in Japan on Aug. 6, 1945, was removed from a display and placed in classified storage at Los Alamos National Laboratory. "We've been without a Little Boy since then," said John S. Rhodes, the museum director. Last year the museum began a process of trying to have a replica fabricated, he said. It was not an easy job, since it meant providing enough detail for the craftsman to do the work, but without providing classified blueprints. Synthetic Authentics of Alba, Texas, handled the assignment. Little Boy is also known as the gun assembly device or the uranium weapon, distinct from the Fat Man, plutonium device that was exploded over Nagasaki on Aug. 9, 1945. On display with the new Little Boy replica will be two of the original safing plugs that were used to keep the Hiroshima weapon safe during take off and transit. The safing plugs are on loan until September from Clay Perkins, a private collector and physicist who acquired them at an auction. Rhodes said visitors have been wondering where the Little Boy, after it was removed three years ago. "Part of a museum's role is to present objects of our material culture and we only had a photograph," he said. Little Boy is on permanent display starting today, restored to its previous setting with refurbished panels and explanatory information. The Bradbury Museum has about 85,000 visitors a year, both members of the public and official visitors. The museum hosts visits from schools and conducts outreach with its Science on Wheels program. © 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: *****************************************************************