*****************************************************************
07/20/05 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 13.166
*****************************************************************
   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 Asia Times: Change of Iran's nuclear guard
2 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Bush Hopes Kim Jong-il to See 'Common Sen
3 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Top U.S. officials sidestep meeting on North'
4 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Talks participants want format change, Ban sa
5 Xinhua: S. Korea expects nuke talks to produce stronger agreement   
6 Xinhua: Russia calls for acceptable compromises at six-party talks  
7 US: [NYTr] Yanks, Watch Out: A Nuke Terror 'Exercise' Set for
8 US: Message to the New Manhattan Project
9 US: Follow the Uranium
10 The Hindu: No sanctity about Bush promise - nuclear experts 
11 US: space.com: Vandenberg to Kwajalien ICBM launch Thursday at 3pm
12 Rediff: US papers blast nuke deal
13 Guardian Unlimited: America to aid India's nuclear power project
14 US: UCS: Last Gasp to Undermine Global Warming
15 Indian Express:  Bush's bold new gamble
16 Indian Express: N-deal a win-win for India, says Singh
17 Asia Times: US opens can of nuclear worms
18 csmonitor.com: Why US is shifting nuclear stand with India 
19 AU ABC: US makes nuclear deal with India
20 India Post: INDIA ACCORDED NEAR NUCLEAR STATUS
21 Times of India: Bush will do it for a Nuclear India
22 [NukeNet] Portugal rejects nuke, goes for wind
23 Times of India: Nuclear-sub project gathers steam- 
24 Hindu: Nuclear deal will lead to a quantum jump - officials 
25 Rediff: India: The nuclear deal
26 BBC: US reports China missile build-up
27 BBC: India media upbeat on US nuclear deal
28 PRI: Nuclear experts give guarded response to Indo-US pact
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
29 US: NCSU Tech: Campus reactor leads the way in 'nuclear renaissance'
30 Xinhua: Ukraine shuts down two nuclear reactors due to malfunctions 
31 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting of the AC
32 Indian Express: Not just Tarapur, other reactors too will get US fue
33 US: The Mercury: Limerick cooling tower shuts itself down
34 US: Middletown Press: Connecticut Yankee vows to keep public informe
35 US: Guardian Unlimited: N.Y. Nuke Sirens Temporarily Deactivated
36 US: PRN: Platts: Nuclear Fuel Strategies Conference to Feature Congr
37 US: CBC News: Power plants worried as heat wave warms Great Lakes
38 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Final NRC decision on Yankee uprate remain
39 Indiatimes: We dont need anybodys help to run our reactors
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
40 UN Atomic Watchdog Uses Satellite Feed To Verify Peaceful Use Of Nuc
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
41 [NYTr] UN Using Satellite Images to Track Nuclear Material
42 [du-list]  Depleted uranium
43 US: Monterey County Herald: Fire threatens lab, homes
44 US: Daily Press: Whistle-blower filing details evidence 
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
45 US: Bradenton Herald: Lockheed drilling two additional wells
46 US: AU ABC: Mining company to search for uranium in NT
47 Las Vegas SUN: DOE: Yucca document collection facing another
48 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Senate rebuffs plan to hire lawyers to handle
49 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Notice of Meeting
50 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Meeting on Planning an
51 KVBC: Potentially Damaging Yucca Mountain Information Subpoenaed By 
52 US: Courier-Mail: Death mine to stay closed 
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
53 [NukeNet] Article on 3 bidders for weapons lab manager
54 DOE: Office of Science; Notice of Renewal of the High Energy Physics
55 Santa Fe New Mexican: Lab-management contenders submit bids     
56 Tri-City Herald: Plutonium residues cleared out from plant 
57 Olympian: Hanford workers finish key plutonium removal
58 Tennessean: Hiroshima A-bomb model replaced - 
59 Guardian Unlimited: Los Alamos Bids Submitted to Energy Dept.
60 lamonitor.com: Anti-nuke groups enter bid 
61 Colorado Daily: Los Alamos in CU sights
62 Daily Texan: UT, Lockheed submit lab bid - The 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 Asia Times: Change of Iran's nuclear guard

 Middle East News, Iraq, Iran current affairs
 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		
By Safa Haeri 

PARIS - The European Three (EU3 - Germany, Britain and France)
who have been engaged for more than two years in hard
negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, should be
prepared for a possible change in attitude in Tehran once the
president-elect, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, officially takes over early
next month, Iranian analysts have said. 

They note the presence of Ali Larijani at a meeting between
Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari and Ahmadinejad on Monday. 

"Mr Ahmadinejad asked me to be present at the meeting as an
adviser," Larijani told the independent Sharq (East) newspaper,
adding that "in the past I've served him in matters of foreign
affairs". 

Larijani was one of only a handful of candidates allowed to
stand in Iran's recent presidential elections. The
conservatives-backed candidate, a former head of the
state-controlled Radio and Television, fared poorly behind the
top two winners in the first round, who then went into a runoff
before Ahmadinejad emerged as the winner. 

Now Larijani is being tipped as a possible foreign affairs
minister, as well as secretary to the Supreme Council on
National Security (SCNS), replacing Hasan Rohani, or even first
vice president. 

"Either way, he would serve as one of the closest aides to
Ahmadinejad in matters of foreign relations," Sharq speculated,
observing that Larijani was standing "shoulder-to-shoulder" with
the president-elect. 

The only candidate to urge his supporters to vote for
Ahmadinejad in the second round of the presidential elections,
Larijani has been a tough critic of the way in which Iran has
been conducting talks with the EU3, and has suggested, without
further explanation, "new paths and approaches". 

"We gave the Europeans pure jewels and got bonbons instead," he
famously once said, also saying that in the matter of foreign
relations, Iran must talk from a position of strength. 

If, as expected - and his presence at the Jaafari-Ahmadinejad
meeting is seen as confirmation - Larijani is named as the head
of Iran's diplomacy, or as secretary of the SCNS, he will be
involved with the EU3. The Europeans can then expect some hard
bargaining over suspicions that Iran is trying to develop
nuclear weapons, and its temporary suspension of
uranium-enriching activities, Iranian analysts pointed out. 

"Though Mr Rohani and other senior officials have repeated that
the change of government and even presidents does not concern
the nuclear issue, the nomination of Mr Larijani as foreign
affairs minister or secretary of the SCNS indicates serious
changes," Sharq commented, adding that Rohani had suggested that
the nuclear file be transferred to the Foreign Affairs Ministry. 

Mohammad Hussein Moussavian, a senior Iranian negotiator with
the EU3, has advised the incoming government to continue talks
with the EU3 "even if they ask for further suspension of
uranium-enriching activities". He also said that the Europeans
should take "an active part" in Iran's project to build 20
nuclear reactors for energy. 

"We plan to build 20 nuclear reactors. In case the Europeans, in
their proposals, agree to support this project and guarantee the
sustained supply of fuel for the reactors, we should welcome it.
But in case they insist on a permanent suspension of enriching
uranium, we must strongly reject this, but not interrupt the
negotiations, since we are very close to reaching an agreement,"
said Moussavian, the head of the foreign policy department of
the SCNS. 

Originally, Tehran intended to build six atomic electricity
power stations, one of which, situated in the Persian Gulf port
of Bushehr, is near completion with the help of Russia at a cost
of US$800 million. 

But in a defiant move against American and Israeli pressure on
its nuclear ambitions, the present conservative-controlled
majlis, or parliament, urged the outgoing government of
President Mohammad Khatami to consider the construction of 20
power plants, a proposal that has been reiterated to the
president-elect. 

In negotiations over the past few years with both the EU3 and
the United Nations watchdog, the International Atomic Energy
Agency, Rohani and his team have agreed to temporarily stop
enriching uranium, an important step in producing nuclear energy
and also in making atomic weapons. Iran also agreed to sign the
Additional Protocols to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,
allowing inspectors to visit any nuclear sites and projects
without restriction and on short notice. In return, Iran has
been offered various economic sweeteners, including "assistance"
in joining the World Trade Organization. 

"The Europeans may ask for a continuation of the suspension of
uranium activities ... but they could be waiting for the next
Iranian government," Moussavian said, hinting that the present
negotiating team could be changed as Rohani's mission ends with
that of Khatami. 

Contacted by Asia Times Online, a source close to the EU3
delegation confirmed that it was indeed waiting for the new
government to be installed. 

Although the president-elect has repeated that mega-projects
like the nuclear one or the main aspects of foreign policy are
decided "not by presidents but by the leader" (Supreme Leader
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the last word on every major
domestic or foreign issue), Ahmadinejad has also stated that he
would "under no conditions" yield to international pressure to
stop permanently the uranium-enriching process. 

In an interview with the Iranian Student News Agency, Ali Aqa
Mohammadi, the spokesman for the SCNS, said, "All Iran has to do
in the Wednesday [July 20] meeting in London is to remove the
wrong interpretation the European side has about the next
government and its policy concerning the nuclear issue. The
macro policies of the Islamic republic are decided in a
collegial form supervised by the leader and do not change with
government," he stated. 

On Tuesday, though, Khatami warned that there would be no
bargaining over Iran's peaceful nuclear programs,
state-television network IRIB reported. "There will be no
bargain and no incentive whatsoever can make us give up pursuing
our peaceful nuclear programs," Khatami said. 

The EU3 are expected to offer Iran a package by the end of
August that will include European conditions for reaching an
agreement or taking the issue to the United Nations Security
Council, as demanded by Washington. 

Eager to enter the lucrative nuclear market in Iran worth
billions of dollars, Europe is afraid that because of American
pressure the West might loose ground to Russia. In interviews
with The Asia Times Online, some Iranian negotiators have
indicated their preference for Western nuclear technology over
that of Russia, and said that Tehran had no objection to
American constructors bidding for future Iranian nuclear
reactors alongside Europe. 

Safa Haeri is a Paris-based Iranian journalist covering the
Middle East and Central Asia. 

(Copyright 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
 																	
Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110 											  
*****************************************************************
 2 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Bush Hopes Kim Jong-il to See 'Common Sense' at Next Week's
 
  Home> National/Politics    Updated July.20,2005 14:09 KST   
 
  Bush Hopes Kim Jong-il to See 'Common Sense' at Next Week's
Nuke Talks
   
  U.S. President George W. Bush says he hopes the upcoming round
of six-party talks aimed at dismantling Pyongyang's nuclear
pursuit would help bring common sense to North Korean leader Kim
Jong-il. Mr. Bush's remarks came while discussing the North's
nuclear issue with visiting Australian Prime Minister John
Howard at the White House. 

At the meeting, the U.S. President reiterated that Washington
had clearly expressed to North Korea that all participating
nations in the six-way dialogue are committed to solving the
issue diplomatically. Mr. Bush also said he believes that
Australia could help influence China to convince Kim Jong-il to
scrap his nuclear program. 

Arirang News 

  
*****************************************************************
 3 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Top U.S. officials sidestep meeting on North's rights
 
July 21, 2005 KST 13:29 (GMT+9)

  July 21, 2005 ぱ WASHINGTON ！ A one-day, U.S.
government-funded conference on North Korea's human rights
situation took place here Tuesday, but senior American officials
did not attend in an apparent sign that the Bush administration
hopes to avoid irritating Pyongyang on the eve of the resumption
of the six-party nuclear disarmament talks.

 Freedom House, a non-profit U.S. rights organization, hosted
the conference, titled "Freedom for All Koreans." The U.S. State
Department provided nearly $2 million so the event could be
held. Representatives from more than 50 groups in South Korea
and the United States attended. 

More than 1,000 politicians, rights activists, officials and
North Korean defectors urged the international community to pay
as much attention to Pyongyang's rights abuses as it does to the
communist regime's nuclear arms programs.

 Pyongyang was quick to complain about the gathering. 
The North's state-run Korea Central News Agency issued a
statement, warning that Washington's support for the conference
threatened a rupture in the agreement to reconvene the
six-nation talks. 

Missing at the event were U.S. State Department officials,
despite its large financial contribution. Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice had initially planned to attend, but canceled.
Nor did Jay Lefkowitz, the nominee for the U.S. envoy for North
Korea human rights, make an appearance because the White House
postponed his official appointment just before the conference
opened. 

Paula Dobriansky, under secretary of state for global affairs,
spoke at the conference, but she was moderate in her remarks.
Presenting a satellite photograph showing how dark North Korea
is at night for lack of power and lighting, Ms. Dobriansky said
North Korea's darkness symbolizes a challenge to people who
pursue freedom.

 Natan Sharansky, a former Israeli cabinet minister and author
of "The Case for Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome
Tyranny and Terror," cautioned Seoul not to rely on a policy of
engagement with the North. He said human rights issues should be
one of the main topics at the six-party talks next week. 

Representative Chung Eui-young of the Uri Party defended Seoul's
policy. "The South Korean government's aid is not to lengthen
the lifespan of the North Korean regime, but it is to support
North residents," he said.

by Kang Chan-ho, Ser Myo-ja myoja@joongang.co.kr>   
	  
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
 4 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Talks participants want format change, Ban says
 
July 21, 2005 KST 13:29 (GMT+9)

   
  July 21, 2005 ぱ Participants in next week's six-party
negotiations on North Korea's nuclear weapons programs agree
that a new format is needed, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban
Ki-moon said yesterday. 

"In order to reach real progress, participants in the talks have
concluded that changing the format of the talks is unavoidable,
" Mr. Ban said.

 "Thus, we are planning to extend the duration of the talks, and
we are actively pursuing the possibility of two- or three-day
recesses, in case delegates need to consult with their
governments," he said.

 It had already been announced that the talks, which start
Tuesday in Beijing, will not have a predetermined closing date.

Mr. Ban added yesterday that participants want a format that
clearly allows for bilateral negotiations on the sidelines. 
Since August 2003, three rounds of the six-party talks, which
involve both Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia,
have been held, with little apparent progress made in persuading
Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear weapons programs.

 Mr. Ban said North Korea's delegation, which is to arrive in
Beijing this weekend, will be informed of the other five
countries' desire for a format change in preliminary meetings
before the main talks.

 Meanwhile yesterday, Pyongyang launched a verbal barrage at
Tokyo, saying that its participation in the talks would not be
helpful. Pyongyang said Tokyo had disrupted past rounds by
insisting on raising the issue of Japanese citizens abducted by
North Korea. "Even when Japan participates at future six-party
talks, there is little work for it to do," the North's state-run
Korean Central News Agency said yesterday.

 Seoul yesterday welcomed Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro
Koizumi's Tuesday statement that he wants to normalize ties with
Pyongyang during his term, but only after the nuclear issue and
the abductee issue have been resolved. 

by Brian Lee africanu@joongang.co.kr>   
	  
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
 5 Xinhua: S. Korea expects nuke talks to produce stronger agreement   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-07-20 16:13:53   

    SEOUL, July 20 (Xinhuanet) -- South Korea hopes the upcoming
round of six-party nuclear talks produce a more binding
agreement than the documents adopted by the previous sessions,
said South Korean foreign minister Wednesday. 

    "We will try to reach a stronger form of agreement than a
chairman's statement," Ban Ki-moon said to reporters in his
weekly press briefing. 

    Ban's remarks came one day after the announcement that the
fourth round of the six-party talks aimed to resolve the nuclear
issue on the Korean Peninsula will be resumed on July 26 in
Beijing. 

    The South Korean foreign minister also said other countries
have agreed to Seoul's proposal of having longer negotiations
and introducing more effective dialogue settings in the fourth
round of the talks. 

    The previous three rounds of six-party talks, attended by
China,the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), the
United States, Russia, South Korea and Japan, lasted three or
four days every time. 

    The second and third round talks ended respectively with a
chairman's summary and a chairman's statement. 

    The nuclear talks had been suspended since last September,
when the scheduled fourth round of the meeting failed to be
convened as the DPRK refused to come to the talks, citing the US
hostile policy toward the DPRK. Enditem   

  Copyright �2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 6 Xinhua: Russia calls for acceptable compromises at six-party talks   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-07-21 03:57:54   

    MOSCOW, July 20 (Xinhuanet) -- Russia calls for mutually
acceptable compromises at the forthcoming six-party negotiations
on nuclear program of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
(DPRK), Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko
said on Wednesday. 

    The fourth round of the talks among the DPRK, South Korea,
Russia, China, the United States, and Japan is scheduled in
Beijing on July 26. 

    "We think that in principle there is the basis for a
constructive dialogue: the agreements and arrangements reached
at the previous three meetings in Beijing," Yakovenko said. 

    In his words, "The main purpose is to find mutually
acceptable solutions through substantive discussions by taking
into account the interests of all sides." 

    "The current format of the talks allows the participants to
raise and solve any issues of concern to them that are related
to the resolution of the nuclear problem," Yakovenko said. 

    Commenting on the resumption of the six-party talks,
Yakovenko said, "Russia's proposal remains one of the priority
ones. Its elements coincide with the offers of other
participants and may beused during decision-making." 

    "There is no other way, but a patient and interested
dialogue. It should take into account concerns of all sides and
be aimed to ensure a nuclear-free status on the Korean
Peninsula," the Russian diplomat said. 

    The new round of the six-party talks should be resulted in
signing a joint document, Yakovenko thought, saying "We hope
that the sides will exert maximum effort to make the new round
of talks successful in order to adopt a joint document." 

    Taking part in the six-party talks Russia will be
represented by Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Alexeyev,
according to the spokesman. 

    The six parties have had three rounds of talks since Aug.
2003,but the process had stalled for growing tension of the
relations between DPRK and the United States. 

    The decision to restart the six-party talks was made through
consultations with all relevant parties, and declared in Beijing
on Tuesday. Enditem        

  Copyright �2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 7 [NYTr] Yanks, Watch Out: A Nuke Terror 'Exercise' Set for
 
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:37:29 -0500 (CDT)

 
Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
sent by Mark Graffis (activ-l)

adapted from http://www.rense.com/general67/eex.htm

In August... a military 'exercise' is to take place which simulates a
nuclear weapon smuggled from a ship off the coast of Charleston, South
Carolina by terrorsts who attempt to detonate it on U.S. shores. Neither the
place of the "detonation" (hints at SC) nor the day in August of the
exercise were given.

The exercise is being orchestrated out of Fort Monroe, [Virginia].

Northcom website - June 29, 2005
http://www.northcom.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.showstory&storyid=C9BFBBAC-F3CA-BD2E-008C7B34AFE33114

Press Release

Exercise to focus on nuclear terror scenario

FORT MONROE, Va. -- Here's the scenario: A seafaring vessel transporting a
10-kiloton nuclear warhead makes its way into a port off the coast of
Charleston, S.C. Terrorists aboard the ship attempt to smuggle the warhead
off the ship to detonate it. Is this really a possibility?

Joint Task Force Civil Support (JTF-CS) here is planning its next exercise
on the premise that this crisis is indeed plausible.

Sudden Response 05 will take place this August on [sic] Fort Monroe and will
be carried out as an internal command post exercise. The exercise is
intended to train the JTF-CS staff to plan and execute Consequence
Management [CM] operations in support of Federal Emergency Management Agency
Region IVs response to a nuclear detonation.

Some of this years objectives for SR05 are to refine nuclear incident
Concept of Operations, produce a CM Operation Order, refine command post
set-up procedures and maintain situational awareness of multiple CM
incidents.

The Sudden Response exercise has been held at Quantico, Va., in the past,
but has been moved to Fort Monroe to maximize command post training time.
The senior leadership felt that it was more important to accomplish training
instead of losing up to a day and a half in travel time, said Paul Deflueri,
J7 Lead Exercise Planner. This will allow us to still meet our training
objectives, he said.

Some external participants may work with JTF-CS during the exercise.

"We're trying to get representatives from FEMA Region IV as well as
representatives from South Carolina Emergency Management Division and active
duty soldiers from the (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and
Explosive) Consequence Management Response Force to play the role of task
force units," Defluri said.

"Each time we do one of these internal exercises, we try to make it more
robust and try to add in fidelity," Defluri said. "That's what we're trying
to do for SR05: create a good scenario and be able to replicate the effects
as best we can. That way we can give the command a really good CM exercise."
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 8 Message to the New Manhattan Project
 
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 00:09:58 -0500 (CDT)

 
Subject: Message to the Inheritors of the Manhattan Project from
Prof. SirJ. Rotblat Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 19:14:18 -0500

Message to the Inheritors of the Manhattan Project from Professor
Sir Joseph Rotblat FRS

On 6 July 2005, the Atomic Mirror wrote a letter to Professor Joseph
Rotblat, the only nuclear scientist to walk away from the Manhattan
Project, asking if he would like to send a message back to Los
Alamos for the 16 July remembrance of the birth of the nuclear age.
He graciously responded with the following message:

MESSAGE FROM PROFESSOR SIR JOSEPH ROTBLAT (1995 NOBEL PEACE LAUREATE
AND FELLOW OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY)

TO THE INHERITORS OF THE MANHATTAN PROJECT on the 60th anniversary
of the Trinity atomic test in New Mexico on 16 July 1945

In national research laboratories, such as Los Alamos or Livermore
in the USA, Chelyabinsk or Arzamas in Russia, and Aldermaston in
the UK, many thousands of scientists are employed doing pure and
applied research for specific purposes, cloaked in secrecy, purposes
that I see as the negation of scientific pursuit: the development
of new, or the improvement of old weapons of mass destruction. Among
these thousands there may be some scientists who are motivated by
considerations of national security. The vast majority, however,
have no such motivation; in the past they were lured into this work
by the siren call of rapid advancement and unlimited opportunity.
What is going on in these laboratories is not only a terrible waste
of scientific endeavour but a perversion of the noble calling of
science.

The Nobel Laureate Hans Bethe, who was a most distinguished physicist,
and one-time leader of the Manhattan Project, said:

"Today we are rightly in an era of disarmament and dismantlement
of nuclear weapons. But in some countries nuclear weapons development
still continues. Whether and when the various Nations of the World
can agree to stop this is uncertain. But individual scientists can
still influence this process by withholding their skills.

Accordingly , I call on all scientists in all countries to cease
and desist from work creating, developing, improving and manufacturing
further nuclear weapons - and, for that matter, other weapons of
potential mass destruction such as chemical and biological weapons.

I would like to see an endorsement of this call by the scientific
community. I will go further and suggest that the scientific community
should demand the elimination of nuclear weapons and, in the first
instance, request that the nuclear powers honour their obligations
under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Let me, in conclusion, remind you that the basic human value is
life itself; the most important of human rights is the right to
live. It is the duty of scientists to see to it that, through their
work, life will not be put into peril, but will be made safe and
its quality enhanced.

Joseph Rotblat

12 July 2005

About Professor Sir Joseph Rotblat KCMG, CBE, D.Sc., FRS, Nobel
Peace Laureate, 1995:

Professor Rotblat, now 97 years old, was born in Warsaw in 1908,
and has been a British citizen since 1946. He is Emeritus Professor
of Physics, University of London, and Emeritus President of the
Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs. During World War
II, Professor Rotblat initiated work on the atom bomb at Liverpool
University, and later joined the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos.

When it became clear that Germany was not working on the bomb, he
resigned from the project, the only scientist to do so before the
bomb was tested. He then changed his line of research to medicine
and was Chief Physicist at St. Bartholomews Hospital in London. He
is the only living signer of the Russell-Einstein Manifesto of 1955.

He has devoted his life to averting the danger posed by nuclear
weapons, working with the Pugwash Conference on Science and World
Affairs, the organization he helped to found, and with which he
shares the Nobel Peace Prize. He is the author of some 400 publications.

Professor Rotblat can be reached at Pugwash Conferences On Science
And World Affairs, London Office, Ground Floor Flat, 63A Great
Russell Street, London WC1B 3BJ, tel 020-7405, fax 020-7831 5651,
e-mail: pugwash@mac.com website: www.pugwash.org

Background to the letter:

In Geneva in April 2003, Pamela Meidell mentioned to Professor
Rotblat that she once told the story of his walking away from the
Manhattan Project in an interview with New Mexico Public Radio. She
asked any nuclear scientist who was listening to the show to listen
to his/her conscience and follow in Professor Rotblat's footsteps.

He was very eager to know if anyone had responded. Sadly, she didnt
know. Perhaps this message directly from him will bring forth a
response.  Care, Speak, Vote
*****************************************************************
 9 Follow the Uranium
 
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 00:07:22 -0500 (CDT)

 
July 17, 2005
Follow the Uranium

By FRANK RICH

"I am saying that if anyone was involved in that type of activity which I
referred to, they would not be working here."

- Ron Ziegler, press secretary to Richard Nixon, defending the presidential
aide Dwight Chapin on Oct. 18, 1972. Chapin was convicted in April 1974 of
perjury in connection with his relationship to the political saboteur Donald
Segretti.

"Any individual who works here at the White House has the confidence of the
president. They wouldn't be working here at the White House if they didn't
have the president's confidence."

- Scott McClellan, press secretary to George W. Bush, defending Karl Rove on
Tuesday.

WELL, of course, Karl Rove did it. He may not have violated the Intelligence
Identities Protection Act of 1982, with its high threshold of criminality
for outing a covert agent, but there's no doubt he trashed Joseph Wilson and
Valerie Plame. We know this not only because of Matt Cooper's e-mail, but
also because of Mr. Rove's own history. Trashing is in his nature, and bad
things happen, usually through under-the-radar whispers, to decent people
(and their wives) who get in his way. In the 2000 South Carolina primary,
John McCain's wife, Cindy, was rumored to be a drug addict (and Senator
McCain was rumored to be mentally unstable). In the 1994 Texas governor's
race, Ann Richards found herself rumored to be a lesbian. The implication
that Mr. Wilson was a John Kerry-ish girlie man beholden to his wife for his
meal ticket is of a thematic piece with previous mud splattered on Rove
political adversaries. The difference is that this time Mr. Rove got caught.

Even so, we shouldn't get hung up on him - or on most of the other supposed
leading figures in this scandal thus far. Not Matt Cooper or Judy Miller or
the Wilsons or the bad guy everyone loves to hate, the former CNN star
Robert Novak. This scandal is not about them in the end, any more than
Watergate was about Dwight Chapin and Donald Segretti or Woodward and
Bernstein. It is about the president of the United States. It is about a
plot that was hatched at the top of the administration and in which everyone
else, Mr. Rove included, are at most secondary players.

To see the main plot, you must sweep away the subplots, starting with the
Cooper e-mail. It has been brandished as a smoking gun by Bush bashers and
as exculpatory evidence by Bush backers (Mr. Rove, you see, was just trying
to ensure that Time had its facts straight). But no one knows what this
e-mail means unless it's set against the avalanche of other evidence, most
of it secret, including what Mr. Rove said in three appearances before the
grand jury. Therein lies the rub, or at least whatever case might be made
for perjury.

Another bogus subplot, long popular on the left, has it that Patrick
Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, gave Mr. Novak a free pass out of
ideological comradeship. But Mr. Fitzgerald, both young (44) and ambitious,
has no record of Starr- or Ashcroft-style partisanship (his contempt for the
press notwithstanding) or known proclivity for committing career suicide.
What's most likely is that Mr. Novak, more of a common coward than the
prince of darkness he fashions himself to be, found a way to spill some
beans and avoid Judy Miller's fate. That the investigation has dragged on so
long anyway is another indication of the expanded reach of the prosecutorial
web.

Apparently this is finally beginning to dawn on Mr. Bush's fiercest
defenders and on Mr. Bush himself. Hence, last week's erection of the
stonewall manned by the almost poignantly clownish Mr. McClellan, who
abruptly rendered inoperative his previous statements that any suspicions
about Mr. Rove are "totally ridiculous." The morning after Mr. McClellan
went mano a mano with his tormentors in the White House press room - "We've
secretly replaced the White House press corps with actual reporters,"
observed Jon Stewart - the ardently pro-Bush New York Post ran only five
paragraphs of a wire-service story on Page 12. That conspicuous burial of
what was front-page news beyond Murdochland speaks loudly about the rising
anxiety on the right. Since then, White House surrogates have been
desperately babbling talking points attacking Joseph Wilson as a partisan
and a liar.

These attacks, too, are red herrings. Let me reiterate: This case is not
about Joseph Wilson. He is, in Alfred Hitchcock's parlance, a MacGuffin,
which, to quote the Oxford English Dictionary, is "a particular event,
object, factor, etc., initially presented as being of great significance to
the story, but often having little actual importance for the plot as it
develops." Mr. Wilson, his mission to Niger to check out Saddam's supposed
attempts to secure uranium that might be used in nuclear weapons and even
his wife's outing have as much to do with the real story here as Janet
Leigh's theft of office cash has to do with the mayhem that ensues at the
Bates Motel in "Psycho."

This case is about Iraq, not Niger. The real victims are the American
people, not the Wilsons. The real culprit - the big enchilada, to borrow a
1973 John Ehrlichman phrase from the Nixon tapes - is not Mr. Rove but the
gang that sent American sons and daughters to war on trumped-up grounds and
in so doing diverted finite resources, human and otherwise, from fighting
the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. That's why the stakes are so high:
this scandal is about the unmasking of an ill-conceived war, not the
unmasking of a C.I.A. operative who posed for Vanity Fair.

So put aside Mr. Wilson's February 2002 trip to Africa. The plot that
matters starts a month later, in March, and its omniscient author is Dick
Cheney. It was Mr. Cheney (on CNN) who planted the idea that Saddam was
"actively pursuing nuclear weapons at this time." The vice president went on
to repeat this charge in May on "Meet the Press," in three speeches in
August and on "Meet the Press" yet again in September. Along the way the
frightening word "uranium" was thrown into the mix.

By September the president was bandying about the u-word too at the United
Nations and elsewhere, speaking of how Saddam needed only a softball-size
helping of uranium to wreak Armageddon on America. But hardly had Mr. Bush
done so than, offstage, out of view of us civilian spectators, the whole
premise of this propaganda campaign was being challenged by forces with more
official weight than Joseph Wilson. In October, the National Intelligence
Estimate, distributed to Congress as it deliberated authorizing war,
included the State Department's caveat that "claims of Iraqi pursuit of
natural uranium in Africa," made public in a British dossier, were "highly
dubious." A C.I.A. assessment, sent to the White House that month,
determined that "the evidence is weak" and "the Africa story is overblown."

AS if this weren't enough, a State Department intelligence analyst
questioned the legitimacy of some mysterious documents that had surfaced in
Italy that fall and were supposed proof of the Iraq-Niger uranium
transaction. In fact, they were blatant forgeries. When Mohamed ElBaradei,
the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said as much
publicly in the days just before "shock and awe," his announcement made none
of the three evening newscasts. The administration's apocalyptic uranium
rhetoric, sprinkled with mushroom clouds, had been hammered incessantly for
more than five months by then - not merely in the State of the Union address
- and could not be dislodged. As scenarios go, this one was about as subtle
as "Independence Day" and just as unstoppable a crowd-pleaser.

Once we were locked into the war, and no W.M.D.'s could be found, the
original plot line was dropped with an alacrity that recalled the "Never
mind!" with which Gilda Radner's Emily Litella used to end her misinformed
Weekend Update commentaries on "Saturday Night Live." The administration
began its dog-ate-my-homework cover-up, asserting that the various warning
signs about the uranium claims were lost "in the bowels" of the bureaucracy
or that it was all the C.I.A.'s fault or that it didn't matter anyway,
because there were new, retroactive rationales to justify the war. But the
administration knows how guilty it is. That's why it has so quickly trashed
any insider who contradicts its story line about how we got to Iraq,
starting with the former Treasury secretary Paul O'Neill and the former
counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke.

Next to White House courtiers of their rank, Mr. Wilson is at most a
Rosencrantz or Guildenstern. The brief against the administration's drumbeat
for war would be just as damning if he'd never gone to Africa. But by
overreacting in panic to his single Op-Ed piece of two years ago, the White
House has opened a Pandora's box it can't slam shut. Seasoned audiences of
presidential scandal know that there's only one certainty ahead: the timing
of a Karl Rove resignation. As always in this genre, the knight takes the
fall at exactly that moment when it's essential to protect the king.

Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
*****************************************************************
 10 The Hindu: No sanctity about Bush promise - nuclear experts 

 Thursday, Jul 21, 2005     

T.S. Subramanian 

  "Nothing to shake the champagne bottle over the accord"   

CHENNAI: "There is nothing to shake the champagne bottle" in the
Joint Statement issued by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and
President George W. Bush that the U.S. "will work to achieve
full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India," according to
former top officials of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE).

There is no sanctity either, they say, about Mr. Bush's promise
to "seek agreement from the [U.S.] Congress to adjust U.S. laws
and policies" and that the U.S. "will work with friends and
allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil
nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India." They pointed
out how the U.S. Senate, where the Republicans were in a
majority, declined to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
despite the then Clinton administration backing the treaty. The
Joint Statement also betrayed the U.S.' reluctance to recognise
India as a nuclear weapons State. Nowhere did it describe India
as a nuclear weapons State. Mr. Bush merely said India was "a
responsible state with advanced nuclear technology," creating "a
new category" as it were, the former DAE officials said. 

According to them, there is "no need to quack" about the
"commitments" made by India in the statement. These commitments
included India identifying and separating civilian and military
nuclear facilities; India "taking a decision to place
voluntarily its civilian nuclear facilities under IAEA
safeguards" and so on. Parliament had to approve India putting
its civilian nuclear facilities under International Atomic
Energy Agency safeguards or its adherence to Missile Technology
Control Regime (MTCR) and Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG)
guidelines. 

"Good development" 

Asked why the Manmohan Singh Government had agreed to reverse
India's long-standing policy of not putting its civilian nuclear
facilities under IAEA safeguards, an official said, "I do not
know what were the Government' s compulsions. These are the big
objectives of the so-called agreement. What will happen tomorrow
is a big question." Yet these former officials welcomed the
Joint Statement as a "good development" in the limited sense
that the U.S. "will work with friends and allies to adjust
international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy
cooperation and trade with India." 

The U.S., Russia and France were unable to sell Light Water
Reactors (LWRs) to India because the NSG guidelines demanded
that India place all its nuclear facilities under the IAEA's
full scope safeguards. However, Russia and France were always
keen on selling LWRs to India because they knew "all along that
India was a disciplined country, that India was never a
proliferator and that it had announced a voluntary moratorium on
nuclear testing" after the nuclear tests at Pokhran in May 1998. 
"The only stumbling block was the US.needed to import LWRs, S.K.
Jain, Chairman and Managing Director, Nuclear Power Corporation
of India Limited, said: "We are not really dependent on them."
India, however, could build a nuclear power capacity of only
10,000 MWe with its indigenous PHWRs that used natural uranium
as fuel. "So we are going [in] for fast breeder reactors" that
would use plutonium-uranium oxide fuel. 

Copyright � 2005, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of
*****************************************************************
 11 space.com: Vandenberg to Kwajalien ICBM launch Thursday at 3pm

Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 17:46:56 -0700 (PDT) 

Ventura County, California MINUTEMAN III LAUNCH 

Vandenberg AFB News Release

VANDENBERG AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. � An unarmed Minuteman 
IIIintercontinental ballistic missile is scheduled for launch 
from NorthVandenberg Thursday morning as part of a developmental 
test todemonstrate the ability to integrate a Safety Enhanced 
Re-entryVehicle into the Mi nuteman III weapons system. The 
launch window isfrom 1:01 a.m. to 5:30 a.m. PDT. 

The missile will launch under the direction of the 576th Flight 
TestSquadron here. Capt Kelvin Dumas, 576th FLTS, is the launch 
director.The 576th FLTS commander, Lt Col S.L. Davis is the 
mission director.Col Jack Weinstein, 30th Space Wing commander, 
is the spaceliftcommander. Members of the 576th FLTS have 
performed all maintenance activities toinclude missile 
emplacement and inst allation of unique missiletracking, 
telemetry and command destruct systems to collect test dataand 
meet safety requirements. 

In addition, members of the 576th FLTSTop Hand program are 
conducting all missile crew duties for thislaunch. The missile's 
single unarmed re-entry vehicle is expected to 
travelapproximately 4,200 miles in about 30 minutes, hitting 
apre-determined target at the Kwajalein Missile Range in the 
westernchain of the Marshall Is lands. 

This test continues a long tradit ion ofICBM test launches that 
serve to ensure a safe, secure and effectiveweapon system that is 
critical to continued global stability. 

LAUNCH VIEWING AND PHOTOGRAPHY For information on launch viewing 
and photography, refer to:

www.spacearchive.info/vafbview.htm
www.spacearchive.info/vafbphoto.htm Copyright � 2005 Brian Webb.
All rights reserved. This newsletter 
*****************************************************************
 12 Rediff: US papers blast nuke deal
 

A Correspondent | 	July 21, 2005�02:51 IST

After a day of cautious criticism and in most US media
yesterday, news of the US-India civilian nuclear energy
cooperation announced during PM Singh's visit to DC more or less
dropped off the map July 20. 

Instead, at least two newspapers launched a scathing attack on
the agreement in that most hallowed of newsprint space: the
editorial page. 

Even as the front page was taken over by the Supreme Court
nomination � which seemed to overshadow the Karl Rove brouhaha �
the Boston Globe decided to take a potshot at the US-India
nuclear energy agreement, headlining it '.' 

The Washington Post, in the same space, called it a , and
cautioned that while it's a gamble and might help as a
counterweight to China, the US cannot be sure of closer ties
with India, especially on such critical issues as the Taiwan
dispute or other US-China disputes! 

Surely by counterweight, the venerable Post does not mean � or
expect � a stooge?

The Globe piece, while it hands India a couple of backhanded
compliments, completely ignores the larger ramifications of the
energy deal for India's economic growth, choosing instead to
focus entirely on what other countries might do following this. 

"�the message of Bush's nuclear deal with India to other
countries that might be pondering a pursuit of nuclear weapons
could hardly be worse. They are being shown that acquiring those
ultimate terror weapons can be a steppingstone to recognition as
a major power and that, after a decent interlude, they can
expect to be pardoned for developing and testing those weapons."

The writer goes on to say that Pakistan and Iran will also ask
for the same privileges, conveniently ignoring India's special
position in Asia. For one, neither Pakistan nor Iran have the
necessary safeguards that India has provided and is willing to
provide. 

In strategic terms, neither of those countries can muster the
kind of influence a blossoming Indian economy can. Nor are their
energy needs as great as India's at this point of time, when it
seeks to expand its infrastructure development as well as
manufacturing sectors. [TKN1]�

The ' Steve Weisman today strikes a more of the pact passing
muster in Congress and with US allies, after warning yesterday
that the Bush-Singh nuclear pact was headed for rough weather:.� 

"I don't expect a lot of opposition in Europe," Mr. Burns [R.
Nicholas, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs] said
in an interview, adding that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
also spoke Tuesday to President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan and
that his reaction was "constructive" and "not overly
problematic."

But the Post persists with its belief that everything regarding
India must be seen through the prism of Pakistan: 

Pakistan, India's neighbor and rival, will seek a similar de
facto blessing for its nuclear status. Given Pakistan's record
as a nuclear proliferator, the United States ought to refuse
this. A rebuff could help to turn Pakistan's anti-Indian
nationalism into an anti-India-and-America nationalism;
pro-Western secularists may lose ground to militant Islamists.
If so, the upside of a stronger relationship with India will
have to be weighed against the potential downside of a
jihad-minded nuclear Pakistan.

And so, discreetly, the argument here seems to be 'don't give it
to Pakistan, but because it might turn them against us, don't
give it to India either'

It is interesting to note the double standards the Globe uses.
India is commended for the 'sound measures' it has accepted in
return for 'recognition of its status as a de facto nuclear
power', among them willingness to 'place its civilian nuclear
reactors under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.' 

In almost the same breath, the piece complains that 'India is
still not permitting full-scope IAEA safeguards for its military
as well as civilian facilities�" 

Does the IAEA do half-scope safeguards as well? 

Again, it criticizes India for not agreeing to "curtail
development of its nuclear weapons and delivery systems,'
choosing to ignore the fact that India has two nuclear weapon
states on either side of the border. 

It would be nice of the Globe could ask Pakistan and China to do
the same. But hey, China is a key economic partner, and Pakistan
a key ally on the war on terror, and never mind the fact that
China gave Pakistan its nuclear technology, while Pakistan gave
to anyone who paid the right price! And never mind that neither
of those two have a democratic leadership in place. 

The Post has it differently: 

The Bush administration can answer that India has earned its
exceptional status. Unlike Iran and North Korea, India was never
a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and therefore never
broke its word; unlike Pakistan, it has not sold its nuclear
secrets to others. But this argument may not prevent other
nuclear powers from asserting exceptional status for their own
friends. Russia may sell more weapons to Iran. China may refuse
to get tough on North Korea. Both of these bad outcomes seemed
probable anyway, but the administration's new stance has made
them likelier.

The question is: if it's probable anyway, what difference does
it make? And likelier? Hardly. If anything, the likely situation
is what Burns is quoted in the Times as saying:

Mr. Wolf [John S, a former assistant secretary of state for
nonproliferation affairs]said that despite his own misgivings,
he expected that the United States' allies in Europe, as well as
Russia and China, would probably support the India deal because
they would jump at the chance to sell nuclear components to
India.

"Whatever they're saying now about this agreement," he said,
"they'll be in New Delhi tomorrow." 

As for those misgivings that Wolf has, it is interesting to see
how hard it is to change mindsets for the non-proliferation days
of decades ago. Wolf also reveals that officials at the State
Department, including John Bolton, had resisted attempts to make
a deal like this with India earlier. 

Should we credit Blackwill for this breakthrough, then? Perhaps. 

Here's what Weisman has to say about the former US ambassador to
India and currently adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice: 

Mr. Blackwill, in the current issue of The National Interest, a
public policy magazine, says he frequently battled with the
State Department on nuclear issues, describing opponents of
giving India wider latitude in the nuclear area as "nagging
nannies" whose policies he refused to put into effect.

 Copyright � 2005 rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 13 Guardian Unlimited: America to aid India's nuclear power project
 
Deal breaks bar on countries which refuse to be monitored               
 		
Randeep Ramesh, South Asia correspondent
Wednesday July 20, 2005
The Guardian 		

The US president, George Bush, has agreed to aid India's civilian 
nuclear power programme, an unexpected decision that reverses 
three decades of American policies designed to deter nations from 
developing nuclear weapons. 

The agreement between Mr Bush and the Indian prime minister, 
Manmohan Singh, is the first exception to the international bar 
on nuclear assistance to any country that does not accept 
monitoring of all of its nuclear facilities. 

India has not signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which 
requires oversight of nuclear installations, and conducted its 
first nuclear detonation in 1974 and more in 1998. 

Mr Bush will have to convince Congress to amend domestic 
legalisation that forbids cooperation between the US and 
non-nuclear states that conduct nuclear tests. 

India has agreed not to explode fresh devices and will place its
civilian reactors, but not its military programme, under the
international inspection regime. 

In an address to a joint session of Congress yesterday, Mr Singh
said: "We have never been, and will never be, a source of
proliferation of sensitive technologies." 

The U-turn is seen as a diplomatic victory for India, which has
long claimed that the rules governing nuclear technology
discriminate against it. 

Mr Singh is on a four-day visit to cement ties between two of
the world's largest democracies. 

Mr Bush said he would "seek agreement from Congress to adjust US
laws and policies" and work with "friends and allies to adjust
international regimes" for cooperation and trade with India. 

Many experts said such a move, which rewards the atomic arsenal
India manufactured in secret, would undermine US efforts to
prevent Iran and North Korea from doing the same. 

It would also incense Pakistan, India's nuclear-capable
neighbour. 

There was also some scepticism that the Nuclear Suppliers Group,
consisting of 40 countries that control exports of sensitive
nuclear material and technology, would acquiesce to US requests
for an exception to be made for Indian projects. 

"Members like Brazil and South Africa, who gave up nuclear
weapon technology under the international rules, will be angry
that India has been rewarded after breaking the rules for so
long," said Praful Bidwai, a New Delhi-based analyst who has
written extensively on India's nuclear programme. 

But it appears larger geopolitical considerations have prevailed
in the White House. 

India and America have grown closer since the end of the cold
war, during which India was perceived as being pro-Soviet. 

Despite the sanctions imposed by Bill Clinton in 1998, when
India exploded its nuclear bombs and Pakistan responded in kind,
trade links between New Delhi and Washington have grown
exponentially. Many in the Bush administration see India as an
essential counterweight to Chinese ambitions in Asia. 

Indians have also become entranced by America and, in a recent
global poll, its citizens had the most positive view of the US. 

The warmth between the two countries can be gauged by the fact
that Mr Singh was given the rare honour of speaking to Congress,
something only a handful of foreign leaders have done since Mr
Bush took office in January 2001. 

But the Indian security establishment is less enthusiastic about
the deal. The Indian nuclear programme was designed to be
self-sufficient. The problem is that it has run into an acute
shortage of uranium, the fuel essential for nuclear reaction. 

It is this, and the need for expertise in a hi-tech fast-breeder
programme, that has led it to seek some accommodation with
Washington. 

"I am bothered by the fact we went and signed this at all.
Really, if Delhi had stockpiled enough uranium when there were
no bans on India making such purchases we would not be in
Washington," said Bharat Karnad of the Centre for Policy
Research in New Delhi. 

"We have a weapons programme that really cannot be split into
two and part overseen by the Americans. It is not in our
national interest." 
	
[UP] 

      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 14 UCS: Last Gasp to Undermine Global Warming
 	 	 	 	 	 
[Union of Concerned Scientists]                                                       

July 19, 2005
 
 Rep. Joe Barton-Exxon's Tiger-Is Defanged by Science
 Statement from Julie Anderson, Washington Representative for
Climate Policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists
 
"The science community has roundly criticized Chairman Joe
Barton's (R-TX) misguided Energy and Commerce Committee
investigation into a specific global warming study. Last week
letters from the National Academy of Sciences, the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, and a letter signed
by 20 leading climate researchers voiced strong concerns about
the value of the investigation as well as its intimidating
approach. In addition, Congressional leaders of both parties
spoke out strongly against the investigation, calling it
"misguided and illegitimate."
 
"Rep. Barton receives thousands of dollars in campaign
contributions from Exxon/Mobil, the fossil fuel dinosaur that
has a long and unflattering history of funding junk science to
cast doubt on the fact that burning oil and other fossil fuels
is a major factor in global warming.
 
"While Barton is acting like Exxon's tiger in his attacks on
individual scientists, he has in fact been defanged by science
itself. Just last month, the national scientific academies of 11
nations issued a joint statement that reads, "The scientific
understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to
justify nations taking prompt action" to reduce global warming
emissions. And at the G8 Summit in July, President Bush himself
acknowledged that he accepts the overwhelming evidence that
human activity contributes significantly to global warming.
 
"If Rep. Barton truly wished to make good use of taxpayer
dollars, he would direct his committee to investigate policies
to immediately reduce our global warming pollution and help
avoid dangerous changes in our climate."   

  LUKE�WARREN Press Secretary 202-331-5458 �   

 � Union of Concerned Scientists
 Page Last Revised: 07.19.2005	 	   
*****************************************************************
 15 Indian Express:  Bush's bold new gamble
 
July 21, 2005

The Bush administration is known for gambles, and Monday�s 
about-face on nuclear cooperation with India qualifies as such. 
By declaring that it would help India build nuclear power plants 
and import advanced weapons, the administration has made good on 
its statement that it wants India to become �a major world power 
in the 21st century.� But it has simultaneously set aside the 
principle that countries refusing to sign the nuclear 
Non-Proliferation Treaty should be denied civilian nuclear 
assistance and, in many cases, face a weapons embargo...

Start with the potential benefits. India, with a population of
just over 1 billion, is already the biggest democracy in the
world and will eventually overtake China as the most populous of
all nations. Its economy has grown rapidly in the past decade,
and it has become a global player in software, computer services
and pharmaceuticals. As an emerging Asian superpower, India may
serve as a counterweight to China. As home to a large and
tolerant Muslim population, it may serve as an ally against
Islamic militancy...

It�s fair to ask what �closer ties� may mean in practice.
Although India�s rising power may constrain China in a general
way, India does not share the US commitment to defend Taiwan and
would probably stand aside in other potential US-China rows that
do not affect Indian interests. Equally, cooperation on
terrorism or economic relations will take place when it suits
the interests of both countries and not otherwise. India�s noisy
democracy tends to feature coalition governments that include
anti-American voices, just as America�s noisy democracy features
protectionist members of Congress who blame India for the loss
of US jobs. So the Bush administration is right to want close
ties with India, but these will have limits.

India does promise some concrete concessions in return for
nuclear cooperation. It will commit itself to abstain from
further nuclear tests, to open its civilian nuclear reactors to
international inspections, and to withhold nuclear technology or
material from illegal proliferators...

Now consider the risks in the administration�s gamble. Pakistan,
India�s neighbour and rival, will seek a similar de facto
blessing for its nuclear status. Given Pakistan�s record as a
nuclear proliferator, the United States ought to refuse this. A
rebuff could help to turn Pakistan�s anti-Indian nationalism
into an anti-India-and-America nationalism; pro-Western
secularists may lose ground to militant Islamists...

The administration�s efforts to contain the nuclearisation of
Iran and North Korea may also suffer. 

Excerpted from an editorial in �The Washington Post�, July 20

� 2005: Indian Express Newspapers (Mumbai) Ltd.
*****************************************************************
 16 Indian Express: N-deal a win-win for India, says Singh
 
Thursday, July 21, 2005

Indo-US: �Will end isolation, national security factored, pact
not directed against Pak, China�  
   	 
C RAJA MOHAN                              

['PM with Natwar Singh and Ronnen Sen on Wednesday.'

WASHINGTON, JULY 20: Despite the political criticism at home of 
the historic nuclear pact he concluded with the US this week, 
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh today said he was confident that a 
strong national consensus will emerge once the immense gains from 
it are fully understood. 

Asked about former Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee�s reaction 
to the pact, Singh said ��if such a statement had been made, it 
must have been based on a misconception and wrong information��. 

Singh said the agreement will help India to ��break out of its
present isolation�� and gain access to civilian nuclear
technology without in any way ��diminishing our strategic
nuclear capabilities�� in a reference to India�s atomic arsenal. 

Insisting that the nuclear pact was agreed ��only after taking
into full account all national security interests��, Singh
promised to make a suo motu statement in the Parliament at the
earliest on the nuclear pact. 

��While competitive parliamentary politics sometimes diverts
attention from national goals,�� Singh said he ��had full faith
in the inherent patriotism of all sections of our country��. 

Asked about the balance of obligations undertaken by India and
the United States under the nuclear pact, Singh underlined the
centrality of reciprocity. ��Only when the US implements its
part of the bargain, we will be called upon to implement our
obligations��, Singh said. This process, he added will be
undertaken in a ��phased manner��. 

��A carefully selected�� joint Indo-US working group, according
to Singh, ��will determine how best to progress�� on the mutual
obligations under the nuclear pact. 

Questioned about the ability of President George W Bush to
implement the nuclear pact amidst potential opposition within
the US Congress, Singh said he was ��impressed by the sincerity
of the President and his cabinet colleagues��. 

��I am hopeful and confident that the Bush Administration will
use all its influence to convert the joint statement on nuclear
cooperation into a living reality��. 

Singh declared that the new warmth in Indo-US relations is not
directed against Pakistan or China. Expanded Indo-US economic
engagement, he said, will not only allow India to accelerate its
economic growth but also those of India�s neighbours. 

Pointing to the rapidly improving relations with China, Singh
said India will ��pursue purposeful engagement with our great
neighbour to the north��. 

��A strong and resurgent India is good for growth and balance in
Asia and the rest of the world��, Singh insisted. On the absence
of explicit US support for India�s permanent membership of the
UNSC, Singh was not disappointed. ��We have created conditions
that when the time comes, the US will be on our side,�� he said.

� 2005: Indian Express Newspapers (Mumbai) Ltd.
*****************************************************************
 17 Asia Times: US opens can of nuclear worms

South Asia news, business and economy from India and                         
Pakistan
 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		 		
By Praful Bidwai 

NEW DELHI - The US-India agreement on nuclear issues is likely
to run into problems on the supply side, in the US and in the
Nuclear Suppliers' Group comprising 44 relatively industrialized
states, as well as on the recipient side - India. 

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, 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 recognizes five nuclear-weapons states. All five crossed
the atomic threshold before 1967, while India became a
self-declared nuclear power only in 1998. 

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, which will
experiment with fusion reactions that release energy when nuclei
are forced together - 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", ie, nuclear weapon
states. 

Besides "working to prevent the global proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction", India will take a series of steps towards
"identifying and separating civilian and military nuclear
facilities and programs". 

India will also be required to file a declaration regarding its
civilian 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 will 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 -
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. 

"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 program," 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
program. 

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 such as 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 Center,
has been quoted as saying that allowing IAEA safeguards "goes
against the national interest". 

Thus the India-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 "sovereignty" 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 radioactive waste that remains menacing for
tens of thousands of years. 

(Inter Press Service)   															 														

Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110 											  
*****************************************************************
 18 csmonitor.com: Why US is shifting nuclear stand with India 

 USA > Foreign Policy 
from the July 20, 2005 edition 	

 A bargain on nuclear technology may signal view of India as
counterbalance to China.

 By Howard LaFranchi | Staff writer of The Christian Science
Monitor 

WASHINGTON  US plans to broaden India's access to nuclear
technology, announced this week during an enthusiastic visit to
Washington by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, have their
roots in designs from the earliest days of the Bush
administration to build India's stature as a counterbalance to a
rising and problematic China. 

The proposed extension of nuclear access to what the White House
likes to call "the world's largest democracy" raises questions
about potential impact on other countries with nuclear ambitions
and designs for international status. That is especially true as
the announcement comes just days before the European Union is to
return to negotiations with Iran to end its nuclear-weapons
programs and six-party talks are to take up again in Beijing on
North Korea's nuclear program.	 	 	

A STROLL:                       President Bush and Indian Prime 
Minister Manmohan Singh walk to a state dinner, past a portrait 
of Herbert Hoover. HARAZ GHANBARI/AP
 		   	 	
But perhaps the greatest significance of the plan is what it
says about 21st- century geopolitics and in particular about a
Bush administration vision for dealing with China, some analysts
say. 

"The crux of this announcement is what it tells us about the US
grand strategy, and that behind whatever else is going on here
the US is preparing for a grand conflict with China and
constructing an anti-China coalition," says Joseph Cirincione,
head of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Project at the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace. "In that scenario, India is
even more valuable as a nuclear power, rather than as a
nonnuclear country." 

The White House plan, which would allow India broader access to
international technology for its nuclear power industry in
exchange for India granting some access to international
inspections, still faces high hurdles: Opposition is expected to
be strong both in the US Congress and among other nuclear powers
who along with the US would have some say. 

In the view of some specialists, the plan would certainly erode
and perhaps mean the scrapping of decades of international
nonproliferation effort in favor of an ad hoc, case-by-case
approach that rewards certain countries while punishing others.
"This is a plan that chooses good guys and bad guys, and says
that what matters is power politics and not nonproliferation
principles," Mr. Cirincione says. 

But for others, the plan reflects a realistic appraisal both of
exploding global energy needs and India's responsible track
record in handling nuclear technology. 

"Yes, this does look at India on an individual basis, but it
also rewards a worthy country for its very good performance on
nuclear proliferation, and in that sense it reflects a desirable
change in US policy," says Selig Harrison, director of the Asia
Program at the Center for International Policy in Washington.
The US shift will raise protests from Pakistan, Mr. Harrison
says, but in response to protests of special treatment for
India, the US "has an answer, and that is: A. Q. Khan," he adds,
referring to the "father" of Pakistan's nuclear program who
developed a clandestine nuclear bazaar. 

Certainly, the US increasingly sees India as a "good guy," both
in terms of the South Asian region but also in international
affairs. President Bush referred to "our shared values" during
Mr. Singh's White House visit Monday, while State Department
officials say the agreement points the way for US-India
relations for the coming decades. 

In a speech to Congress Tuesday, Prime Minister Singh emphasized
India's record of guarding its nuclear technology from a
dangerous spread, assuring members of Congress that India "never
will be a source of proliferation of nuclear technologies."
Harrison says the US agreement would also rectify an anomaly in
the "outdated" international nonproliferation regime that allows
the US to sell civilian nuclear technology to China but not to
India. 

The White House plan does not formally recognize India as a
nuclear power, but some critics say it does grant de facto
recognition. 

Karl Inderfurth, a former assistant secretary of State for South
Asian affairs during the Clinton administration, recognizes the
plan will be controversial among many nonproliferation experts
and in Congress. But he adds: "It's the right call for us and
for the world, really. This is a way to bring India into a
global nonproliferation regime, rather than leaving it on the
outside." 

Yet while the nuclear agreement signals new thinking on US-India
relations, it won't really mean a new chapter in the partnership
unless the administration is willing to fight for the plan and
convince Congress of its merits, Mr. Harrison says. "This is a
litmus test, for Indians and for others as well, as to whether
the US is really serious about seeing India as a key and rising
player in global calculations," he says. 

	
No doubt China will be watching how far the US plans to take the
relationship. So will Europe - in particular a European Union
that does not see the rising challenge of China in the same
terms as the US, but which has put off arms sales to China in
response to US concerns. China is clearly a factor in US
calculations on India, experts say, but some also warn that the
US has little to gain if it develops ties to India primarily as
a counterweight to another rising power. 

"I know a lot of people are busy devising the scenarios of India
counterbalancing China and joining us in confronting a rising
power, but we need to be careful not to get into a triangular
trap," says Mr. Inderfurth, now at George Washington University.
The problems the global powers face, from poverty to the spread
of nuclear weapons, are nothing any one country can address, he
says. "We need to develop relations with both countries and work
in a cooperative, not a competitive way." 	 
Special Offer: Subscribe to the Monitor and get 32 issues FREE


  www.csmonitor.com | Copyright � 2005 The Christian Science
Monitor. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 19 AU ABC: US makes nuclear deal with India
 
The World Today - Wednesday, 20 July , 2005  12:22:00
 
Reporter: Samantha Hawley

 ELEANOR HALL: While the Prime Minister has been enjoying the
Bush administration's hospitality in recent days, another world
leader, India's Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, has also been
receiving a warm reception in Washington. 

And today, another Asian power, China, emerged as a major
discussion point for both leaders. But while Mr Howard was
talking up Australia's relationship with China, Prime Minister
Singh was entering into a nuclear deal likely to anger Beijing,
as Samantha Hawley reports.

SAMANTHA HAWLEY: India's Prime Minister, Manmohan Sing was given
the rare opportunity to address the United States Congress, a
privilege usually reserved for America's closet allies. 

ANNOUNCER: Members of Congress, it is my privilege and I deem it
a high honour and a personal pleasure to present to you, His
Excellency, Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of the Republic of
India. 

SAMANTHA HAWLEY: The Indian Prime Minister was basking in the
glory after reaching a nuclear deal with President Bush.

MANMOHAN SINGH: Our relationship in this sector is being
transformed. President Bush and I arrived at an understanding in
finding ways and means to enable such cooperation to proceed.

SAMANTHA HAWLEY: It took Congress by surprise. In essence,
President Bush would be seeking an end to decades old sanctions
preventing the United States from cooperating with India on
civilian nuclear programs, despite India still not signing up to
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

In his address, Prime Minister Singh moved to assure Congress,
saying India's track record in nuclear non-proliferation was
impeccable. 

MANMOHAN SINGH: This is because 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. We have never been and will never been a source
of proliferation of sensitive technology.

(Sound of applause)

SAMANTHA HAWLEY: Analysts across the globe see the deal as a
part of the United States attempts to foster India as a
counterweight to China, a move China appears certain to find
provocative. 

In contrast, at the Washington press conference with the Prime
Minister John Howard, the US President was describing the
Washington relationship with China as very important and vibrant

GEORGE BUSH: It's a good relationship, but it's a complex
relationship. I think that Australia, first of all has got to
act in her own interests and there's no doubt in my mind the
Prime Minister will do that. 

Secondly though, that we can work together to reinforce the need
for China to accept certain values as universal: the value of
minority rights, the value of freedom for people to speak, the
value of freedom of religion.

SAMANTHA HAWLEY: John Howard too was upbeat, saying China
understands Australia's strong relationship with the US.

JOHN HOWARD: We are going to differ with China on human rights
issues. You've seen recently in the debate over Mr Chen, you've
seen an expression of view from China, but equally I think the
relationship between our two countries is mature enough to ride
through temporary arguments such as that. I think China sees a
growing place for herself in the world, but I think there's a
great level of pragmatism in the Chinese leadership.

Now, the economic relationship between Australia and China is
different from the economic relationship between the United
States and China and I understand that and the President and I
talked about that today, but I have a more optimistic view about
the relationship between China and the United States and I know
that the leadership of both countries understands the importance
of common sense in relation to Taiwan.

SAMANTHA HAWLEY: But a further complication in Australia's
relationship with China may come tomorrow when the Chinese
defector, Chen Yonglin, who was recently granted a permanent
visa in Australia, will give evidence to the US Congress' Human
Rights Committee. China's already condemned the decision to
allow Mr Chen to stay in Australia and his trip to the United
States is likely to only heighten Beijing's concerns. 

ELEANOR HALL: Samantha Hawley reporting.   
*****************************************************************
 20 India Post: INDIA ACCORDED NEAR NUCLEAR STATUS
 
  Published: 2005-07-20  

  PTI  
     
  Bush pledges concomitant benefits, advantages 

WASHINGTON: In a highly significant breakthrough, the US has
implicitly recognized India as a nuclear weapon state and agreed
to supply fuel for Tarapore reactors following a series of
commitments by India including that of separating civilian and
military facilities. 

"President George W Bush conveyed his appreciation to Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh over India's strong commitment to
preventing WMD proliferation and stated that as a responsible
state with advanced nuclear technology, India should acquire the
same benefits and advantages as other such states," a joint
statement issued after the two-hour long talks between the two
leaders, said. 

Washington has stopped short of explicitly recognizing India as
a nuclear weapon state because of legal and international
complications but Bush has acknowledged that "India is
responsible state with advanced nuclear technology". 

The US agreement means a major gain for India which has been
having difficulties getting external supply of nuclear fuel ever
since the 1998 Pokhran nuclear blasts. 

The President told the Prime Minister that he would work to
achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India as it
realizes its goals of promoting nuclear power and achieving
energy security. 
He would also seek agreement from Congress to adjust US laws and
policies and Washington will work with friends and allies to
adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy
cooperation and trade with India. 

This, the statement said, will include but not limited to
expeditious consideration of fuel supplies for safeguarded
nuclear reactors at Tarapore. 

"The US will consult with its partners considering India's
participation. The US will consult with the other participants
in the Generation IV International Forum with a view towards
India's inclusion," it said. 

Singh conveyed that for his part India would reciprocally agree 
that it would be ready to assume the same responsibilities and 
practices and acquire the same benefits and advantages as other 
leading countries with advanced nuclear technology such as the 
US. 

The responsibilities and practices consist of identifying and
separating civilian and military nuclear facilities and programs
in a phased manner and filing a declaration regarding its
civilian facilities with the IAEA. 

It includes taking a decision to place voluntarily its civilian
nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards, signing and adhering
to an additional protocol with respect to such facilities and
continuing India's unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing. 

It would also comprise working with the US for the conclusion of
a multilateral Fissile Materials Cut Off Treaty, refraining from
transfer of enriching and reprocessing technologies to states
that do not have them and supporting the international efforts
to limit their spread. 

The Indian commitment would ensure that necessary steps have
been taken to secure nuclear materials and technologies through
comprehensive export control legislation and through
harmonization and adherence to Missile Technology Control Regime
(MTCR) and Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines. 

The President welcomed the Prime Minister's assurance and agreed
to establish a working group to undertake on a phased basis the
necessary actions to fulfill these commitments. They agreed to
review this progress when Bush visits India next year. 
The two leaders reiterated the commitment that their two
countries would play a leading role in international efforts to
prevent the proliferation of WMDs, including nuclear, chemical,
biological and radiological weapons. 

In the light of this closer relationship and recognition of
India's growing role in enhancing regional and global security,
both the leaders agreed that international institutions must
fully reflect changes in the global scenario that have taken
place since 1945. 

Bush maintained that international institutions were going to
have to adapt to reflect India's central and growing role. The
two countries will strengthen their cooperation in global
forums. 

Declaring their resolve to transform their relationship and
establish a global partnership, the two leaders resolved to
create an international environment conducive to promotion of
democratic values and to strengthen democratic practices in
societies which wish to become more open and pluralistic. 

They also resolved to combat terrorism relentlessly and
applauded the active and vigorous counter-terrorism cooperation
between the two countries and support more international efforts
in this direction. 
"Terrorism is a global scourge and the one we will fight
everywhere. The two leaders strongly affirmed their commitment
to the conclusion by September of a UN comprehensive convention
against international terrorism," the statement said. 

On the economy, the two leaders agreed to revitalize the
US-India economic dialogue and launch a CEO Forum to harness
private sector energy and ideas to deepen bilateral ties and
support and accelerate economic growth in both countries through
greater trade, investment and technology cooperation. 

The two countries agreed to promote modernization of India's
infrastructure as a prerequisite for the continued growth of the
Indian economy because as India enhances its investment climate,
opportunities for investments will increase. 

They also will launch US-India knowledge initiative on
agriculture focused on promoting teaching, research, service and
commercial linkages. 

The US-India energy dialogue will address issues like
strengthening energy security and promoting stable and efficient
energy markets in India for ensuring adequate and affordable
energy supplies. 

On democracy and development, the two countries decided through
the new US-India democracy initiative seek assistance and
resources that strengthen democracy in countries which need
that.  
  
  Copyright 200, Post Media Group.
*****************************************************************
 21 Times of India: Bush will do it for a Nuclear India

CHIDANAND RAJGHATTA

[ WEDNESDAY, JULY 20, 2005 11:00:08 PM 		]

  WASHINGTON: Fast work! After clinching a breathtaking nuclear
agreement with India in a matter of months, the Bush
administration has already begun lobbying Congress and its
nuclear allies to amend laws and rules to bring New Delhi aboard
the nuclear club as a de facto member. 


Senior administration officials fanned out to build support for
the deal within a day of the landmark understanding between
President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice telephoned Mohammed El Baradei, Director
of the IAEA, and Pakistan's military ruler Pervez Musharraf to
apprise them of the agreement. 

Other administration officials began reaching out to law-makers
and key Congressional aides even as Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh was making his case before them. Rice's aides met Richard
Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and
author of non-proliferation legislation which put a crimp on the
nuclear ambitions of many countries. 

Mandarins also began briefing diplomats of the Nuclear Suppliers
Group (NSG) nations. 


it can overcome any opposition, the first stirring of which 
surfaced within hours of the deal, first from domestic 
non-proliferation fundamentalists who have traditionally opposed 
weakening of control regimes, and also from some Congressmen.

Members of the 44-nation NSG maybe less of a problem, senior 
officials suggested. "I don't expect a lot of opposition in 
Europe," Nicholas Burns, undersecretary of state and pointman for 
the nuclear talks, was quoted as telling the New York Times .

He also said President Musharraf's reaction was "constructive" 
and "not overly problematic."

Analysts familiar with the issue and the region agreed the 
administration would steer the issue through the Congress after 
an extended debate.

"If India continues to behave responsibly regarding nuclear 
matters, then Congress will conclude that non-proliferation is 
best served by having New Delhi in the tent, than outside of it," 
said Stephen Cohen, a South Asia specialist with the Brookings 
Institution. "I'd predict passage, but a very interesting debate 
beforehand."

One route for the seeing the deal bear results would be for 
Congress to amend the 1978 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act to be 
amended to allow the President to make exceptions, and for him to 
use it in the case of India.

Bush has a three-year window to bring the deal to fruition before 
the United States enters the Presidential election cycle that 
will involve his stepping down because of the two-term limit.

Asked if a Democratic dispensation could scupper the deal after 
Bush exits, a senior Indian official who was involved in the 
talks said, "If the laws have been amended by then, it will be 
difficult."

But many Democrats are also supporting the deal, saying 
Washington needs to get over its non-proliferation fixation when 
it comes to India, given New Delhi exemplary record in export 
controls and the hostile neighborhood it has had to live in.

The administration's swift footwork on the issue, while Prime 
Minister Singh is still in Washington, also answered Indian 
skeptics who were suggesting that Bush had cut such a generous 
deal knowing full well that it would be opposed by the non-pro 
crowd, resisted by its NSG allies, and killed in the Congress.

But some analysts and editorialists cautioned that there was some 
distance to go before the agreement came into effect.

"The Bush administration is known for gambles, and Monday's 
about-face on nuclear cooperation with India qualifies as 
such...The gains from this shift could be considerable, but so 
too could the risks," The Washington Post said in an editorial on 
Wednesday. "Much will depend on the administration's skill in 
assembling support for its new stance, in Congress and 
internationally." 
  
  Copyright � 2005 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 22 [NukeNet] Portugal rejects nuke, goes for wind
 
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:39:17 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)


Portugal pins energy hopes on wind farm licenses
By Henrique Simoes de Almeida
Mon Jul 18, 4:51 PM ET

LISBON (Reuters) - Portugal's Socialist government said on Monday it would 
grant licenses within six months to build massive stretches of wind farms, 
as part of a 2.5 billion-euro ($3-billion) investment plan in renewable energy.

  Economy Ministry spokesman said the licenses, to be awarded to business 
consortiums, would allow for the generation of 1,700 Megawatts (MW) of 
energy. That's more than the capacity of a new nuclear power plant proposed 
by private investors last month, and immediately rejected by the government.

Officials did not say when the wind plants would be ready or how much 
government spending would be needed for the project.

But the ministry saw direct investment of 900 million euros ($1.09 
billion), with most of the funds coming directly from the companies, and a 
portion from public coffers.

"If there is an area that is of utmost importance for our future, that area 
is renewable energy," said Prime Minister Jose Socrates, calling for 
private-sector investment.

The government approved last month a 25 billion-euro plan for 
infrastructure investment, including 2.5 billion euros in spending for 
renewable energy. The plan was part of the Socialist campaign platform 
ahead of February elections in which the party ousted a center-right coalition.

The rise in oil prices to record levels of around $60 a barrel has put the 
spotlight on alternative sources of energy. Portugal's state-owned 
electricity generator EDP is a heavy user of fuel oil for power generation.

Last month investors headed by tycoon Patrick Monteiro de Barros said they 
would seek to build a nuclear power plant with a capacity of 1,600 
megawatts -- without public funds. But the government ruled out nuclear 
power projects.

EDP, Portugal's biggest industrial group, called the wind farm project 
"ambitious."

"EDP has always been interested," said CEO Joao Talone, who attended the 
press conference in Lisbon.

Analysts believe other companies will also be interested in the wind farm 
project, including Spanish firms Endesa, Iberdrola and Gamesa .



_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 23 Times of India: Nuclear-sub project gathers steam- 

RAJAT PANDIT

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, JULY 20, 2005 10:31:22 PM 		]

  NEW DELHI: By the end of this decade, India should have a
fully-operational nuclear submarine of its own. The Advanced
Technology Vessel (ATV) project to build a nuclear-powered,
guided-missile attack submarine is now on track after years of
technical glitches and design problems. 

"The first functional ATV should be ready for trials by 2007-08.
The technical problems, including fitting a miniaturised
pressurised water reactor (PWR) and its containment vessel in
the submarines hull, have more or less been sorted out,"says a
top source. 

Sources add that the two heavily-guarded ATV project complexes
at Vishakapatnam naval dockyard, where the basic submarine
structure is being fabricated, and Indira Gandhi Centre for
Atomic Research at Kalpakkam, where the PWRs are being tested,
are witnessing a flurry of activity these days. 

The project has been shrouded in secrecy ever since it was
formally launched in 1983, with successive governments either
denying its very existence or being deliberately vague about it. 

Interestingly, one of the grounds for sacking Admiral Vishnu
Bhagwat as the Navy chief in December 1998 was his expression of
concern, in public, for the slow progress of the ATV project. 

Apart from the Navy, which operated a leased Russian nuclear
submarine INS Chakra from 1988 to 1991, a whole host of
agencies ranging from Bhabha Atomic Research Centre to the
Defence Research and Development Organisation are involved in
the hush-hush project. 

Russia, too, is providing technical help to the project in the
form of PWRs and vessel designs. 

Compared to conventional submarines, nuclear-propelled submarines 
can operate at higher speeds for virtually unlimited ranges, 
without surfacing to recharge batteries, apart from carrying a 
larger arsenal of weapons.

Faced with an ageing fleet of 16 conventional diesel-electric 
submarines, coupled with the government decision to now 
renegotiate the French Scorpene project due to cost-escalation, a 
successful ATV project can bring good cheer to the Navy.

India, of course, eventually plans to arm nuclear-powered 
submarines with nuclear-tipped missiles since they provide the 
most effective and secure platform for a second-strike 
capability.

The Navy is also keen to lease another nuclear submarine from 
Russia as soon as possible to regain the skills learned while 
operating 'INS Chakra', before it inducts the ATV.

Most of the personnel trained on 'INS Chakra', a "Charlie-I"or 
"Skat"class guided missile submarine, which was also based at the 
Vishakapatnam naval dockyard, have since retired.
  
  Copyright � 2005 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 24 Hindu: Nuclear deal will lead to a quantum jump - officials 

Online edition of India's National Newspaper

 Thursday, Jul 21, 2005     
  
N. Ravi 

  ``India's obligations were no more and no less than those
assumed by the U.S., France or any of the nuclear powers''   


+ Clear implication that India was looked upon as a nuclear
weapons state 

+ By agreeing to place civilian facilities under safeguards,
India will gain access to nuclear technology, fuel and equipment
from abroad 

WASHINGTON DC: The nuclear deal with the United States by
removing restrictions had opened up a huge opportunity and could
lead to a quantum jump in the area of nuclear energy, according
to official sources familiar with the negotiations. 

In contrast to the target of 10,000 MW or the likely achievement
of 6,500 to 7,000 MW from nuclear energy with a restrictive
regime, it would be possible under the new agreement to go to
40,000 MW or even beyond to meet the energy needs in the medium
term. 

As regards India's obligations, they were clearly and
unambiguously spelt out in the joint statement. Pointing to the
wording that "India would reciprocally agree that it would be
ready to assume the same responsibilities and practices and
acquire the same benefits and advantages as other leading
countries with advanced nuclear technology, such as the United
States," the officials asserted that India's obligations were no
more and no less than those assumed by the United States, France
or any of the nuclear powers. 

Referring to the U.S. description of India in the joint
statement as "a responsible state with advanced nuclear
technology" rather than as a nuclear weapons state, the sources
said while there was no reference to India as a nuclear weapons
state explicitly, it was clear by implication in the text that
India was looked upon as a nuclear weapons state and was to be
given the same rights and expected to take on the same
obligations. A formal recognition as a nuclear weapons state was
not possible technically without an amendment to the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty. 

On the issues raised by experts in India that the agreement
would cap nuclear weapons at the current levels and that it
would hamper research, they said such fears were without basis
and ran contrary to the clear language used in the agreement. It
was India's own responsibility to identify and separate military
and civilian facilities, and it was obliged to provide the
International Atomic Energy Agency only the list of civilian
facilities, not military facilities. It could keep any facility
which might be needed for military purposes outside the list and
the inspection regime. On the other hand, by voluntarily
agreeing to place the civilian facilities under safeguards, it
would gain access to nuclear technology, fuel and equipment from
abroad. 

The officials pointed out that India had always sought equality
of treatment with the nuclear weapons states under the Nuclear
Non-proliferation Treaty. Under the agreement with the U.S.,
India's rights and obligations in civilian nuclear energy would
be identical with those of the nuclear weapons states under the
NPT while like in their case the military facilities would be
outside any safeguards. 

Room for negotiation 

The language of the joint statement would allow India room to
negotiate on specific issues. For instance, it speaks of signing
and adhering to "an additional protocol" with respect to
civilian nuclear facilities which may be different from the
additional protocol that is commonly applied by the IAEA to
non-nuclear states. The U.S. had negotiated a separate protocol
for its civilian nuclear facilities. Again, it speaks of working
with the U.S. for the conclusion of "a multilateral Fissile
Material Cut Off Treaty" and not the current text of the treaty
over which both the U.S. and India had reservations. Under the
circumstances, fears that India's production of fissile material
would be frozen or that research would be hit were groundless. 

The officials pointed out that from the American standpoint,
President George Bush had taken a tremendous political risk and
would have to spend considerable political capital to get the
U.S. Congress and the other nuclear suppliers to go by the
agreement on nuclear supplies to India. 

Some sections of the strategic community in the U.S. would see
it as undermining the whole edifice of the non-proliferation
regime to accommodate one country. If he had taken on this
formidable task, it was because of his vision of India as an
emerging great power and his keenness to engage with it
seriously in all areas. 

Asked if in view of the difficult task ahead for Mr. Bush there
could be a situation in which he would not be able to deliver
but India would have taken on its obligations under the
agreement, the sources said India's obligations were all
reciprocal on the U.S. moving ahead with its commitments and not
unilateral. 

The text of the joint statement made it clear that India would
"reciprocally agree" to assume the obligations and the task of
identifying and separating military from civilian nuclear
facilities and filing a declaration on its civilian facilities
with the IAEA would be done in a "phased manner." 

There was no likelihood of India tying its own hands in the
event of the U.S. defaulting on its commitments.

Copyright � 2005, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of
*****************************************************************
 25 Rediff: India: The nuclear deal
 
Columnists > T P Sreenivasan

July 20, 2005

By assuming the same responsibilities and practices as leading
countries with nuclear technologies 'such as the United States',
in the expectation of receiving the same benefits and
advantages, India has joined the big league. 

At least in the eyes of the United States, India is now a
nuclear weapons state. The gamble of 1998 has finally paid off.
The concessions made in return are not inconsistent with our new
status, even though some of them were unthinkable till very
recently. The US has matched India's boldness with far-reaching
commitments.

India to get civilian nuclear reactors

Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran reflected the public rather than
his own perception when he said the outcome exceeded
expectations. He himself must have seen the evolving pattern of
the new arrangements right through the negotiations on NSSP.

The elements of the agreement on both sides have been tossed
about for a number of years, but neither side had the political
will to take the plunge. On the Indian side, there was extreme
reluctance to give any signal that we were moving towards the
NPT, while on the US side, the constraints of US domestic laws
and its obligations under international arrangements, some of
which were formulated to counter Indian nuclear ambitions, were
considered irremovable. 

The willingness of the US to 'work for' adjusting US laws and to
persuade friends and allies to alter international regimes is a
major step indeed. Whether the proposal will have smooth sailing
in the US Congress, which has many non-proliferation fiends and
in the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Zanggar Committee, which
have some extremist adherents to the NPT, is to be seen. 
Nuclear deal will be a tough sell-out: US lawmakers

Another imponderable is the approach that the US will adopt to
the demands of Pakistan and Israel, which will also claim to be
responsible nuclear states with impeccable record in
non-proliferation. Even after A Q Khan was caught red-handed,
the US literature has been praising India and Pakistan together
for enforcing export controls. 

One intriguing point is that the list of US commitments mentions
the removal of only 'certain Indian organisations' from the
dreaded 'Entity List', which was drawn up outside the
non-proliferation laws after our nuclear weapon tests. The
abolition of the list as an instrument of technology denial is
one of the easier things that the Bush Administration can remove
without seeking legislative sanction.

For those of us who have witnessed the controversies that the
supply of Tarapur fuel generated since 1974, the agreement to
supply enriched uranium directly or through allies is nothing
short of a revolutionary change. This was naturally on top of
Department of atomic Energy's wish list. 

The IAEA has been gearing up for years for the anticipated
reprocessing of the Tarapur fuel as its inspection will require
additional budgeting for the Agency. The details of 'full
civilian nuclear energy co-operation and trade with India' are
yet to be elaborated, but if they include supply of natural
uranium fuel for our reactors, the new deal will have
significant implications for our nuclear programme. 

Our involvement with ITER (Fusion power) project and Generation
IV International Forum may be marginal, but its symbolic value
is significant. India has so far pinned its hopes on the IAEA
project for the development of economical and proliferation
resistant reactors, which is in a nascent stage. The US has been
skeptical about this project.

Among the commitments undertaken by India in the nuclear deal,
the step that was considered impossible till now is the
separation and identification of civilian nuclear facilities and
submitting them to IAEA safeguards. 

Analysis of PM's speech to Congress

India had offered to subject some additional facilities to
safeguards even earlier, but we had not considered it feasible
to separate the civilian and military ("vegetarian and
non-vegetarian" in DAE parlance) facilities because of the
interlinkages between the two. The Department of Atomic Energy
must have resisted this move till the end, in view of the
massive effort involved in this separation. 

Moreover, IAEA inspections will also entail considerable
additional attention and investment. Conclusion of an Additional
Protocol with the IAEA on the lines of those signed by nuclear
weapon states is within the realm of possibility, but the
intrusive inspections envisaged in the Protocol will impose
heavy responsibilities on DAE. 

Continuation of our unilateral moratorium and our commitment to
negotiate and sign a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty are not new
concessions. But the FMCT negotiations are stalled in Geneva and
we have so far resisted moves for a fissile material cut off
agreement among a few selected countries. We are likely to
continue our insistence on a non-discriminatory regime. 

As for MTCR and NSG guidelines, the US observers are already on
record as having expressed satisfaction over our following their
spirit. Hopefully, the US will also favour India's formal
admission to these groups. Russia had suggested associate
membership for India in the NSG, which was turned down by the US
and others earlier.

The deal is as yet only a deal and the Working Group, which has
been established to undertake the envisaged steps, will have a
hard time to reconcile the many differences in perceptions,
which have persisted for half a century. There is a view that
the light at the end of the tunnel may well be a mirage as the
diverse paths that India and the US have taken in pursuit of
their respective nuclear programmes may have little to offer
each other. 

Dr Singh wows Congress

Dr A Gopalakrishnan, a former chairman of the Atomic Energy
Regulatory Board, who recently examined the complementarities of
the two programmes, came to the conclusion that the US had no
worthwhile current expertise in the design, construction and
operation of any of the reactors we have in India. 

In his view, the areas in which the US can help are in the
procuring of natural uranium fuel for our reactors, enriched
uranium fuel supply for Tarapur and facilitating NSG clearance
for our Fast Breeder Reactor. His wishlist is very much a part
of the deal and additional avenues may open up, if there is
political will on both sides.

The significance of the nuclear deal goes beyond the concrete
benefits that may accrue to India and the US. It means not only
a real transformation in bilateral relations; it is the
legitimisation of India's nuclear assets and recognition of
India as a nuclear weapons state. 

The prime minister's US visit: Complete coverage

T P Sreenivasan is a former ambassador to the United Nations,
Vienna, and former governor for India, International Atomic
Energy Agency, Vienna. 

Guest Column

 Copyright � 2005 rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 26 BBC: US reports China missile build-up
 
Last Updated: Wednesday, 20 July, 2005
 
[Chinese soldiers]                              

The report says the military balance is tipping against Taiwan                                                               

China has increased the number of short-range ballistic missiles 
on its coast opposite Taiwan, the US has said. 

In an annual report to Congress, the Pentagon claimed there were 
now up to 730 such missiles in place. Last year's report found 
only 500. 

The Pentagon said China could now be spending up to $90bn a year 
on defence, and that its military build-up put regional balances 
at risk. 

But China has dismissed the claims, insisting its rise would be 
peaceful. 

"Not only is China not a threat to anyone, but we would also like 
to make friends with people in every country, work together and 
develop mutually beneficial co-operation in order to facilitate 
everyone's progress," Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing said 
on Wednesday. 

'Credible threat' 

The Pentagon report said that China did not face a threat from 
any other nation. 

Yet it found that Beijing continued to invest heavily in its 
military, and its modernisation plans are aimed primarily at 
winning a war with Taiwan. 
	
REPORT'S KEY FINDINGS            

Build-up of short-rang missiles opposite Taiwan Increase in 
long-range missiles and hardware from Russia Military spending 
could be up to $90bn - the highest in Asia But the US is the top 
military spender, with an estimated $399bn annual defence budget       

According to the American findings, there are now between 650 and 
730 short-range ballistic missiles in position opposite Taiwan, 
with 100 more being deployed every year. 

China is also developing the capability to launch air strikes and 
mount a blockade against the island, the report said. 

In the past, the US has cautioned both China and Taiwan not to 
change the status quo. 

Washington is Taiwan's main arms supplier and could be drawn into 
any conflict. 

Broader ambitions 

But the Pentagon also believes that China's strategic planners 
are looking beyond Taiwan. 

The report points to China's growing missile capability and the 
imminent deployment of mobile, long-range ballistic missiles, 
known as DF31s, which could hit targets worldwide with nuclear 
warheads. 

The Pentagon report says Chinese defence spending could be up to 
$90bn this year, more than twice the estimated figure given by 
Beijing. 

This would make it the largest military spender in Asia - and 
third in the world after the US and Russia. 

The US itself is thought to have an approximate annual defence 
budget of almost $400bn, according to World Bank figures. 

The Chinese navy has bought into service advanced guided missile 
destroyers, submarines and fighter aircraft, bought from Russia. 

Over the long term, says the Pentagon, if current trends persist, 
the Chinese military could pose a credible threat to other modern 
militaries operating in the region. 

According to the BBC's Pentagon correspondent Adam Brookes, this 
is code for American forces in Asia. 

The drafting of this report has been a contentious process, 
reflecting divisions in Washington between those who view Chinese 
power as a serious emerging threat and those who take a more 
benign view, our correspondent says. 

But the final product is a document tough in substance and in 
tone, which will do little or nothing to reassure those Americans 
who worry about China's intentions, he says.                                          
*****************************************************************
 27 BBC: India media upbeat on US nuclear deal
 
Last Updated: Wednesday, 20 July, 2005
 
Indian newspapers have greeted the historic deal between India 
and the United States on civilian nuclear co-operation with 
cautious optimism. 

[Indian papers]                                 

The deal made headlines news                    
			   		
"The agreement promises to end India's nuclear isolation," says
the Indian Express. 

"The agreement is also a tribute to India. India is slowly being
acknowledged as a full-fledged nuclear power, and an important
player in the shaping of a new proliferation order," the
newspaper says in an editorial. 

The Hindustan Times says the US decision to recognise India as a
"responsible" state with nuclear technology "is part of a
historic bargain which could transform the global balance of
power in as significant a manner as Richard Nixon's opening to
China did in the seventies". 

Caution

The Asian Age, however, sounds a note of caution, saying the 
"major shift in Indian nuclear policy" may "not be acceptable to 
the rest of the country". 

[President George W Bush] 
obviously going to face serious problems in fulfilling the 
promises he has made The Pioneer Historic breakthrough           

"Experts detect in the joint statement a compromising of Indian
nuclear interests. India has agreed to controls over its control
programme in return for the 'ifs and 'buts' of the US assurance
to work with others to facilitate India's nuclear civilian
programme." 

The Times Of India rejects this view. 

"Delhi's committing in return to place its civilian nuclear
plants under international safeguards does not damage our
interests, since military facilities are out of their scope,"
the newspaper says in an editorial. 

"It may, in fact, be a plus, as India's nuclear plants are
ageing and doubts have been raised about their safety." 

The Pioneer feels that President George W Bush "is obviously
going to face serious problems in fulfilling the promises he has
made to India on nuclear energy". 

[Manmohan Singh and George Bush]                                
The nuclear deal has already sparked some opposition in the US                                                              

"We should not slow down efforts to achieve self-reliance in
nuclear energy. India should aim to become a reliable exporter
of nuclear power plants rather than merely remaining an
importer." 

Business Standard expresses doubts about the "speed with which
the outcomes are achieved" - especially in opening Indian
markets to US services. 

"India is still seen as sclerotic and confused," the newspaper
says in an editorial. 

"Given the company he keeps at home, it is unlikely that Dr
[Manmohan] Singh would have been able to dispel this view," the
editorial says, alluding to the ruling Congress party-led
government's Communist allies, who have expressed their concerns
about the recent Indian engagement with the US. 		 	 		 	 	 
*****************************************************************
 28 PRI: Nuclear experts give guarded response to Indo-US pact
 
  July 20, 2005 03:16:00 PM 

New Delhi, Jul 20 (PTI) Reacting cautiously to the Indo-US
civilian nuclear energy agreement, experts have said it would
help facilitate India's indigenous programme in this field and
ease the discomfort felt by the Nuclear Suppliers Group,
prohibited from selling sensitive material to countries which
have not signed NPT.
 "Any offer that is coming in through this declaration for
additional nuclear power reactors will only add to the ongoing
expansion of the indigenous nuclear civilian programme," S
Banerjee, Director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, said.
 
"Our programme will continue and these collaborations with the
US will only further strengthen the area of safety in the field
of nuclear reactors," he told PTI.
 
Terming the agreement as a step in the positive direction,
former chairman of Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) M R Srinivasan
said the "Indo-US pact is a good thing if it takes a concrete
shape. I welcome it only when it has some practical
application." He said the change in the US policy would ease the
discomfort felt by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).
 
The NSG guidelines prohibit its 40 member nations from selling
fuel or nuclear material to countries like India which have
refused to sign Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
 
"Whether the US stand to cooperate with France and other allies
will be able to help all the 40 members of the Nuclear Suppliers
Group is something to be waited and watched for," Srinivasan
said.
 
He said India would also like to get natural uranium fuel for
its pressurised heavy water reactors which should be made easily
available by the NSG. PTI 

  � Copyright PTI 2003-2004
*****************************************************************
 29 NCSU Tech: Campus reactor leads the way in 'nuclear renaissance'
 
technicianonline.com /  07.20.2005 /    news /  

07.20.2005 	 	

Illustration by Win Bassett/TECHNICIAN                
 		  
 Ian Jester 

Every Tuesday and Thursday afternoon in Spring semester, Dayne
Murray skated on his Gravity longboard towards what he described
as the "home of his future." 

He was one of 45 nuclear engineering students to attend this
second-year class inside Burlington Laboratories. The sophomore
said skating to class saved him 20 minutes of traveling, which
he put towards sleep. 

But there is an object that captured his attention before
walking into each class. 

"There's a Progress Energy plaque that I look at on the wall
next to our classroom," Murray said. "It's nothing fancy, but it
lets me know there's an employer out there that wants me to come
to class and succeed." 

The plaque symbolizes the University's appreciation for the
$385,000 renovation grant presented by the Progress Energy
Foundation to former Chancellor Marye Anne Fox in 2000. 

Headquartered in Downtown Raleigh, Progress Energy is one of the
strongest supporters of the College of Engineering, according to
COE Executive Director of Development Ben Hughes. 

"Progress Energy needs engineers and we train engineers," Hughes
said. "We are a source of recruitment for major companies like
Progress, and their generous financial support is just an
insight to our long-term relationship. It's a relationship that
dates back to before I was at N.C. State." 

The partnership began in 1977 -- when Progress Energy was known
as Carolina Power &Light -- it has benefited both parties. 

"In the 80 plus years of the company, we've worked with the
faculty and students at N.C. State to ensure their research in
nuclear energy is adequately funded," Merrilee Jacobson, a
corporate communications specialist for Progress Energy, said.
"We want people to be aware that Progress Energy is committed to
the University and to the Raleigh community for years to come." 

Progress Energy donated a total of $232,500 to the College of
Engineering in the 2004 fiscal year, and is planning to increase
that amount by more than $30,000 for 2005. 

Jacobson is part of a research team for the Progress Energy
Foundation that decides which non-profit organizations are most
deserving for the company's education, environmental and
economic development grants. 

"It's a very interactive process," Jacobson said. "Everyone is
interested in finding the right mix of funding that satisfies
both parties. I sit down with Ben once or twice a month to find
out the needs of the engineering college and how we can
appropriate our corporate profitability funds." 

Hughes says Duke Energy, the North Carolina-based diversified
energy company, is another huge supporter of the University. 

Based out of Charlotte, Duke Energy provided the College of
Engineering with $174,500 in the 2004 fiscal year, according to
Duke Energy Senior Vice President E. O. Ferrell III. 

"Duke Energy is a company founded in engineering with seven
nuclear reactors under our control," Ferrell, a 1966 alumnus in
electrical engineering, said. "And since N.C. State has one of
the few operating nuclear reactors for research in the nation,
we want to fund N.C. State to make sure the nuclear program
stays robust." 

That nuclear reactor is housed at Burlington, on the other side
of Murray's nuclear engineering class in the Progress Energy
Lecture Hall. Ferrell, who is also on the board of directors for
the NCSU Engineering Foundation, remembers the first time he was
introduced to nuclear energy. 

"I remember watching the utility trucks pass by my house in
Durham. That was the first time I knew of Duke Power," Ferrell
said. "While I was at State, Duke Energy was building a
hydroelectric station north of Charlotte, and they invited
engineers to come see the facility as part of future
recruitment. The potential of fission and nuclear power really
started to pick up." 

Stemming from the ideas of Clifford Beck and former Dean of
Engineering Harold Lampe, the present 1-megawatt PULSTAR nuclear
reactor was built in 1950, establishing the nation's first
university nuclear reactor and research curriculum. 

Currently, the PULSTAR reactor is one of three university
nuclear reactors located in the Southeast -- and one of 27 in
the nation. 

NCSU is a member of the Multi-University Southeast INIE
Consortium, or MUSIC, which conducts research based on grants
from the U.S. Department of Energy. The department head of
nuclear engineering Paul Turinsky points out that U.S.
Department of Energy has funded the NCSU program in several
ways, including a $12 million research grant applicable over six
years. 

"For the longer term, the U.S. Department of Energy is
developing six new reactor designs, dramatically different from
current plant designs, to deploy two or three decades from now,"
Turinsky said. "Our program will be a key player in that
development, through our membership in the Battelle Energy
Alliance, which recently received a $5 billion contract to
operate at the Idaho National Laboratory for the next 10 years." 

Hughes said the nuclear industry took a major hit in confidence
following the melting of nuclear fuel from a full-scale
commercial reactor at Three Mile Island near Middletown, Pa. in
1979. The loss that halted a nuclear dream of unlimited
potential for some time. 

"Lots of nuclear programs closed down, and now whether it's
because of political controversy or the threat of nuclear
terrorist attacks, there's a reluctance to rebuild that
confidence in general," Hughes said. 

According to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission there was a
decline in orders for nuclear plants following the meltdown, and
the demand for new employees dropped. But as many universities
discontinued their nuclear funding and programs after Three Mile
Island, NCSU remained committed throughout the questionable
period in the nuclear industry, a move Mohamed Bourham, a
professor in nuclear engineering, praised. 

"We are now in the nuclear renaissance," Bourham said. "Nuclear
engineering programs have increased nationwide and the numbers
are incredible compared to five years ago." 

As more programs are created across the country, NCSU's program
grows. 

"There were only 25-30 undergraduates in nuclear engineering
three or four years ago," Hughes said. "Now there are about 120
graduates this year." 

Spring graduate Josh Nowak said researching the history of
nuclear engineering in high school didn't scare him from
enrolling in the program. 

"The scholarship from Duke Energy means the world," Nowak said
"Because I'm an out-of-state student I wouldn't have been able
to get my degree without that." 

Nowak's scholarship is one of four areas of financial support
given by the nuclear companies' foundations. The second area is
directed toward programmatic support, which includes anything
from improving the operation of the PULSTAR to renovating
teaching facilities and labs. The renovations have not gone
unnoticed by one nuclear engineering student, who receives
scholarship support from Progress Energy. 

"I know that I just got out of a nuclear lab without new
equipment, and the radiation counters were so worn out," Jason
Kopp, a senior in nuclear engineering, said. "Through the
funding of Progress Energy we've gotten a world of help in our
experiments." 

The other two areas reflect corporate funding in the areas of
event sponsorships and unrestricted support. Both energy
companies sponsor dinners for Ben Franklin scholars -- students
earning a bachelor's degree in both engineering and humanities
-- as well as providing a "piggy bank" fund for the dean to use
at his will. 

"The dean will use the unrestricted support funds to benefit
highly-qualified out-of-state students that are considering a
closer alternative for education," Hughes said. "It's a strong
way to compete against Georgia Tech, Virgina Tech, Purdue and
other technical schools for the brightest students." 

By bringing in this vast potential for future employees of the
nuclear industry, Ferrell said both North Carolina-based
companies will benefit from a market period that is demanding to
hire more graduates. 

"Over the past several years, the main goal for utility
companies was to operate extremely efficient," Ferrell said.
"Now many of the senior employees that we hired in the 1970s are
looking at retirement -- they've already benefited the company
with all they had left. Now we've reached a period where hiring
a greater number of college graduates is becoming the main
goal." 

Jacobson echoed Ferrell's statements, when she also added the
market for hiring at Progress Energy is improving following the
recent purchase of Florida Energy. 

"You don't normally absorb a company the same size as yourself,"
Jacobson said. "We had to borrow a lot of money from the market,
but this made us more flexible as an employer. Now we'll hire
roughly 1,000 entry-level graduates by December to fill those
positions vacated by our retiring senior employees." 

It's a change in the market Ferrell anticipated, but said he
knows one of the two North Carolina nuclear giants needs to
build the next-generation reactor to fulfill that promise. 

"The need for engineers was static after Three Mile," Ferrell
said. "The normal cycle that increased the number of nuclear
power plants stopped. It left the country in the position where
adding more base-load generating plants will support the need
for engineering talent, the talent that will replace the seniors
of the 1970s." 

Jacobson and Ferrell both agreed the importance of nuclear power
in the nation's future will be witnessed by its environmental
safety compared to other energy sources. 

And by way of their long-term relationship with the University,
both companies have NCSU graduates believing in the same
prosperous future. 

"It's going to start booming here when we start running out of
fossil fuels," Kopp said. "I think my future is going to be a
promising one for the nuclear industry." 	 	   	     	  
 	
TECHNICIAN Contact us

North Carolina State University's Student Newspaper Since 1920
� 2000-2004 NCSU SMA. All Rights Reserved.         
*****************************************************************
 30 Xinhua: Ukraine shuts down two nuclear reactors due to malfunctions   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2005-07-20 19:49:11   

    KIEV, July 20 (Xinhuanet) -- Two nuclear reactors in Ukraine
have been shut down on Wednesday due to malfunctions, officials
from the Emergency Situation Ministry said. 

    The No. 4 reactor at the Rivne nuclear power plant in
western Ukraine was shut down after two power supply pumps
automatically turned off because of low water levels. 

    The No. 2 reactor at the Southern Ukraine plant in the
Mykolaivregion was automatically disconnected after a crack
appeared in a circuit pipe. 

    The malfunctions are both minor and are expected to be
repaired soon, emergency officials said. 

    Ukraine was the site of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear
catastrophe,the world's worst civilian atomic disaster. Enditem 
 
    
  Copyright �2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 31 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting of the ACRS 
 
                         FR Doc E5-3858 
[Federal Register: July 20, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 138)] 
[Notices] [Page 41801] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy05-118]                         
 
Subcommittee on Plant Operations; Notice of Meeting The ACRS 
Subcommittee on Plant Operations will hold a meeting on August 24 
and 25, 2005, U.S. NRC Region II, Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal 
Center, 23 T85, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia. The 
entire meeting will be open to public attendance.
 
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: 
Wednesday, August 24, 2005--1:30 p.m. until the conclusion of 
business Thursday, August 25, 2005--8:30 a.m. until the 
conclusion of business The Subcommittee will discuss regional 
inspection, enforcement, and operational activities. The 
Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and 
facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as 
appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
 
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, 
Mr. Ralph Caruso (telephone 301-415-8065) five days prior to the 
meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be 
made.
 
Electronic recordings will be permitted.
 
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 
4:30 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged 
to contract the above named individual at least two working days 
prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to 
the agenda.
 
Dated: July 14, 2005.
 
Michael L. Scott, Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
 
[FR Doc. E5-3858 Filed 7-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 32 Indian Express: Not just Tarapur, other reactors too will get US fuel supply
 
Thursday, July 21, 2005

C RAJA MOHAN                              

WASHINGTON, JULY 20: In an impressive gain for India, the Bush 
Administration has agreed to supply not only enriched uranium to 
fuel the Tarapur reactors, but also natural uranium for other 
reactors that are at the heart of the national nuclear energy 
programme.

In one stroke, the US decision under the nuclear pact signed 
Monday, addresses a long-standing vulnerability of India�s 
civilian nuclear programme�the lack of enough domestic reserves 
of natural uranium.

Well placed sources in the Indian delegation say the Bush
Administration�s commitment came upon the insistence of Anil
Kakodkar, Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission.

Those familiar with the drama of Indo-US nuclear
negotiations�that oscillated between success and failure
throughout the last weekend�say it was a master stroke by Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh to include two top scientists in his
delegation.

The presence of Kakodkar and G Madhavan Nair, who heads the
Indian space programme in the delegation, sources add, ensured
that the Prime Minister had the best and highest possible
technical inputs in the complex negotiations with the US on
nuclear and space related issues.

The presence of these two top scientists allowed India to
maximise the gains from the negotiations with the US. It was
also an insurance against inevitable criticism at home�either
politically motivated or ill-informed. The effective
participation of Kakodkar and Madhavan Nair in the talks ensured
that all the interests of these two key sectors of India�s
strategic scientific complex were protected.

The US commitment to supply natural uranium to those reactors
India chooses to place under international safeguards was only
one of the many positive results from the nuclear pact with the
United States.

The nuclear pact commits the Bush Administration now to press
its allies and partners to let India into future-oriented
international nuclear ventures like ��ITER�� and ��Generation IV
International Forum��. The former is aimed at producing electric
power from nuclear fusion. The GIF brings together some ten
advanced countries which pool their resources in developing a
new generation of fission reactors.

The so-called Generation IV reactors are safer, cheaper, and
more efficient. They also produce less radioactive waste. The
Department of Atomic Energy has been keen to join and contribute
to both the scientific ventures.

Meanwhile, the Bush Administration has agreed to remove a number
of important Indian nuclear and space establishments from list
of entities which have been facing US sanctions.

These include the two nuclear reactors at the Tarapur Power
Station and the two at the Rajasthan Atomic Power Stations. Also
included are the ISRO Telemetry, Tracking and Command Network
(ISTRAC), the ISRO Inertial Systems Unit (IISU) and the Space
Applications Centre (SAC). The notification on this is expected
next week.

� 2005: Indian Express Newspapers (Mumbai) Ltd.
*****************************************************************
 33 The Mercury: Limerick cooling tower shuts itself down

07/20/2005 - 

Mike Castiglione, mcastiglione@pottsmerc.com07/20/2005

LIMERICK -- Peering out at the cooling towers of Exelon�s 
Limerick Generating Station, observers may notice that since 
Monday morning steam has only been pouring out of one of the 
units.                                                      

At about 10 a.m. Monday, Unit 1 underwent an unexpected automatic 
shutdown because of a trip in the electrical distribution area of 
the plant, officials said. 

"We have had automatic shutdowns in the past, but our record of 
operation continues to be one of the best in the industry," said 
Beth Rapczynski, spokeswoman for the plant. 

Although Unit 2 is running at full power, Unit 1 continued to be 
shut down Tuesday. Officials did not release a time period for 
when Unit 1 would be up and running, a policy plant officials 
uphold when dealing with "proprietary information." However, 
Tuesday evening, officials did confirm that Unit 1 was starting 
back up, a process that takes considerably longer than the time 
it takes to shut down. 

According to Rapczynski, there is nothing for area residents to 
worry about with respect to the cooling tower being shut down. 
"There was no release of radiation, nor were there any injuries 
to any employees during the process," Rapczynski said. "Unit 1 
was shut down properly and safely. There are no issues, 
everything went as expected."

Rapczynski said the plant is set up to shut down in cases where 
there is a trip. The shutdown happens within seconds of 
initiation. 

In April, the plant received high marks from the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission during its annual performance assessment, 
meaning there were very few safety issues. 

Plant officials did confirm that the NRC was notified Monday of 
what was going on.

Rapczynski, when asked if Monday�s shut down, or the subsequent 
response to the situation, would have any effect on the NRC�s 
evaluation, replied, "The NRC will look into it. They look at 
many different aspects when they conduct the assessments. It�s up 
to them how they handle it."

The Mercury was unsuccessful in attempts to reach the NRC for 
comment.

This is the second time in recent months that one of the towers 
had to be unexpectedly shut down. In March, after a scheduled 
refueling outage to conduct maintenance to Unit 2, the tower had 
to be shut back down two days after it came back online due to a 
high temperature reading on a turbine bearing.

Crews investigated and found damage to the bearing. Workers 
repaired the damage and the plant was functioning normally seven 
days after it shutdown. 

      �The Mercury 2005                                       

*****************************************************************
 34 Middletown Press: Connecticut Yankee vows to keep public informed status of waste

07/20/2005 - 

By JOSH MROZINSKI, Middletown Press Staff07/20/2005

MIDDLETOWN -- The Community Decommissioning Advisory Committee, 
or CDAC, agreed on Tuesday to start talking about its future role 
and make-up after Labor Day.                                                        

The committee first started meeting in 1998 when the 
decommissioning of Connecticut Yankee nuclear power plant in 
Haddam Neck first started. CDAC meets quarterly.

Hugh Curley, CDAC chairman, said that a new committee would
likely be formed to give public updates on the status of the
nuclear waste stored at a pad three-quarters of a mile from the
Connecticut Yankee plant.

In March, Connecticut Yankee brought the last cask of
radioactive material to the pad. Long-range plans call for the
43 casks of spent-fuel and reactor vessel metal to be moved to a
federal nuclear waste disposal site planned for Yucca Mountain,
Nev. at an undetermined date.

 Decommissioning was 77.6 percent complete as of June 30, a
Connecticut Yankee employee reported at Tuesday�s meeting.

Joe Bourassa, nuclear safety and regulatory affairs director,
said 400 plant personnel are involved in the project at this
time.

"We should see that number decrease as the year goes on,"
Bourassa said.

Preparation for the eventual demolition of the containment dome
is set to begin later this week, Bourassa said. The actual
demolition is scheduled for next year. Demolition of the plant�s
turbine.

With the waste transfer complete, Connecticut Yankee is
demolishing the plant�s buildings. 

A total of 335 million pounds of construction debris will be
removed from the site by the project�s end, which is scheduled
for 2006. Bourassa said approximately 159 million pounds of
construction debris had been shipped as of July 2.

Connecticut Yankee is transporting radioactive debris to
facilities in Tennessee, Utah and South Carolina and
non-radioactive debris to a facility in Bozrah.

A truck spilled approximately two tons of low-level radioactive
soil onto a Virginia highway during a recent shipment, Bourassa
reported.

The truck reportedly overturned when it tried to avoid another
vehicle that made an illegal U-turn.

The spilled-waste was removed, Bourassa said.

To contact Josh Mrozinski, call (860) 347-3331, ext. 222 or
e-mail jmrozinski@middletownpress.com 

�The Middletown Press 2005                                      

*****************************************************************
 35 Guardian Unlimited: N.Y. Nuke Sirens Temporarily Deactivated
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday July 20, 2005 3:01 AM

By JIM FITZGERALD 

Associated Press Writer 

WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. (AP) - Sirens meant to warn thousands of
people of any emergency at a nuclear plant complex north of New
York City stood useless for nearly six hours Tuesday 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. 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.'' 

Gottlieb said the cause of the outage was not known but there
was ``no evidence of sabotage.'' 

Entergy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission were investigating
the failure. 

Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano, who has been
demanding a backup power system for the sirens, said he would
ask the Federal Emergency Management Agency to investigate as
well. 

The sirens, in suburban Westchester, Putnam, Rockland and Orange
counties, are meant to alert residents within 10 miles of the
complex to tune in broadcasts about any emergency. 

``The public was never in danger,'' Gottlieb said. He said that
if an emergency had occurred the failure of the sirens would
have been noticed and a battery would have been brought in to
activate them. 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 36 PRN: Platts: Nuclear Fuel Strategies Conference to Feature Congressman
David Hobson

Wednesday July 20, 5:06 pm ET 

LEXINGTON, Mass., July 20 /PRNewswire/ -- Congressman David 
Hobson will deliver the opening address for Platts' Nuclear Fuel 
Strategies conference, September 22, 2005, in Washington, DC.

Congressman Hobson, among the most important congressional 
leaders on energy policy, will speak on "Progress and Solutions 
for Nuclear Fuel: Legislative Outlook." Hobson, now in his 
seventh term representing the 7th district of Ohio, is the 
chairman of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Water 
Development Appropriations.

Congressman Hobson is joined by two other outstanding keynote
speakers: Peter B. Lyons, Commissioner of the US Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, and Dan Keuter, Vice President for
Nuclear Business Development with Entergy Nuclear.

Attendees will hear from senior nuclear fuel experts including
representatives of British Energy, Florida Power & Light, Duke
Power, TVA, Yankee Atomic Energy, Constellation Energy, Progress
Energy, RWE Nukem, USEC, AREVA, Ballard Spahr Andrews &
Ingersoll, the Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate, Idaho
National Laboratory, and many more.

The conference takes place September 22-23 at the Four Points
Sheraton, Washington, DC. For a full conference program go to
http://www.events.platts.com, or call 866-355-2930 (toll free in
the US).

Platts is the publisher of Nucleonics Week, Nuclear News
Flashes, NuclearFuel and Inside NRC, which offer coverage of
global commercial nuclear power, front and back ends of the fuel
cycle and significant regulatory news worldwide

Platts, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, is the world
leader in providing energy information. For nearly a century,
Platts has helped to enable ever-changing global energy markets
enhance their performance through such offerings as independent
industry news and price benchmarks. From 15 offices worldwide,
Platts covers the oil, natural gas, electricity, nuclear power,
coal, petrochemical and metals markets. Additional information
on Platts real-time news and price assessment services,
publications, databases, geospatial tools, conferences,
magazines, research and analytical services and energy financial
services is available at http://www.platts.com.

About The McGraw-Hill Companies

Founded in 1888, The McGraw-Hill Companies is a leading global
information services provider meeting worldwide needs in the
financial services, education and business information markets
through leading brands such as Standard & Poor's, BusinessWeek
and McGraw-Hill Education. The Corporation has more than 290
offices in 37 countries. Sales in 2004 were $5.3 billion.
Additional information is available at
http://www.mcgraw-hill.com.

Source: Platts
*****************************************************************
 37 CBC News: Power plants worried as heat wave warms Great Lakes
 	 	 	 	 	
 Last Updated Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:34:34 EDT CBC News 

Ontario's electricity supply may be in jeopardy because a 
weeks-long heat wave has warmed waters in the Great Lakes and 
lowered the levels of northern rivers, a provincial power utility 
is warning. 

  + INDEPTH: Blackouts and brownouts

Although temperatures and humidity haven't been as extreme
during the past two days, the warmer waters may force some coal
and nuclear generating stations to cut their power production,
according to Ontario Power Generation. 

The water at Toronto's Cherry Beach, which is on Lake Ontario,
is about four degrees warmer than it was last summer, for
example. 


  + INDEPTH: Energy conservation

The utility said that similar increases in other parts of the
Great Lakes are causing problems for coal and nuclear plants at
Nanticoke, Lambton and Pickering. They all use water from the
Great Lakes system to cool their generators. 

OPG spokesman John Earl said that the warmer the water gets, the
less efficiently it cools the generators. That in turn reduces
the plants' generating capacity, resulting in less electricity
for consumers. 


  + INDEPTH: Heat waves

Earl said the water can be no warmer than 35 C when it is
expelled from the plants. "If we exceed [that temperature], we
would have to ratchet back the amount of generation we could put
out." 

He said that the power company has come close to that limit a
number of times, including once last week. 



Warmer water could lead to lingering blackouts The Independent
Electricity System Operator (IESO), which oversees the
provincial electricity system, said the warmer waters pose
particular concerns � especially if the heat wave continues. 

A spokesman, Terry Young, said water doesn't cool off quickly,
so any cutbacks in generation could last for some time. 

"Instead of just worrying about a peak hour, you are worrying
about 24 hours, because you have energy issues throughout those
24 hours," Young said. 

He said the warmer waters are one of the reasons that the IESO
issued a warning on Monday asking people to cut back on their
electricity usage all week. 

The IESO said rolling blackouts were still possible if
residents, businesses and industry didn't cut back on power use
during the week. It has urged consumers to reduce electricity
use between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. 

So far this week, the province's power consumption peaked at
25,857 megawatts (MW) on Monday, just short of the record set
last week of 26,170 MW. 

Northern hydro power drops by a third 

Meanwhile, as continued high temperatures fuel the use of air
conditioners and other power-sucking devices, low water levels
have reduced the amount of power northeastern Ontario can churn
out. 

  + FROM JULY 18, 2005: Heat wave pushing power consumption in
Central Canada



Power generation from hydro facilities in the region is down by
about a third, Ontario Power Generation said. 

Northern Ontario facilities are responsible for providing about
a fifth of the power needed across the province. 

Earl said water levels on rivers like the Abitibi and the
Mattagami are too low to keep production at normal levels. 

He said the company must ensure its generating needs don't
reduce water levels to the extent that fish and wildlife are
affected. 

As a result of the lower power supply from the north, Earl said
the company must rely on other power facilities to meet the
demand. 

All nine of Ontario's nuclear reactors are on-line, as are the
province's coal-fired power plants, he said. 

Ontario dips into energy reserves 

The Independent Electricity System Operator hasn't been able to
meet a standard for its reserves that was set after a massive
blackout two years ago. 

The Northeast Power Co-ordinating Council, which oversees the
power grid for Ontario, Quebec and the northeastern United
States, says that about 15 per cent of capacity should be kept
in reserve. 

But the IESO hasn't been able to meet that figure. This week,
Ontario's electricity system has been running with a reserve
margin of only six per cent. 

A spokesman for the council, Stephen Allen, said it's expected
that the standard can be broken when it gets as hot as it has
recently been in Ontario. He also said there's a 10-minute
reserve to consider. 

If Ontario's largest power generating unit at the Darlington
nuclear plant stopped producing electricity suddenly, the IESO
would have to find replacement power within 10 minutes. 

Allen said Ontario has been able to meet that standard. 

  Copyright � CBC 2005   
*****************************************************************
 38 Brattleboro Reformer: Final NRC decision on Yankee uprate remains unknown

July 20, 2005 Brattleboro, VT                                                                                 
 			 								 					
By CAROLYN LORI� 
Reformer Staff

BRATTLEBORO -- The staff at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
still do not know when there will be a final decision on Vermont
Yankee's uprate application.

 In a report submitted to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
on Friday, agency attorney Brooke Poole wrote that the NRC
expected to request a large amount of additional information
from Vermont Yankee staff.

 The primary concern is the effect that a power increase will
have onthe nuclear reactor's steam dryers.

 According to Neil Sheehan, NRC spokesman for Region I, plants
that have increased power by more than 7 percent -- known as an
extended power uprate -- have experienced problems with cracking
in the steam dryers. The cracking is the result of increased
vibration.

 Two nuclear power plants in Illinois, Dresden and Quad Cities,
increased power in 2001. Both boosted power production by about
17 percent and both have had substantial trouble with the steam
dryers, at times resulting in extended shutdowns. 

Dresden, Quad Cities and Vermont Yankee are all Mark I boiling
water reactors, designed by General Electric.

 During the spring 2004 refueling outage, Vermont Yankee staff
discovered about 20 hairline cracks in the steam dryer. They
have since been repaired and reportedly did not affect the
safely of the plant.

 NRC officials, however, continue to have questions.

 In April, Vermont Yankee engineers submitted several
supplements to the application addressing the steam dryer
concerns.

 The result, according to Friday's report, was the raising of
more questions.

 "The staff expects to issue, in the near term, approximately
200 requests for additional information questions on various
topics," wrote Poole.

 Until Vermont Yankee staff gives some indication as to when it
will respond to the requests, the NRC cannot set a schedule for
the application review.

 Officials at the plant completed their file to increase power
by 20 percent, the most that is allowed, in January, 2004. Most
uprate applications take about one year to review, which meant
that a decision on Vermont Yankee was expected this past January.

 The NRC, however, delayed a decision in order to look into the
steam dryer problem.

 In February, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ordered the
NRC staff to file monthly reports about the ongoing review. The
board, a quasi-judicial, independent branch of the NRC, is
presiding over the hearings challenging the proposed uprate.

 The Vermont Department of Public Service and the
Brattleboro-based New England Coalition are both opposing the
uprate -- or in the case of the department, aspects of the
uprate -- on grounds that it is not safe.

 On Aug. 3, the board will hold a conference call with all of
the parties to get an update on the proceedings.

 According to Poole's July 15 report, the NRC staff will provide
an estimate of the uprate schedule at that time.

Copyright �1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., 
*****************************************************************
 39 Indiatimes: We dont need anybodys help to run our reactors

GIRISH KUBER

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, JULY 20, 2005 03:07:12 AM]   

  MUMBAI: A day after the US lifted 31-year sanctions on uranium
supplies to India, the local scientist community says the
countrys doesnt need anybodys help to run its nuclear
establishments. Nuclear Power Corporation (NPCIL) chairman & MD
SK Jain, in an exclusive interview to ET, explained the
decisions significance. 

NPCIL is the nodal body that that runs Indias nuclear power
plants. SK Malhotra, the head of public awareness at the
Department of Atomic Energy echoed similar sentiments. We were
not facing an emergency in the absence of US support. But its
always good if someone assures a long-term uranium supply, he
said. 

Mr Jain said, We have established our comprehensive capability
in developing pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs). These
fast track programmes are in place and going on as per schedule.
We dont need anybodys help in running these reactors. Except
some raw material thats required for tubes in the reactor,
India has never had any problem in developing its nuclear
infrastructure even under US sanctions, he further said. 

 However, he hastened to add that the US decision is welcome 
because it will ease pressure. "All support is welcome in raising 
our power generation. So considering our power needs, the US 
decision will relieve our pressure and bring down the gestation 
period of atomic plants," he said. The NPCIL has set a generating 
target of 20,000 MW by '20. The NPCIL thinks that this decision 
will help it shop globally for needs.

"The US decision will have an international effect as it will 
free us and other countries. Now, we will be allowed to buy what 
we want and other countries will be free to sell what we need," 
Mr Jain also said. Besides, it will help India to become a global 
player. The US, while lifting the sanctions, has recognised India 
as a responsible nuclear state. This will allow India to sell 
what it has. "There's a great demand for our pressurised heavy 
water reactors. Sanctions had restricted us from selling them. 
Lifting of those sanctions means we can now compete with others 
in the global market," he said.
  
Copyright � 2005 Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. ||
*****************************************************************
 40 UN Atomic Watchdog Uses Satellite Feed To Verify Peaceful Use Of Nuclear Materials
 
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:01:25 -0400

 
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on pascal.ctyme.com
 
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_ORG,
	SPF_HELO_PASS,SP_HAM_SUPER,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS,WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham 

	version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com

UN ATOMIC WATCHDOG USES SATELLITE FEED TO VERIFY PEACEFUL USE OF 
NUCLEAR MATERIALS
New York, Jul 20 2005 10:00AM
The United Nations atomic watchdog agency has started using direct 
satellite feeds from nuclear facilities to check that sensitive 
materials are not being diverted for weapons or other non-peaceful 
uses, executing every day operations previously performed only 

The first field trial connecting a nuclear power plant in Slovakia 
to UN International Atomic Energy Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org">IAEA) 
headquarters in Vienna started in April, the agency <"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/satellitefeeds.html">reported 
today. 


�It provides Agency inspectors with a continuous flow of information,� 
Massimo Aparo of IAEA Safeguards Technical Support said.

Images and electronic seal data recorded at a Slovak nuclear spent 
fuel pool and reactor core are now downloaded daily to the IAEA�s 
safeguards computer systems. The images are taken every five minutes, 
the data is encrypted/authenticated, then transmitted to 
Vienna. Inspectors review the data and determine if the plant is 
operating as declared.

Previously inspectors needed to travel to the nuclear facility to 
retrieve the data, making such a journey every three months. The 
results of a feasibility study for a prospective global roll-out 
of the use of satellites are expected by the end of the year.

�The idea is to create secure, global communication networks between 
IAEA headquarters, remote nuclear facilities and regional offices,� 
Mr. Aparo said. Such a set-up would enable several gigabytes 
of data to be transmitted each day to IAEA headquarters for inspectors 
to scrutinize.

The IAEA is now working with the European Space Agency to assess 
the feasibility and cost of using satellites to relay data from more 
than 100 surveillance systems it operates in 13 countries.

The IAEA first started using remote monitoring of selected nuclear 
facilities on a trial basis in the 1990�s, using telephone lines 
and the Internet to transmit the data, but these networks are not 
always reliable, especially when communicating with less developed 
countries that lack established telecommunications infrastructure.

�One advantage of satellites is you do not need to rely on the infrastructure 
of the country,� Mr. Aparo said, adding that telephone 
lines are also not optimal to transfer large amounts of data.
 2005-07-20 00:00:00.000 


________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news

To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml
*****************************************************************
 41 [NYTr] UN Using Satellite Images to Track Nuclear Material
 
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:53:43 -0500 (CDT)

 
Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Prensa Latina, Havana
http://www.plenglish.com

UN Using Satellite Images to Track Nuclear Material

United Nations, Jul 20 (PL)--Officials from the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) announced Wednesday the use of satellite images to track
nuclear material and assure its peaceful use, which is already considered
routine.

Maximo Aparo, official of the IAEA Technical Support department, said
that inspectors have begun using satellite images of nuclear plants
to track dangerous materials.

"Revision of this kind of information has been incorporated to the
IAEA daily routine. With the traditional evaluation method, inspectors
travelled every three months to the installations," Aparo stated.

"The idea is to create safe world communication nets between IAEA,
remote nuclear installations and regional nuclear offices. This allows
inspectors to have a continuous flow of information," he concluded.

nytr/ln/tac/ir/jwp
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 42 [du-list]  Depleted uranium
 
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:39:09 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Depleted uranium
Date: 	Fri, 6 May 2005 23:08:27 +0200
From: 	Secr�tariat Avigolfe <avigolfe@tiscali.fr>
To: 	<et@nucnews.net>

Dear Sir, madam

My name is Alain ACARIES and I am the general secretary of
AVIGOLFE  - the French association for military and civil
victims of the Gulf and Balkans wars, the chairman is M.
Herve DESPLAT, an ex-military person and veteran of the
First  Gulf  war.

I am also the father of Ludovic, sent to the Balkans during
his military service for six months with FORPRONU  - and who
died of a serious illness in 1997. I would like to inform
you , that due to the lack of recognition by both military
and civil authorities of the connection between the military
service and the death of my son, I asked for a scientific
analysis of one of his lymph glands that had been conserved
by the civil hospital where he had been treated in the first
instance. This examination was done in the NANODIAGNOSTICS
   laboratory (Via E.Fermi  41057 San Vito, Modena , Italy)
Dr. Gatti, biologist and physician, examined the lymph
ganglion, that I personally took to her in January 2005.

A new technique has been developed using an ambient electron
microscope, with funding by the EEC ( Projet QLRT - 2002 -
147 NANOPATHOLOGY) . This method, for the moment unique,
reveals inorganic micro and nano particles in the tissues.
For more information on their research you can connect to :
http:/avigolfe.ifrance.com  - click on the flower on the
title page and you have access to all the rubric  - select
Nanopathologie 2.  The documents are in both English and
French  or if you wish I can forward  further information to
you, in French or English, about this method.

As in all the cases of victims of the "Balkans Syndrome"
studied by this laboratory, the sample of the lymph gland of
Ludovic Acaries was found to contain a concentration of
metallic micro and nano particles ( Ag. Cr. Au. Si. Al. Mg.
Mo.) and non metallic  ( P, S, I, Cl ). Such a mass is not
found in the normal composition of human tissues, and these
alloys do not exist in a natural state or in the
metallurgical industry. It has already been proven that
normal cellular defense mechanisms are ineffective when
confronted  with extremely small particles. Once these
fragments have entered the human body, they can penetrate
the cellular nucleus and lead to very serious consequences,
- a number of them are listed as poisonous chemicals.

These particles produced during the impact of the weakened
uranium or tungsten munitions on the target  and owing to
the extremely high temperature  ( +3000� ) can remain
suspended in the atmosphere for a very long time after their
formation, and they can persist in high concentration in
enclosed areas (cars or rooms ). The vehicles used by the
French of FORPRONU in the Balkans, had not long returned
from the Gulf war and NO research or specific treatment was
carried out before they were re-used in the Balkans.
(Confirmation by the defense ministry)

An important detail is that Ludovic was in the Balkans from
March 1993 to October 1993 and NATO declared to have used
weakened uranium weapons as from August 1994  But we have
proof that tungsten munitions were found in the Balkans in 1993.

In Ludovic's case, who was a lorry driver - and who ate and
slept in his lorry when on supplies mission to troops in
Sarajevo , and frequently having to stop due to close
fighting, the origin was confirmed to be caused by
vaccinations and radioactivity , but not necessarily both.
For more information, you can read  "Les Vaccins"  on our
internet site.

A complaint is being registered by the French judge in
charge of the investigations  ... But here , at AVIGOLFE, we
would like to take these sanitary problems associated with
modern wars to a European level  as our governments refuse
to listen to reason and give pensions to the victims or to
their families.  We would like the veterans of  each
European country who took part in these conflicts,  alert
the press again with the information I'm sending you ,so
that ALL  persons concerned are informed  and that each one
write to one or more European deputies in Strasbourg asking
for the creation of  a European Inquiry Committee, and also
that the scientists involved be heard.

I'm sure I can count on you to distribute this letter as far
as possible to all yours European friends and other people.
    Avigolfe has already written to French European
parliamentaries - but  that it must do it in other Europeans
countries.

I would very much appreciate acknowledgement of this letter
- and, if possible , the actions you intend to take.

Very sincerely yours,

     Alain Acaries
AVIGOLFE

Association Fran�aise des victimes civiles et militaires des
   guerres du Golfe et des Balkans
49 avenue Bontemps
95750 CHARS ( FRANCE )
t�l : +33 6 85 20 06 99
avigolfe@tiscali.fr <mailto:avigolfe@tiscali.fr>

http://avigolfe.ifrance.com <http://avigolfe.ifrance.com/




Antonietta Morena Gatti is a physicist and bioengineer, and
is the founder and the director of the Laboratory of
Biomaterials of  the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia
(Italy). She is the  discoverer of the presence of micro-
and nano-particles in biological tissues and of their
pathological effects. The European Community appointed her
Coordinator of the international group in charge of the
nanopathology study.

Stefano Montanari is a pharmacist and a scientific
consultant. He has collaborated with Dr Gatti for about 25
years.

THE SO-CALLED "BALKAN-SYNDROME": A BIO-ENGINEERING APPROACH

Dr Antonietta M. Gatti - Dr Stefano Montanari

It is a well-known fact, widely reported by media, that a
non-negligible number of veterans of the Gulf War (1990-91)
showed what according to medicine are mutually unrelated
symptoms. Some of those can be attributed to stress:
headache, for example, or sleep disturbance, or
forgetfulness, or an impaired concentration. Other symptoms
like fatigue, muscle and joint pain, and shortness of breath
are somewhat harder to classify, but cancers, various and,
in some cases, extremely unusual diseases of the
genitourinary system, an  increased incidence of birth
defects among veterans' children and disorders of the blood
and the haemopoietic organs must be due to causes that
cannot be legitimately ascribed to stress. Other pathologies
Gulf War veterans are suffering from, like sudden death and
Lou Gehrig's disease are under investigation as to their
meaningfulness.

But the problem is unfortunately wider and not limited to
that group of military population.

Very similar symptoms are being displayed by soldiers who
served in the former Yugoslavian territory during the
so-called Balkan War, made worse by an unusually high
incidence of Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. Staffers
of humanitarian missions and Yugoslavian residents as well
are suffering from the same diseases.

Professor Edo Hasanbegovic, chief of the Paediatric Clinic
of Sarajevo, denounced how leukaemia is on the increase in
children throughout the Yugoslavian Federation, but mainly
in children coming from Velika, Kladusa and Buzim, towns
located close to the Croatian borderline.An explanation to
all that was offered when in March 2000 NATO revealed that
Depleted Uranium (DU) shells had been employed in the
Balkans and in 2001 traces of radioactivity were detected by
the United Nations Environment Protection agency not far
from Sarajevo, in a barracks at Han Pijesak and in two
places inside a factory in Hadzici.

It is a frequently observed fact that radioactivity is a
triggering factor to cancer, and Hiroshima and Nagasaki
taught a painful lesson about that. So, uranium was
immediately seen as the obvious scapegoat to blame.

For a better understanding, it is necessary to know that DU
was used to make a component of some shells used in that
war, but radioactivity played no role in that choice. High
density and hardness are the features that made those
projectiles, called kinetic penetrators, particularly fit
for piercing even very thick armours. DU is what is left
over when most of the highly radioactive isotopes of uranium
are removed for use as nuclear fuel or nuclear weapons.

The DU used in armour-piercing munitions is also used in
civilian industry, primarily as ballast, for stabilizers in
airplanes and boats.

As a matter of fact, uranium is a mixture of three isotopes:
U235, U234, and U238. When the content of U235 is below
0.711%, uranium is classified as "depleted", and the blend
used in the Balkans contained less than 0.2% of that isotope.

DU is approximately 40 percent less radioactive than natural
uranium and emits alpha and beta particles, and gamma rays.
Alpha particles can hardly pass through the skin, while beta
particles are blocked by most garments, and the amount of
gamma rays, a form of highly penetrating energy, emitted by
DU is very low.

The radioactivity produced by those weapons is certainly not
healthy, but its full responsibility for such an unusual
health situation looks at least doubtful if observed from a
scientific standpoint.

In addition to that, another piece of evidence is raising a
further doubt about the radioactive origin of the
pathologies: A higher-than-expected quantity of lymphomas
and symptoms identical to those suffered from by the Balkan
War's veterans was observed in Italian soldiers who had
never served in any theatre of war nor had ever come near to
radioactive weapons. The condition all those soldiers shared
was serving in firing grounds.

In the meantime, someone tried to blame the multiple
vaccinations soldiers underwent during the so-called
Operation Desert Storm, but without being able to give any
scientific demonstration to that thesis.

As a matter of fact, in addition to the usual vaccines
against tetanus-diphtheria, hepatitis B, poliovirus,
meningococcal, typhoid and yellow fever, the American troops
were treated with Botulinum Pentavalent, unlicensed in the
United States, intended to counteract botulism.

Then they were treated with a vaccine against anthrax, a
drug proven to be teratogenic. In fact, women receiving it
are warned not to have children for at least three years.

Finally troops received Pyridostigmine bromide, not a
vaccine, but a pre-treatment against nerve agents. That
drug, normally used for myasthenia gravis, is not approved
by the Food and Drug Administration as a nerve gas antidote
and its side effects are potentially very dangerous.

But those medicines were administered to US troops only,
while the Gulf War Syndrome affected also civilians and
soldiers of other nationalities.

Thus, no answer was given to the question: why do people
living in theatres of war and soldiers working under
particular conditions contract those diseases with such an
alarming frequency?

Our Laboratory of Biomaterials of the University of Modena
and Reggio Emilia (Italy) is engaged in checking bioptic and
autoptic samples coming from patients belonging in the
classes described above. It is an indisputable fact that all
samples contain inorganic micro- and nano-particles, while
it may be interesting to observe that  none of them show any
trace of uranium.

  From the technical point of view, those very small
fragments can be detected by using an innovative technique
of electronic microscopy we developed and that has been
already described in literature.

What we found were very small bits, sometimes agglomerated,
of simple or combined metals: Fe-Si, Cu-Cl-Zn, Si-Ti-Fe-Al,
Si-Bi, Si-Pb, Fe-Cu-Zn, Cr-Fe-Ni, Fe-Mn and, but just once,
Zr alone.

The spherical shape, hollow in the larger sizes, of many
particles proves their formation under a very high
temperature, a condition compatible with that of the
explosion of a DU shell.

DU projectiles hit very different targets, but specially
buildings and armaments like, for example, tanks, and when
they do, the temperature in the core of the explosion
exceeds 3,000�C, which is more than enough to have all solid
matter sublime and, in some cases, form new metal alloys.

That gas expands over a large volume  of atmosphere, then,
rapidly, the matter becomes solid again taking the shape of
very small spheres (down to 10-8 m diameter), stays
suspended in the air and is carried away over distances
depending on atmospheric conditions like wind, rain, snow
and pressure. This phenomenon was studied in 1977-78 at the
US Air Force base of Leglin (Fla).

After some time, all the air-borne particles fall slowly
down and settle on grass, vegetables, fruit or expanses of
water where they become inevitably a guest of food and drink
to animals and men alike. Even if that unwanted presence is
known in advance - but very often it is utterly ignored -
getting rid completely of inorganic particles can be very
difficult. A good wash eliminates a great quantity of debris
from fruit or vegetables, but cauliflowers, for example,
cannot be cleaned thoroughly because of their rough surface,
while those particles that settle in the tissues of animals
that ate contaminated grass and men eat as meat can't be
taken away at all.

Keeping in mind the well-known, even if never widely
publicized, phenomenon studied at Leglin and the new science
of nano-pathology, an explanation to the unanswered question
becomes easy.

People present in firing grounds and in the theatres of war,
and being a soldier or a civilian makes no difference,
breathe in micro- and nano-particles while they are
suspended in the air as an aerosol, then eat and drink them
along with vegetables and water.

We have amply demonstrated with our researches that once
debris that size (10-9 - 10-5 m) enter the body, be it via
the digestive or the respiratory system, they can easily
negotiate the luminal tissues and either be captured by the
tissue itself which acts the way a filter does, or be
transported by the blood or the lymph until they end their
travel in some organ (for instance the kidneys and the
liver). Lymph nodes, for example, are the organs where
lymphomas start and develop and where, in all pathological
cases checked, we found the presence of inorganic particles.
But also all the other pathologic specimens we had the
possibility to observe show clearly and without  any single
exception the presence of debris.

It is important to underline that none of the particles we
found is biodegradable.

Just to give a further confirmation about the applicability
of the theory according to which the so-called Balkan
Syndrome has an environmental, nanopathological origin,
particles found in the diseased tissues of soldiers and
civilians, and particles found in the ground of the
territories where the pathologies were contracted are
mutually compatible.

If no uranium was ever detected, that does not necessarily
mean there is none somewhere in the tissues of the patients.
The fact is likely to be due to its quantity, which is
extremely scarce when compared with the huge masses of the
targets that sublime and that contain no such element. It is
also possible that uranium particles had been captured by
tissues but, probably because they did not reach a critical
threshold, did not trigger any disease and, as a
consequence, we did not have the chance to receive and study
the samples.

In conclusion, DU's responsibility is only indirect, and it
is not its radioactivity to blame, but the very high
temperature that uranium produces once the shells of which
it is a component hit the mark.

It is then possible that the Balkan Syndrome has a
multi-factorial origin including radioactivity and
vaccinations, but the main cause is without any doubt a
nanopathological one.





To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 43 Monterey County Herald: Fire threatens lab, homes

| 07/20/2005 | 
 
LIVERMORE (AP) - A wind-blown brushfire outside Livermore
threatened a nuclear weapons laboratory, hundreds of homes and
the closure of two major freeways on Tuesday. 

Hundreds of firefighters battled the blaze that began Tuesday
afternoon near Tracy and consumed more than 7000 acres of
grassland as it quickly spread through the Altamont Pass, home
to hundreds of turbines that produce energy with wind. 

The fast-moving fire prompted officials at Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory to declare an operational emergency,
allowing agencies from outside the lab to come in and help
protect an experimental test site at the facility. 

No structures were damaged. 

, but firefighters expected to work trying to contain the fire
throughout the night while defending about 500 homes in its
path. 

The California Highway Patrol monitored the situation to
determine whether to close the 580 and 205 freeways. CHP
encouraged commuters who use those freeways to check the
agency's Web site for alternate routes in the morning.   

*****************************************************************
 44 Daily Press: Whistle-blower filing details evidence 

HAMPTON ROADS, VA.

The case against Northrop Grumman Newport News and General
Dynamics Electric Boat builds.
 
BY PETER DUJARDIN 
247-4749
 	 	
July 20, 2005

General Dynamics Electric Boat and Northrop Grumman Newport News 
failed in their duty to stop quality and fraud problems at a key 
maker of submarine parts -- and the case against them needs to 
proceed, two whistle-blowers contended in a court filing this 
week.
 
The "out of control" quality control structure at Hunt Valve, a
Salem, Ohio company, "was itself only possible because of a
complete breakdown of effective oversight" by the shipyards, the
whistle-blowers said.
 
The 52-page filing was submitted by whistle-blowers Tina Marie
Gonter and her husband Charles William Gonter - former quality
assurance officials at Hunt Valve, which has provided thousands
of valves to Electric Boat and Newport News for Navy
submersibles.
 
That case is related to a Justice Department-led case against
Hunt, as well as an ongoing federal criminal case against
company officials -- involving, among other things,
falsification of quality assurance documents and signing off on
inspections that were never done.
 
Two high-ranking officials at Hunt already have pleaded guilty
to federal fraud charges in the case.
 
The Gonters are suing the shipyards separately under a separate
process allowing civilians to sue on behalf of the government in
return for part of any judgment.
 
The Gonters' filing, in U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Ohio, was a response to motions by the shipyards in
June asking a judge to throw out the case.
 
Newport News and Electric Boat had said they are victims, not
perpetrators, of the quality control and fraud problem at Hunt
Valve - not a party to it. The yards further said the Gonters
weren't specific about the accusations and didn't specify the
valves involved or the false bills submitted to the government.
 
The Gonters countered that the shipyards had ample knowledge of
the goings-on at Hunt. They said that Harry Arnold, an Electric
Boat inspector on site at Hunt, referred to Hunt as a "rat's
nest," of fraud problems. Arnold, they say, lost all confidence
in Hunt.
 
"One of these days something major is going to get by (a Hunt
inspector)," Arnold is quoted in the lawsuit as saying. Yet
though Arnold reported the problems to his supervisor, the
Gonters' assert, Electric Boat never rectified them.
 
And Newport News, the Gonters said, "was as willing as General
Dynamics to allow Hunt to cover up slipshod quality practices."
 
An onsite audit that Newport News performed at Hunt in June
1999, for example, gave the all clear.
 
But in one cited example, "Had those auditors bothered to
actually look at Hunt's welding records, they would have found
that they were falsified," the whistleblowers said.
 
The Gonters disputed Newport News' contention that the array of
problems that the Newport News yard failed to uncover was "minor
and inconsequential."
 
The whistleblowers don't consider certification requirements for
valves used on nuclear-powered submarines to be minor and
inconsequential.
 
"Northrop Grumman does. The jury can decide."
 
In response to the shipyards' assertions that more specificity
is required about which valves are non-conforming, the
whistleblowers asserted Monday that since the Navy determined in
2002 that none of Hunt's paperwork on the valves going back a
number of years can be trusted, none of the valves are
conforming.
 
The Navy paid "millions of dollars" to Electric Boat and Newport
News, they say, for that paperwork - and the assurance that the
submarines, including the valves, met strict quality assurance
requirements.
 
All bills the yards submitted to the Navy that included charges
for Hunt Valves, they say, were false claims. A judge must now
decide whether to allow the case to move forward. 

Copyright � 2005, Daily Press      

*****************************************************************
 45 Bradenton Herald: Lockheed drilling two additional wells

| 07/20/2005 | 

DUANE MARSTELLER

 Herald Staff Writer

TALLEVAST - Lockheed Martin Corp. is drilling two more
monitoring wells in Tallevast, but residents continue to
maintain that even more are needed to determine the extent of
contamination underneath their community. 

Tetra Tech Inc., hired by Lockheed to measure the plume of
contamination emanating from a former beryllium plant, began
drilling the new wells Tuesday, said Meredith Rouse Davis, a
Lockheed spokeswoman. 

A 200-foot-deep well is planned south of the
Sarasota-Bradentonton International Convention Center at 8005
15th St. E. 

To the north, a 50-foot well is planned near a warehouse at 7455
16th St. E. Drilling should finish by Friday, and water samples
will be taken next week. 

Davis said the new wells are needed because two existing wells
nearby produced widely different results for 1,4-dioxane, a
flammable liquid often used as an industrial solvent that the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has listed as a probable
human carcinogen. Initial sampling of the wells showed the
chemical below the detectable level of 2.5 parts per billion,
but subsequent testing found higher levels - 5.4 and 6.8 parts
per billion. 

Lockheed hopes test results on samples from the new wells will
resolve the discrepancy, which Davis said is not unusual when
multiple samples are taken from the same well. 

"That's why we're going back," she said. "It's pretty common. It
could be differences in transporting the samples, how you handle
the samples, collection techniques or well stabilization." 

Residents, who have become used to the drilling, shrugged off
news of the new wells. 

"For us, it's not a big concern now because it's something we
expected," said Laura Ward, president of Family Oriented
Community United and Strong, an advocacy group for Tallevast
residents. "We have been saying for quite some time that they
would need to put in more wells to accurately delineate the
plume." 

Community leaders have said they want additional wells and
independent testing of existing wells, but they have not yet
made a formal request for either, Ward and Davis said. 

The new wells will be the 132nd and 133rd that Lockheed has dug
or tested as part of plans to measure and clean up contamination
from the former Loral American Beryllium Co. plant at 1600
Tallevast Road. Lockheed acquired the plant as part of a 1996
buyout of Loral holdings but never operated it. 

While trying to sell the plant in 2000, Lockheed discovered the
liner of an evaporation pond had leaked at some point, spilling
dangerous chemicals and solvents into the groundwater. The
company told the county and state and accepted cleanup
responsibility, but no one was bound to tell the community,
which learned of the contamination in late 2003. 

Tests show the plume of contamination now covers more than 131
acres - including 67 parcels with homes on them, according to a
Herald computer analysis. Lockheed initially said the
contamination was confined to the plant site. 

Lockheed recently re-sampled the first 131 wells in the area, as
well as 20 other private wells within a quarter-mile of the
plume's known boundary. The company expects results later this
month. 

The company hopes to include those results in an updated report
to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, which is
overseeing the assessment and cleanup. In that report, Lockheed
also is expected to say how it plans to clean up the
contamination. 

The defense company also plans to drill at least two more
monitoring wells, these into the Floridan Aquifer, to determine
whether any contamination has migrated deeper and reached the
drinking water source. The well sites have not yet been chosen,
Davis said. 

Lockheed contends samples from those wells will show no
contaminants from the plant in the aquifer, but residents and
some environmental experts are skeptical. 

Duane Marsteller, transportation and growth/development
reporter, can be reached at 745-7080, ext. 2630, or at
dmarsteller@HeraldToday.com. 

Go online for background information on the problems in
Tallevast.   

*****************************************************************
 46 AU ABC: Mining company to search for uranium in NT
 
18:32 (ACST)Wednesday, 20 July 2005. 19:32 (AEDT)Wednesday, 20

 Batavia Mining Limited has struck a deal giving it the ability
to search for uranium over 1,200 square kilometres of land in
central Australia. 

Thor Mining has granted the Perth-based company access to its
parcel of land about 230 kilometres north-east of Alice Springs. 

The announcement by Batavia follows last week's acquisition of
prospects at nearby Harts Range, Hales River and Plenty Highway.











*****************************************************************
 47 Las Vegas SUN: DOE: Yucca document collection facing another
delay 

Today: July 20, 2005 at 10:57:18 PDT 

By Suzanne Struglinski <>

 SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU

 WASHINGTON -- During arguments made before a Nuclear Regulatory
Commission panel on Tuesday, lawyers for the Energy Department
said that the department's final document collection for the
Yucca Mountain project may be delayed for up to another six
months.

 This morning, however, attorney Donald Irwin said the
department is still working out its timeline.

 "I don't want to speculate" about a possible delay, said Irwin,
a lawyer with the Richmond, Va., law firm Hunton &Williams hired
by the Energy Department.

 Irwin's statements came during a conference call this morning
with Nevada's lawyers, the Nuclear Energy Institute's lawyers
and commission staff.

 Irwin said the department has decided to follow the Atomic
Safety Licensing Board's format for documents that will go on
the License Support Newtork, a database of Yucca Mountain
project documents.

 He said he would know more about the schedule by Aug. 1, when
the department must make its monthly update with the board on
its timeline.

 The department wanted to finalize its collection in August, but
its attorneys said Tuesday that certain rules set by a panel of
the Atomic Safety Licensing Board about how documents must be
formatted will make them miss that self-imposed deadline.

 But Irwin said during the conference call that nothing has
changed the department's end-of-August goal.

 "There is nothing that requires a change to that," he said.

 At the hearing, Nevada's attorneys said they would be making
numerous procedural challenges once the department finalized its
collection because it was not following formatting rules on
certain documents.

 Joe Egan, an attorney who represents Nevada, who was at
Tuesday's hearing said the Energy Department attorneys took a
15-minute break and then came back to say the department would
not meet its certification schedule if it had to go back to redo
those documents.

 "It was pretty amazing, they had been sticking to that August
date for so long," Egan said.

 Commission regulations require the documents collection to be
finished six months before it can start formal proceedings on
the proposed nuclear waste repository's license application. The
department tried to finish the collection last year, but Nevada
objected to it, saying it was incomplete.

 The NRC agreed and the Energy Department has been reworking it.

 In January the NRC ordered the department, the state and
interest groups to find common ground on how to handle millions
of pages of documents required for the License Support Network,
an electronic database of Yucca documents.

 The board could issue its final ruling soon on which documents
can be left out of the database collection because they are
privileged and what has to go into the database. 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 48 Salt Lake Tribune: Senate rebuffs plan to hire lawyers to handle
PFS cases 

Article Last Updated: 07/20/2005 10:42:16 AM 

By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune 

WASHINGTON - Senators on Tuesday blocked a Transportation 
Department plan to hire two new lawyers to handle lawsuits over 
shipments of high-level nuclear waste to the proposed Private 
Fuel Storage dump in Utah, as Utah's senators were assured by 
top Bush administration officials they would not revive the 
proposal. 

Sen. Bob Bennett, a member of the Senate Appropriations 
Committee, had language stripped from a House-passed 
transportation bill Tuesday that would have allowed the 
department to hire the attorneys �to support legal challenges� 
over shipments of nuclear material to the private storage 
facility on the Skull Valley Band of Goshutes Indian 
reservation. 

�The federal government should not be in the business of 
mounting legal challenges for a privately owned company,� 
Bennett said. 

Robert Johnson, a spokesman for the Department of 
Transportation admitted the language in the House bill was 
poorly worded. 

"The intentions were good. We wanted to make sure we had the 
staff available to enforce the regulations," Johnson said. "The 
problem is the language, as it was written, didn't say that. . . 
. We're glad it's not going to pass as its written because it 
was not one of our finer moments." 

Johnson said the department would like to work with the Utah 
senators to try to get back to the original intent and make sure 
the department gets the staff it needs - in this year's bill, if 
possible - to ensure any shipments of waste are transported 
safely. 

The language in a report accompanying the House bill noted 
that the department requested four positions �to support the 
legal challenges regarding shipments of spent nuclear fuel and 
high-level radioactive waste to Skull Valley, Utah,� and 
approved two of the slots. Each would cost about $100,000. 

The Utah senators' concern was that the new Transportation 
Department attorneys would be used to fight any challenges Utah 
may mount for plans to ship the waste to the state. 

The state has said it will go to court if the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission grants a license to Private Fuel Storage. 
The consortium of electric utilities is seeking to store 44,000 
tons of spent nuclear fuel on the Skull Valley reservation 45 
miles southwest of Salt Lake City until a permanent repository 
is opened, likely at Yucca Mountain, Nev. 

The NRC decision could come by the end of the summer, 
although PFS has said that shipments are not expected to begin 
until 2007, at the earliest. 

Sen. Orrin Hatch spoke with White House Chief of Staff 
Andrew Card on Tuesday and said he was assured the language that 
was included in the House bill was not what the administration 
intended and would not be in the final bill. 

Likewise, Bennett said he was assured by White House Office 
of Management and Budget Director Josh Bolten that the 
administration supports Utah's efforts to block the waste from 
coming to the state, and that the administration would not try 
to resurrect the language before the bill becomes law. 

In addition to striking the language, Bennett added a 
provision in the subcommittee denying �funding for new positions 
to administer activities related to shipment of spent nuclear 
fuel and high-level nuclear waste to a private interim storage 
facility.� 

The full appropriations committee will act on the 
subcommittee bill Thursday. 

息 Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. 
*****************************************************************
 49 NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Notice of Meeting
 
                         FR Doc E5-3857 
[Federal Register: July 20, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 138)] 
[Notices] [Page 41799-41800] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy05-116]                         
 
The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) will hold its 
162nd meeting on August 2-4, 2005, Room T-2B3, Two White Flint 
North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
 
The schedule for this meeting is as follows: Tuesday, August 2, 
2005 The Committee will conduct a 2-day working group meeting on 
Waste Determinations.
 
8:30 a.m.-11:25 a.m. Session 1: (Open)--This session will provide 
a background for waste determinations. The ACNW Moderator will 
discuss the purpose of the Working Group meeting and provide an 
overview of the meeting sessions. Department of Energy (DOE) 
staff will provide an overview of DOE's current and planned 
management of tank waste at four tank sites, including waste 
handling practices, waste streams likely to require waste 
determinations and their characteristics. NRC staff will provide 
an overview of NRC's
 
[[Page 41800]] involvement in waste determination evaluations to 
date, a summary of new waste determination provisions in the 
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2005, and 
anticipated waste determination activities by the NRC.
 
11:25 a.m.-4:15 p.m. Session 2: (Open)--Invited experts will 
address state-of-the-art and R technology for waste retrieval 
including removal of common target radionuclides, and technology 
for characterizing tank heels. In addition, a historical 
perspective on the definition of ``highly radioactive waste'' in 
the regulations and in practice will be provided. There will also 
be a roundtable discussion of Session 2 topics.
 
4:15 p.m.-5 p.m. Session 3: (Open)--Invited experts will discuss 
the status of technology for using cementitious materials to 
stabilize wastes.
 
Wednesday, August 3, 2005 8:30 a.m.-11:35 a.m. Session 3, 
continued: (Open)--Invited experts will address the status and 
prospects of predicting durability of grouts; performance 
assessment perspectives on waste disposal; and practical 
approaches to make decisions on waste determinations.
 
There will also be a roundtable discussion of Session 3 topics.
 
11:35 a.m.-4:40 p.m. Session 4: (Open)--Invited experts will 
address status of technology for environmental monitoring of 
on-site waste disposal, monitoring of engineered barriers 
performance, and non- destructive monitoring for cementitious 
waste forms. There will also be a roundtable discussion of 
Session 4 topics, as well as topics from other sessions as they 
relate to the waste determination provisions in the NDAA.
 
4:40 p.m.-5 p.m.: (Open)--The ACNW Committee members will discuss 
the main thoughts and findings of the Working Group meeting, and 
a potential letter/report to the Commission.
 
Thursday, August 4, 2005 10:15 a.m.-10:20 a.m.: Opening Statement 
(Open)--The ACNW Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the 
conduct of today's sessions.
 
10:20 a.m.-11:30 a.m.: Discussion of Current Letters/Reports 
(Open)--The Committee will discuss prepared draft letters and 
reports on April 2005 Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory 
Analyses Program Review, NRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory 
Research Generic Waste-Related Research, and Risk-Informing 
Nonreactor Activities.
 
12:45 p.m.-3:45 p.m.: Status of Repository Design Issues (Open)-- 
The Committee will hear a briefing by the NRC staff on issues 
related to the design of a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain, 
Nevada. The general areas to be addressed are: ``NRC Staff Views 
on the Sufficiency of Current U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 
Level of Design Detail;'' ``Recent NRC Staff Visits to Spent 
Nuclear Fuel Handling Facilities in France (Cogema), and the 
United States (Idaho and Washington);'' and ``Status of 
Development of NRC's Pre-Closure Safety Assessment Tool.'' 4 
p.m.-4:45 p.m.: Past Waste Confidence Decisions (Open)--The 
Committee will hear a briefing by the NRC staff on waste 
confidence decisions (findings) made by the Commission prior to 
1999.
 
4:45 p.m.-5:15 p.m.: ACNW Low-Level Waste White Paper: Draft 3 
(Open)--The Committee will comment on the third draft of the 
white paper on low-level waste.
 
5:15 p.m.-5:30 p.m.: Miscellaneous (Open)--The Committee will 
discuss matters related to the conduct of ACNW activities, and 
specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, 
as time and availability of information permit. Discussions may 
include future Committee meetings.
 
Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACNW meetings 
were published in the Federal Register on October 18, 2004 (69 FR 
61416). In accordance with these procedures, oral or written 
statements may be presented by members of the public. Electronic 
recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the 
meeting that are open to the public. Persons desiring to make 
oral statements should notify Ms. Sharon A. Steele, (Telephone 
301-415-6805), between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. ET, as far in advance 
as practicable so that appropriate arrangements can be made to 
schedule the necessary time during the meeting for such 
statements. Use of still, motion picture, and television cameras 
during this meeting will be limited to selected portions of the 
meeting as determined by the ACNW Chairman.
 
Information regarding the time to be set aside for taking 
pictures may be obtained by contacting the ACNW office prior to 
the meeting. In view of the possibility that the schedule for 
ACNW meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to 
facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend 
should notify Ms. Steele as to their particular needs.
 
Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the 
meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, the Chairman's ruling 
on requests for the opportunity to present oral statements and 
the time allotted, therefore, can be obtained by contacting Ms. 
Steele. ACNW meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter 
reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) 
at pdr@nrc.gov, or by calling the PDR at 1-800-397-4209, or from 
the Publicly Available Records System component of NRC's document 
system (ADAMS) which is accessible from the NRC Web site at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ (ACRS & ACNW Mtg 
schedules/agendas).
 
Video Teleconferencing service is available for observing open 
sessions of ACNW meetings. Those wishing to use this service for 
observing ACNW meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACNW 
Audiovisual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 
p.m. ET, at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the 
availability of this service. Individuals or organizations 
requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line 
charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they 
use to establish the video teleconferencing link. The 
availability of video teleconferencing services is not 
guaranteed.
 
Dated: July 14, 2005.
 
Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E5-3857 Filed 7-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 50 NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Meeting on Planning and 
 
                         FR Doc E5-3859 
[Federal Register: July 20, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 138)] 
[Notices] [Page 41800-41801] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy05-117]                         
 
Procedures; Notice of Meeting The Advisory Committee on Nuclear 
Waste (ACNW) will hold a Planning and Procedures meeting on 
August 4, 2005, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, 
with the exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 
U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel 
matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and 
practices of ACNW, and information the release of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
 
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Thursday, 
August 4, 2005--8:30 a.m.-10 a.m. The Committee will discuss 
proposed ACNW activities and related matters. The purpose of this 
meeting is to gather
 
[[Page 41801]] information, analyze relevant issues and facts, 
and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for 
deliberation by the full Committee.
 
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, 
Ms. Sharon A. Steele (Telephone: (301) 415-6805) between 8 a.m. 
and 5:15 p.m. (ET) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, 
so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic 
recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the 
meeting that are open to the public.
 
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 8:30 a.m. and 
5:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged 
to contact the above named individual at least two working days 
prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in 
the agenda.
 
Dated: July 14, 2005.
 
Michael L. Scott, Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
 
[FR Doc. E5-3859 Filed 7-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 51 KVBC: Potentially Damaging Yucca Mountain Information Subpoenaed By Congressman Jon Porter

July 21, 2005   

Information that could add fuel to the fight against Yucca 
Mountain is being subpoenaed from the energy department. A house 
subcommittee, led by Nevada Congressman Jon Porter, wants a lot 
of information, including potentially falsified research at the 
site. 

Porter had asked that the information be handed over voluntarily, 
but the Department of Energy missed Porter's deadline Monday. 
Victor Gilinsky, a former member of the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, who's now working to stop Yucca Mountain, says there 
are serious problems with the proposed dump. 

Part two of his interview with Mitch Truswell was supposed to air 
Tuesday, but because of the President's speech last night, we 
will run that special report tonight on News 3 at 6.   

  John Porter Speaks, Plus Mitch Truswell's Interview With
Victor Gilinsky
   
      All content � Copyright 2000 - 2005 WorldNow and KVBC. All
Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 52 Courier-Mail: Death mine to stay closed 

[20jul05]
 
BHP's Olympic Dam mine is one of the world's biggest producers of 
uranium and copper / File
 					 					   				 			 
By staff writers with AAP

THE Olympic Dam uranium mine owned by BHP Billiton will remain 
closed today after an underground explosion killed a worker.

Victorian man Karl Eibl died in the blast at the Roxby Downs 
site, in South Australia's far north, about 1.30 pm (CST) 
yesterday.

 The circumstances are not known and an investigation involving
officials from Workplace Services in South Australia is underway.

 "They'll certainly be looking at all the facts surrounding the
incident and making a determination from there," Workplace
Services spokesman Richard Littleton said.

 The explosion occurred about 500m underground and police said
it was not considered suspicious. Emma Meade, a spokeswoman for
BHP Billiton (bhp.ASX:Quote,News), said Mr Eibl had worked for
the company at the Olympic Dam site for about 10 years.

 She said workers rostered on for the day shift today had been
sent home. "It is hoped that the mine will reopen within the
next couple of days," Ms Meade said.

 The Olympic Dam mine produces uranium and copper and is
operated by WMC Resources, which was recently acquired by BHP
Billiton.

 At least three underground workers have been killed at the mine
in the last 15 years, an Olympic Dam worker told news.com.au.
The remote mine is one of the world's biggest producers of
uranium and copper. 

� Queensland Newspapers   

*****************************************************************
 53 [NukeNet] Article on 3 bidders for weapons lab manager
 
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:39:19 -0700

 
<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

Wednesday, July 20, 2005
UT Touts Sizable Alliance As Bid to Run LANL Starts
By Adam Rankin
Journal Staff Writer

      The first-ever competition to run Los Alamos National Laboratory
formally began Tuesday, with one of the bidding teams making a last-minute
announcement it had formed an alliance with more than 30 universities.
      The team headed by Lockheed Martin and the University of Texas said
the alliance would improve the team's strength in science and technology
research.
      It is going up against the University of California the only manager
the lab has ever had and Bechtel National in a federal Department of Energy
competition to capture the $2.2 billion-a-year LANL contract.
      The winner will run the nation's first nuclear weapons research lab
for a seven-year term, with a chance to extend the contract to a total of
20 years.
      Both teams refused to disclose how much they proposed to charge the
government for running LANL. The government has put a ceiling of $79
million on the fee, nearly 10 times the fee DOE now pays the University of
California to run the lab.
      UC has managed LANL for the government since 1943 and Lockheed has run
DOE's Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque since 1993 and also runs
Britain's Atomic Weapons Establishment.
      "If you have a national laboratory, you need a national community of
scientists and engineers to support it," said Mark Yudof, chancellor of the
University of Texas System, in announcing the alliance during a telephone
news conference on Tuesday, the deadline for submitting bids.
      "It is very important that this national laboratory not be insular,"
he said.

      Winner by November

      DOE is expected to name the winner in late November. Whoever is
selected is expected to begin managing LANL by Dec. 1 and assume full
operational control by June 1.
      Also included in the competition is a longtime LANL watchdog, Nuclear
Watch of New Mexico, which submitted a joint bid to run the lab with
California's Tri-Valley CARES, or Communities Against a Radioactive
Environment.
      "We carried through with our threat to submit a bid," said Nuclear
Watch executive director Jay Coghlan.
      In their proposal, the watchdog groups propose to elevate basic
science research and environmental remediation, while subordinating nuclear
weapons work under a proposed nuclear non-proliferation directorate.
      The University of California's management of LANL has faced criticism
in recent years after a series of security and fiscal problems, prompting
DOE to put the contract out to bid for the first time.
      The competition for the lab has worried lab employees and others in
the Los Alamos community, and there are fears of a major departure of lab
personnel if UC with a lucrative pension plan and other benefits doesn't
hold onto the contract.
      The University of California's team submitted its bid, contained in 22
cartons, to DOE a day early on Monday afternoon, just to be sure it was in
on time, said Michael Anastasio, the team's leader and proposed director of
LANL.
      Anastasio said the UC-Bechtel limited liability corporation, which
includes Washington Group International and BWX Technologies, will be
called Los Alamos National Security.

      'Best of the best'

      "A great team, a great proposal," Anastasio said, but he wouldn't
divulge details on the team's bid, citing the highly competitive environment.
      "Members of the team are already working at six of eight (DOE) sites
that we manage," he said. "All of the issues that we have to face are ones
that we are already facing."
      C. Paul Robinson, former head of Sandia, said the Lockheed-UT team,
which also includes Fluor Corp. and CH2M Hill, will be a fully integrated
limited liability corporation called the Los Alamos Alliance.
      Of his team's members, Robinson said: "They were chosen for their
strengths and, as they proved to us during the proposal, they really are
the best of the best."
      Robinson will be director of LANL if the Lockheed-UT team wins.
      The University of Texas and Lockheed's proposed university alliance,
called the Network for Science and Technology Education and Research, will
be a limited liability corporation, independent of LANL oversight and run
by the University of Texas System.
      UT's Yudof said the goal of the network will be to provide LANL with a
broad base of scientific skills for research collaboration, peer review and
recruiting sources for future lab scientists and engineers.
      The network of universities which includes the University of Colorado,
Carnegie Mellon, Georgia Tech, the universities of Michigan, Wisconsin, and
Arizona, the Colorado School of Mines, Johns Hopkins and Arizona State
University have more than 51,000 faculty and 58,000 graduate students in
science, engineering and health and oversee more than $7 billion in research.
      New Mexico's three universities University of New Mexico, New Mexico
Tech and New Mexico State University were invited to join the network, but
had already signed an exclusive agreement with UC, Yudof said.
      Still, he said, the New Mexico schools will be included if the
University of Texas team is successful in winning the contract.
      "We made a determination in the range of what was the best value we
thought we brought to the table," said Lockheed's Robinson.


******************************

Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551

<http://www.trivalleycares.org> - 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

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 54 DOE: Office of Science; Notice of Renewal of the High Energy Physics 
 
                        FR Doc 05-14220 
[Federal Register: July 20, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 138)] 
[Notices] [Page 41698] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr20jy05-52]                         
 
Advisory Panel AGENCY: Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice of renewal of the High Energy Physics Advisory 
Panel.
 
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 14(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, and section 102-3.65, title 41, 
Code of Federal Regulations and following consultation with the 
Committee Management Secretariat, General Services 
Administration, notice is hereby given that the High Energy 
Physics Advisory Panel has been renewed for a two year period, 
beginning in July 14, 2005.
 
The Panel will provide advice to the Associate Director, Office 
of High Energy Physics, Office of Science (DOE), and the 
Assistant Director, Mathematical & Physical Sciences Directorate 
(NSF), on long- range planning and priorities in the national 
high-energy physics program. The Secretary of Energy has 
determined that renewal of the Panel is essential to conduct 
business of the Department of Energy and the National Science 
Foundation and is in the public interest in connection with the 
performance of duties imposed by law upon the Department of 
Energy. The Panel will continue to operate in accordance with the 
provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.
 
L. 92- 463), the General Services Administration Final Rule on 
Federal Advisory Committee Management, and other directives and 
instructions issued in implementation of those acts.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rachel Samuel at (202) 
586-3279.
 
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 14, 2005.
 
James N. Solit, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. 05-14220 Filed 7-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 55 Santa Fe New Mexican: Lab-management contenders submit bids     
 	
 Wed Jul 20, 2005 5:53 pm   							 						

 The New Mexican            

Tuesday marked the end of an era, as two big-time bidders put
forth their concepts for running Los Alamos National Laboratory
in the first-ever competition held by the U.S. Department of
Energy. 

The University of California has operated the lab since 1943,
when the federal government was in a hurry to build the atomic
bomb. Now, no matter which team wins in December, a for-profit
corporation will be in the picture. 

Even if UC wins, it wont be the same old UC as lab manager.
Three industrial partners, Bechtel National, BWX Technologies
and Washington Group International, have joined UC in a
limited-liability corporation called Los Alamos National
Security. 

The group is up against Lockheed Martin Corp. and The University
of Texas, a partnership known as Los Alamos Alliance LLC. On
Tuesday, it unveiled a network of 33 other schools, including
Johns Hopkins University, designed to give the nations top
scientists a hand in research at Los Alamos. New Mexico
universities would be invited to join. 

Los Alamos lab, with a $2.2 billion budget, 8,000 UC employees
and 3,000 contract workers, is one of the nations three
institutions responsible for maintaining the nations nuclear
arsenal. In 2003, the nations energy secretary and members of
Congress decided the lab needed better leadership, after a
series of security, safety and financial-management fiascoes
cast a negative light on the place. 

For this competition, the government limited the base contract
to seven years, while allowing bidders to set an unprecedented
price: as high as $79 million a year. The contract is renewable
for an additional 13 years. 

Though each team granted interviews Tuesday, neither would make
public the full content of their proposals. 

When asked why UC, given its spotty track record, would be a
wise choice, team leader Michael Anastasio said: I think the
reason they should pick us is were a new team. Were not UC.
Were not Bechtel. Were this integrated team that is aware of
all the issues that have arisen. 

UC picked team members that are steadfast in ways UC has fallen
short, he said. They will bring experts, systems and structures
to the lab. 

I believe this team can really help bring stability to the
laboratory and a focus on the future, Anastasio said. Weve
looked carefully at the issues that have arisen in recent years,
and our proposal specifically addresses how to meet those
challenges , whether its safety or security or project
management or procurement. 

Meanwhile, Anastasio said the team is planning a smooth
transition for workers that would shift the focus back on
science in the national interest. In the next few weeks, Los
Alamos National Security LLC will open a new office in town to
get its presence out there, he said. 

The Lockheed Martin/UT team listed five significant changes it
would make: establish a lab-wide recruiting function; draft a
strategic and operational plan for the next 20 years; cultivate
future leaders within the lab; accelerate construction of new
facilities as well as environmental cleanup; and harvest the
best scientific ideas and build programs around them. 

We believe, by providing sound leadership and applying proven
best business practices, we will enable the scientists of Los
Alamos to do their work with fewer distractions and
administrative impediments, Paul Robinson , team leader, said
in a written statement. Our top priority at Los Alamos is to
nurture and support the scientific work done there. We will make
sure this priority stays in our sights as we help the lab become
a more safe, secure, efficient and productive place to work. 

In a slam against last years management decisions at LANL,
Robinson said he doesnt believe that halting work for months is
the way to fix problems: Why administer chemotherapy to
everyone if theres one case of cancer? Errors should be fixed
on an individual basis, he said, and basic functions at the lab,
such as financialaccounting controls, must be put in place
immediately. 

Anastasio and Robinson are battling each other for the position
of lab director. They differ on how to raise the caliber of
science at Los Alamos. 

Peer review has been a strong element in the past, Anastasio
said. Still, he wants to enhance cooperation between Los Alamos
and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California , plus
tap a deep pool of scientists at UC and New Mexico universities. 

But Robinson said sibling rivalry has clouded Lawrence
Livermores ability to scrutinize science at Los Alamos. 

They have not been well reviewed, and a number of problems that
have occurred in the past you can cite directly to not having
the advice that the science that they proposed would work, he
said. 

UT and a host of top research universities would fill that gap.
As a national lab, it should be working with the nations best
scientific ideas, not only those that were invented within the
laboratory, Robinson said. 		 	   	 	 	 			
 		   			 		   	 		 							
*****************************************************************
 56 Tri-City Herald: Plutonium residues cleared out from plant 

This story was published Wednesday, July 20th, 2005 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

Hanford workers have finished removing residues with plutonium
from processing systems and equipment at the Plutonium Finishing
Plant more than a year before a legal deadline. 

Not only is it a significant step toward being able to tear down
the plant at the nuclear reservation, but it also will reduce
the security requirements that can add to the cost and time
needed to do remaining work. 

"This definitely makes our work less expensive and more
efficient," said Bruce Klos, vice president for Department of
Energy contractor Fluor Hanford at the Plutonium Finishing Plant
complex. "It makes access easier." 

For nearly four decades the plant made plutonium produced at
Hanford reactors into metal buttons the size of hockey pucks for
shipment to the nation's weapons production plants. More than
half the nation's plutonium for nuclear weapons came through the
plant. 

When operations stopped abruptly in 1989, plutonium was left in
different forms throughout the massive plant. Last year, after a
four-year campaign, workers finished converting the leftover
plutonium into a form that can be safely stored. The next step
was cleaning up loose residue that could contain plutonium
inside glove boxes, equipment, processing ventilation systems
and canyon areas. 

"Workers had to deal with some very difficult situations," Klos
said, and much of the work was done by workers wearing
voluminous protective clothing and sometimes on supplied air
respirators. 

Production work with plutonium was done inside glove boxes, with
workers inserting their hands through gloves that protruded
inside the boxes and looking through thick windows. 

Over the years some of the plastic windows had grown so clouded
that workers could no longer see through to wipe out residues
earlier workers had left behind. 

In some cases, cleanup workers used cameras inserted within the
glove boxes to see what they were doing. In other cases, they
used a cleaning compound the Air Force uses on cockpit covers
made of the same material or used sandpaper to polish windows
clouded by chemical reactions until they were clear enough for
work to proceed. 

Getting the remaining loose material with plutonium
contamination removed also has reduced the risk to employees,
Klos said. 

The residue filled more than 500 drums. The drums with trace
amounts of plutonium in the residue will be packaged and shipped
to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in the New Mexico desert for
permanent disposal. Some of the material, which has a higher
plutonium concentration, will be packaged and stored at Hanford
with other heavily guarded plutonium from the plant. 

The long-term plan is to consolidate that plutonium elsewhere,
likely at the Savannah River, S.C., site, to reduce security
costs at Hanford. But no decision has been made on where to send
the plutonium. 

Removing the residue plutonium will reduce some security costs,
by allowing less stringent requirements in some areas, Klos
said. For example, in some areas where plutonium had been left,
workers had been required to work in teams of at least two as a
security check. 

The next step will be completing removal of equipment from 231
glove boxes and laboratory hoods contaminated with radioactive
material with the goal of getting them clean enough to qualify
as low level radioactive waste. If they do qualify, the boxes
and hoods can be demolished with the rest of the plant building
and the rubble buried at a Hanford landfill. 

Others will have to be cut up, packaged and sent to the New
Mexico repository at a greater cost to taxpayers. 

New chemical-etching processes being used for the tedious
process of cleaning plutonium off glove boxes and hoods are
expected to increase the number that may be classified as low
level waste, Klos said. He said he expects the percentage to
jump from 55 percent to 85 percent. 

So far equipment has been removed from about 70 of the 231 glove
boxes and hoods, and 38 of them have been decontaminated to
low-level waste standards. 

Workers also are preparing to remove the "pencil tanks," skinny
tanks that can measure more than 20 feet long, that were used to
recover plutonium residues for weapons use during the height of
the Cold War. The tanks, which were shaped to prevent an
uncontrolled nuclear reaction of the plutonium, will be cut up
and boxed for shipment to the New Mexico repository. 

� 2005 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 57 Olympian: Hanford workers finish key plutonium removal

- Olympia, Washington
 
Wednesday July 20, 2005                 

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 

YAKIMA -- Workers at the Hanford nuclear reservation have
completed the removal of residual plutonium from a former
finishing plant more than a year ahead of schedule, the U.S.
Department of Energy announced Tuesday. 

The project required removing plutonium held up in equipment,
ventilation systems and other areas of the Plutonium Finishing
Plant in order to reduce security requirements.

"This is a significant step in decommissioning of former
production buildings that posed a significant hazard to our
community, and further paves the way for their ultimate
demolition," Keith Klein, manager of the Energy Department's
Richland office, said in a news release.

Beginning in 1949, the Plutonium Finishing Plant was the last
step in converting plutonium nitrate solutions into pure
plutonium "buttons" about the size of hockey pucks, which were
sent to other Energy Department sites to make atomic bombs. The
work stopped in 1989, but more than 18 tons of materials
containing plutonium in some form remained.

Early last year, workers completed a project to stabilize and
package the remaining 4.4 tons of plutonium -- a project that
was considered one of three critical cleanup problems at
Hanford, along with underground tanks containing highly
radioactive waste and corroding spent fuel rods from the nuclear
reactors.

Workers have since packaged 511 drums of the residual plutonium
from equipment and other systems, which will be sent to a waste
repository in New Mexico. 							 			 							 	 							 						
							 
�2005 The Olympian
*****************************************************************
 58 Tennessean: Hiroshima A-bomb model replaced - 

Wednesday, 07/20/05
 
Associated Press
 
LOS ALAMOS, N.M. � A model of the atomic bomb dropped on 
Hiroshima that had been on display at a museum for more than a 
decade has been removed and replaced for security reasons. Los 
Alamos National Laboratory officials in charge of safeguarding 
national security now view the technology that ended the war 
against Japan 60 years ago as a potential target for theft.

John Rhoades, director of the Bradbury Science Museum, said he
was not able to comment on what aspects of the "Little Boy" bomb
model may be classified. "Little Boy" was dropped on Hiroshima
on Aug. 6, 1945. "Fat Man" was dropped on Nagasaki three days
later.

The Y-12 nuclear weapons plant in Oak Ridge, Tenn., produced
about 50 kilograms of highly enriched uranium for the "Little
Boy" bomb.         
	 
  
  Copyright � 2005, tennessean.com. All rights reserved.
   
*****************************************************************
 59 Guardian Unlimited: Los Alamos Bids Submitted to Energy Dept.
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday July 20, 2005 5:01 PM

By JENNIFER TALHELM 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - Teams competing for the federal contract to
run Los Alamos National Laboratory have submitted bids to the
Energy Department which will now decide which one will manage
the troubled nuclear weapons facility. 

The two major contenders for the contract are a group headed by
the University of California and engineering company Bechtel
Corp., and another one led by defense contractor Lockheed Martin
and the University of Texas. 

Tuesday was the deadline for bids, and the department will hear
oral presentations in August. It is expected to announce a
winner by Dec. 1. 

The bids mark a major change for the New Mexico lab, where
scientists developed and tested the first atomic bomb 60 years
ago. The victor would get up to a $79 million annual fee and
would play a key role in the future of the nation's nuclear
weapons stockpile. 

``Putting a contract up for consideration for the first time in
60 years is major undertaking,'' said Anson Franklin, a
spokesman for the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security
Administration. ``It's also major undertaking because it's so
important.'' 

The University of California has run the nuclear weapons lab for
the federal government since the lab's inception in 1943. But
its management was questioned after a series of security and
fiscal lapses, which prompted the DOE to put the contract out to
bid. 

The bid process has worried lab employees and others in the Los
Alamos community. Some have bitterly criticized the University
of California's leadership, while others fear involving private
corporations would hurt the lab's ability to recruit top
scientists. 

As it prepared a bid to hold onto the lab, UC teamed up with
Bechtel Corp., Washington Group International and BWX
Technologies Inc. 

Michael Anastasio, who is leading the UC-Bechtel team, said
Tuesday his group's bid emphasized that the university system's
decades of scientific experience would be enhanced by its
partners, who are experts in management, safety and security. 

The University of California group - now called Los Alamos
National Security LLC - also announced plans to open a Los
Alamos office to work with community members as the bids are
being considered. 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
 60 lamonitor.com: Anti-nuke groups enter bid 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 
JAYNA BOYLE, , Monitor Staff Writer

Two nonprofit organizations known as advocates for Los Alamos
National Laboratory worker health and safety, the environment
and nuclear nonproliferation, formally submitted a joint bid
Tuesday to manage the laboratory, saying it should be moved 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.

On Tuesday, LANL's existing manager, the University of
California, partnered with Bechtel, one of the world's largest
construction corporations, subitted a bid. 

That team has named Michael Anastasio, current director of the
Lawrence Livermore Lab, also managed by UC, as its designated
director of LANL.

The other bidder Tueaday was Lockheed Martin, the world's
largest defense contractor, which has partnered with the
University of Texas. 

That team has named C. Paul Robinson, ex-head of Sandia National
Laboratories, as its candidate for LANL director. Lockheed
already manages Sandia and co-manages the British Nuclear
Weapons Establishment.

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, and to help direct
the lab toward meeting long-range national security needs and
challenge competitors. 

"Our goal is to improve the lab contract regardless of who is
chosen to manage the lab," said Marylia Kelley, executive
director of the Livermore, Calif.-based Tri-Valley CAREs. "We
feel our proposed changes will help attract new, young
scientists."

Rather than naming individuals to specific positions, NWNM/TVC
proposes to radically revamp the LANL management structure.

The change in direction flows directly from the revamped
structure.

Starting at the top, NWNM and Tri-Valley CAREs propose to keep
an overall lab directorship.

Attached to the director's office would be a chief officer for
whistleblower protection. Currently eight associate
directorships serve under the director.

The organizations 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 the organization would
subordinate nuclear weapons programs, weapons physics, and
weapons remanufacturing.

This aligns with their proposed program of maintaining (but not
advancing) nuclear weapons while they await dismantlement.

NWNM and Tri-Valley CAREs also plan to create a new associate
directorship for dismantlement.

They 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.

"We want to try to use great minds for something besides nuclear
weapons," said Scott Kovac, research and operations director for
NWNM.

Kovac said under the proposed contract the NWNM/TVC team plans
to continue the existing benefits and pay scale at the lab.

Jay Coghlan, NWNM executive director, said:

"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."

Kelley said the NWNM/TVC contract proposal emphasizes how the
lab can meet emerging civilian science needs.

Although NWNM/TVC are nonprofit organizations, the team plans to
voluntarily pay an estimated $80 million annually in New Mexico
gross receipts taxes, nearly half of which goes to public
education.

UC has not paid taxes to New Mexico in the past.

The NWNM/TVC bid and current and proposed LANL management
organizational charts are available at www.nukewatch.org and
www.trivalleycares.org.   

  � 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 61 Colorado Daily: Los Alamos in CU sights

By MATT WILLIAMS Colorado Daily Staff Writer

Count CU in.

University of Colorado faculty members confirmed to the Colorado
Daily that CU will join a group led by the University of Texas
system and Lockheed Martin in a bid to manage the Los Alamos
National Laboratory (LANL).

"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," C. Paul Robinson, head of the
Lockheed Martin team, told The Albuquerque Tribune on Tuesday.
"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."

Englewood-based engineering and construction firm CH2M Hill and
Fluor Corp. are also industrial partners in the bid.

A CU spokesperson said Friday that CU will not be involved in
weapons programs at LANL, the facility where scientists designed
and tested the first nuclear bomb in the 1940s. CU will focus on
research and science.

"A consortium like this would give Colorado, and all of its
campuses, ready-made partners," CU Faculty Council Chair Rod
Muth said.

Only a few CU system administrators and select faculty members
are privy to CU's prospective role in the management plan that
was turned in Tuesday to the Department of Energy.

CU vice president of academic affairs Jack Burns has quietly
been meeting with faculty for months to gauge opinion, Muth
said. Burns was unavailable for comment Tuesday.

The University of California has held a no-bid management
contract at LANL since the lab was established in 1943, but the
DOE opened up the contract for bid for the first time last
December.

The Texas-led consortium will face a competing bid from the
University of California in partnership with Bechtel Corp.

The DOE will pay the new contractor about $80 million annually
in management fees, ten times more than the $8 million the
University of California collects in the current deal. The
initial contract is for seven years, and it can be extended 13
additional years at the discretion of the DOE.

The DOE is scheduled to award the contract Dec. 1, and the new
contractor will take over operations next June.

CU-Boulder physics professor Jerry Peterson said CU could serve
LANL as a pipeline for new employees.

"Their greatest need is workforce. They're an aging group of
scientists and engineers and technicians, and we're in the
business of producing bright new ones," Peterson said.

Peterson said CU scientists have effectively collaborated with
LANL scientists for years, but the relationship has never been
formalized before.

"The great universities carry some role of responsibility in
national matters. The grown up universities do. It's time for
[CU] to take that step somehow," Peterson said.

Contact Matt Williams about this story at 303-443-6272 ext. 111
or   
*****************************************************************
 62 Daily Texan: UT, Lockheed submit lab bid - The 

| 7/20/2005 
 
UT plans to lead 33 universities in Los Alamos research

 By Zachary Warmbrodt 

The UT System and Lockheed Martin Corp. submitted their joint
bid for management of Los Alamos National Laboratory on Tuesday
and announced their intention to establish a UT-led network of
33 universities that will participate in research at the lab.
 
"The effort here is to assemble the best of the best
nationally," said UT System Chancellor Mark Yudof. "We believe
that when you have a national laboratory of this importance you
need a national community of scientists and engineers to support
it." Yudof said the network was a product of UT's desire to be
more inclusive than current manager the University of
California, which has operated Los Alamos since its creation 62
years ago. the University and Lockheed are competing with UC and
its own set of industrial partners.
 
The bid was delivered to the National Nuclear Security
Administration on Tuesday morning in Albuquerque, New Mexico,
where UT and Lockheed have been working together on a bid since
the Board of Regents authorized Yudof to enter into an agreement
with the defense contractor in May. The UT System has authorized
$1.7 million for the bid's cost, a total that comes directly
from the UT System's budget and will not be reimbursed, even if
the University wins the contract. UC and its primary partner
Bechtel Corp. submitted their bid, all 22 boxes worth, Monday in
San Francisco, said UC spokesman Chris Harrington. 

As Lockheed's primary partner, the University will oversee
research and technology at Los Alamos and ensure scientific
integrity, while Lockheed intends to manage lab operations.
Yudof said the UT System was "not in the weapons development
business." The UT System currently conducts classified research
at Los Alamos and additional security clearances would be
awarded to universities on an individual basis, he said. 

The University and Lockheed agreed last spring to collaborate on
the research side of another nuclear weapons lab managed by
Lockheed, Sandia National Laboratories. Lockheed has selected
Sandia's president, Ambassador C. Paul Robinson, to head Los
Alamos in the event of a winning bid. Of Robinson, Yudof said
"we're sort of standing on Paul's shoulders." 

The network of 33 universities will have an advisory board at
Los Alamos and will be able to participate in peer review and
collaborative research, use the facilities to educate their own
students, and assist in the professional development of lab
employees, which includes mentoring and assessments of their
work. The University is responsible for coordinating the
coalition, which will be incorporated under a non-profit entity
called the Network for Science and Technology Education and
Research.
 
According to a UT System release, the network institution's
51,000 faculty members include 22 Nobel laureates, 236 National
Academy of Engineering members, 209 National Academy of Sciences
members and 138 members of the Institute of Medicine. The
institutions are also said to have 58,000 full-time graduate
students in science, engineering and health. 

The members named Tuesday included: Johns Hopkins University,
the University of Michigan, Rice University, the Texas A System,
the University of Wisconsin, the University of Arizona, Arizona
State University, the University of Colorado System and Carnegie
Mellon. In addition to these members, Yudof said three New
Mexico universities, at this time contractually bound to the
University of California's bid, would be welcome to join the
network.
 
The only outside universities UC is intending to utilize are the
New Mexico schools, said Harrington.
 
The NNSA is expected to inform the bid teams soon about when the
teams will give oral presentations to a board of Department of
Energy appointees. UT and Lockheed will put forth their
executive board in this process, expected in August. The board
is expected to pose a set of hypothetical problems for the
bidders to solve, said Lockheed spokesman Don Carson. Yudof said
he did not want to speculate on which UT System employees would
participate. 

In the bid, he said the University and Lockheed also took into
account current lab employees' concerns about the impending
management shift, so as not to appear like "barbarians at the
gate." According to Los Alamos, the number of lab employees
retiring has noticeably increased because of the shake-up. Yudof
said the University would respect the scientists' achievements
and that "we feel we know a lot about the nurturing of
first-class researchers."
 
The DOE has said it will announce a winner by Dec. 1. 

Lockheed and the University intend to employ the services of
CH2M Hill for environmental clean-up of the facility and Fluor
Corp. for construction. 	   	 

    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************