***************************************************************** 07/27/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.172 ***************************************************************** 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 US: FPIF News | U.S. & Iran: Democracy, Terrorism & Nuclear Weapons 2 Reuters: France says wants guarantees on Iran nuclear plans 3 Reuters: Iran says will resume key atomic work despite EU 4 Reuters: EU set to offer Iran limited nuclear incentives 5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Vows to Restart Some Nuke Activities 6 MNA: Malaysian PM tells world to respect Iran's nuclear rights 7 Korea Herald: How long will N.K. ignore Japan? 8 Korea Herald: U.S., North Korea put down new demands 9 Daily Yomiuri: North Korea ready to talk on N-program 10 AFP: North Korea offers to dump nuclear weapons if US normalises tie 11 Guardian Unlimited: New Round of Six-Party Nuclear Talks Begin 12 Korea Times: When Will Nuke Talks See ˇ®White Smoke?ˇŻ 13 Reuters: N.Korea digs in on day two of nuclear crisis talks 14 Reuters: N.Korea digs in on day two of nuclear crisis talks 15 Reuters: RPT-N.Korea cool to U.S. nuclear offer--U.S. official 16 US: [southnews] US new nukes 60 years after first bomb 17 US: Las Vegas SUN: Nevada congressmen divided on energy bill 18 HindustanTimes.com: UK will toe US line on N-fuel 19 STUFF: Bill to lift ban on nuclear-propelled ships defeated 20 Japan Times: Japan starts nuke talks with abduction demand 21 Reuters: Snubs all round for ASEAN as ministers skip forum 22 www.satribune.com: India Should be Forced to Open Up its Nuclear Ins 23 Scoop: Annan Welcomes Seven-Nation Nuclear Initiative NUCLEAR REACTORS 24 Chongqing Daily News Group: Nuclear industry to seek foreign help 25 RIA Novosti: IAEA director general to appraise prospects of Armenian 26 US: TomPaine.com: A Nuclear Swindle 27 Xinhua: India building 8 more nuclear power reactors 28 US: NRC: Entergy Operations, Inc., Arkansas Nuclear One Independent 29 US: NRC: Portland General Electric Company, Trojan Nuclear Plant, 30 US: NRC: Carolina Power And Light Company, H. B. Robinson Steam Elec 31 RedNova News: UK Nuclear Business Sinks into the Red 32 ITAR-TASS: China plans to build thirty nuclear reactors within 15 ye 33 Guardian Unlimited: Energy Deal Has Tax Breaks for Companies 34 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Yankee still shut down, probe continues NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 35 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Groups to study VY radiation emissions 36 US: Buffalo News: Payments for uranium exposure possible 37 Bellona: Emergency drills at nuclear facility in Murmansk 38 US: WSJ: Industrial chemicals in tiny doses raise health issue 39 US: Cape Cod Times: New RDX plume could hit Sandwich 40 US: Lake County Record-Bee: Board OKs photo exhibit (DU) NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 41 US: [shundahaialert] Latest News on Nuke Dumps in Utah and Nevada 42 AU ABC: Alice to hold another waste dump meeting 43 US: Casper Star Tribune: Searching for uranium 44 Inyo Register: House demands more answers on Yucca Mountain 45 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Feud: The Utahn sought a check on the propose 46 AU ABC: Govt defends rainy site for nuclear dump - 47 AU ABC: Indigenous leader questions dump plans 48 AU ABC: Catchment at no risk from nuclear dump: Govt. 49 US: World Peace Herald: Ongoing challenges of nuke waste disposal 50 Ottawa Citizen: Ontario pays towns to take nuclear waste PEACE 51 Alamogordo News: Monks walk atomic flame to Trinity Site 52 Guardian Unlimited: 'Any nuclear arsenal is a risk' US DEPT. OF ENERGY 53 Tri-City Herald: Report says Hanford needs more security 54 Daily Texan: Inclusion at lab is nothing new - 55 KTVB.COM: Idaho could be home to plutonium production 56 lamonitor.com: Experts share crucial knowledge 57 lamonitor.com: LANL says cleanup on pace ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 FPIF News | U.S. & Iran: Democracy, Terrorism & Nuclear Weapons Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:25:15 -0500 (CDT) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ New at FPIF Working to make the United Statesa more responsible global leader and partner http://www.fpif.org/ July 27, 2005 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Introducing the latest policy analysis from Foreign Policy In Focus The U.S.and Iran: Democracy, Terrorism, and Nuclear Weapons By Stephen Zunes The election of the hard-line Teheran mayor, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, over former President Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani as the new head of Iran is undeniably a setback for those hoping to advance greater social and political freedom in that country. It should not necessarily be seen as a turn to the right by the Iranian electorate, however. The 70-year old Rafsanjania cleric and penultimate wheeler-dealer from the political establishmentwas portrayed as the more moderate conservative. The fact that he had become a millionaire while in government was apparently seen as less important than his modest reform agenda. By contrast, the young Teheran mayor focused on the plight of the poor and cleaning up corruption. In Iran, real political power rests with unelected military, economic, and right-wing ideologues, and in the June 25 runoff election, Iranian voters were forced to choose between two flawed candidates. The relatively liberal contender came across as an out-of-touch elitist, and his ultraconservative opponent was able to assemble a coalition of rural, less-educated, and fundamentalist voters to conduct a pseudopopulist campaign based on promoting morality and value-centered leadership. Such a political climate should not be unfamiliar to American voters. Of course, Washingtondid not provide the Iranians with much incentive to elect another relative progressive to lead their country. Since the 1997 election of the outgoing reformist President Mohammed Khatami, the United States has strengthened its economic sanctions against Iran and has even threatened military attack. Although most Iranians would like improved relations with the United States, they apparently got the message that U.S. hostility toward their country would continue whomever they chose as president. Washingtons primary criticisms of Teheran focus on the Iranian governments suppression of political freedom, its support for terrorism and subversion, and its nuclear program. Though all three of these are legitimate areas of concern for the international community, the double standards exhibited by both the Bush administration and the bipartisan congressional leadership in pressing these issues have done little to promote individual liberty, counterterrorism, and nonproliferation in Iran or the region as a whole. Stephen Zunes is Middle East editor for the Foreign Policy in Focus Project (http://www.fpif.org) and a Professor of Politics at the University of San Francisco. He is the author of Tinderbox: U.S.Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism (Common Courage Press, 2003). See new FPIF Policy Report online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/173 With printer-friendly pdf version at: http://www.fpif.org/pdf/papers/0507iran.pdf For related material from Stephen Zunes & FPIF: Bush Administration Stokes Dangerous Arms Race on Indian Subcontinent By Stephen Zunes http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/170 Bush Administration Support for Repression in Uzbekistan Belies Pro-Democracy Rhetoric By Stephen Zunes (June 20, 2005) http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2005/0506uzbekistan.html Bush Administration Attacks on Amnesty International: Old Wine, New Bottles, By Stephen Zunes (June 6, 2005) http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2005/0506amnesty.html Undermining the Nuclear Non-Proliferation TreatyIt Didnt Start With the Bush Administration, By Stephen Zunes (June 2005) http://www.fpif.org/pdf/papers/0506undermine.pdf Recognizing the Power of Nonviolent Action By Stephen Zunes (March 2005) http://www.fpif.org/papers/0503action.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For media inquiries: Emily Schwartz Greco, emily@ips-dc.org 202-297-5412 Kyle Johnson, kyle@irc-online.org 505-388-0208 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Produced and distributed by FPIF:A Think Tank Without Walls, a joint program of International Relations Center (IRC) and Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). For more information, visit http://www.fpif.org. If you would like to add a name to the Whats New At FPIF list, please email: communications@irc-online.org, giving your area of interest. Please consider becoming an IRC member or donor. You can join the IRC and make a secure donation by visiting http://www.irc-online.org/donate.php. Thank you. Also see our Progressive Response newsletter at: http://www.fpif.org/progresp/index.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ InternationalRelationCenter(IRC) http://www.irc-online.org/ Siri D. Khalsa Outreach Coordinator Email: communications@irc-online.org P.O. Box 2178 Silver City, NM88062 Siri D. Khalsa Communications Coordinator International Relations Center (IRC) siri@irc-online.org IRC Projects Online: IRC (www.irc-online.org) FPIF (www.fpif.org) Americas Program (www.americaspolicy.org) Self-Determination In Focus (www.selfdetermine.org) Project Against the Present Danger (www.presentdanger.org) ***************************************************************** 2 Reuters: France says wants guarantees on Iran nuclear plans Wed Jul 27, 2005 11:57 AM ET PARIS (Reuters) - France wants guarantees that Iran cannot produce material usable in nuclear bombs and believes the U.N. Security Council should deal with the issue if this is not the case, President Jacques Chirac said on Wednesday. At a meeting in Paris, Chirac told Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that "we have the goal of obtaining objective guarantees that Iran renounces all activity in the field of the production of fissile material," a government spokesman said. "If this is not the case, the issue should be taken to the (U.N.) Security Council," the spokesman quoted Chirac as saying. The guarantees should be verified by the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, he added. Iran says its nuclear programme is for electricity, but the United States and the European Union fear Tehran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons. Iran vowed on Wednesday to resume some key work on its nuclear fuel cycle regardless of what European diplomats might propose in a bid to defuse a dispute over its atomic ambitions. France is part of an EU troika, with Germany and Britain, trying to resolve the dispute. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 Reuters: Iran says will resume key atomic work despite EU Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:29 AM ET (Repeats fixing typo in word "Iran's" in paragraph one) TEHRAN, July 27 (Reuters) - Iran will resume some key work on its nuclear fuel cycle regardless of any proposals European diplomats might make in an attempt to defuse a dispute over Tehran's atomic ambitions, Iran's President said on Wednesday. "Whether Europeans mention our right to resume activities at (the uranium conversion facility at) Isfahan or not, we will definitely resume it regardless," Mohammad Khatami told reporters. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 Reuters: EU set to offer Iran limited nuclear incentives Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:28 AM ET By Paul Taylor, European Affairs Editor BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Three European Union powers plan to offer Iran a limited package of nuclear, economic and political incentives next week to give up suspect nuclear work amid growing pessimism that Tehran's leaders will take the bait. Diplomats from Britain, France and Germany are due to hand over the proposals to the Iranian government after new hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad takes office next Wednesday, but signs are growing that they will get a dismissive reception. Outgoing President Mohammad Khatami said on Wednesday that Iran would resume some work on its nuclear fuel cycle, which the West suspects is part of a clandestine effort to produce a bomb, regardless of what the so-called EU3 group offers. "Our deadline for suspending nuclear work was the EU proposal. We will wait until the first days of August but will restart activities right afterwards," Khatami told reporters. EU diplomats said the European offer was predicated on Iran agreeing to maintain indefinitely its suspension of uranium enrichment, nuclear fuel reprocessing and related activities. Iran regards nuclear fuel cycle activities as a right under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, meant to prevent the spread of atomic weapons while allowing civilian nuclear work, and wants to be allowed to keep at least a pilot enrichment programme. The EU3 remain adamant, with strong U.S. backing, that they will agree to no enrichment or reprocessing activity. EU and Iranian officials say nuclear policy is under the control of Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, so the change of president from a moderate reformist to an Islamic ultra-conservative may alter the tone but not the substance. EMPTY BOX? The EU3 have threatened to report Iran to the United Nations Security Council for possible sanctions if it ends its voluntary suspension of enrichment-related activity. Under the package, the EU would offer a guaranteed supply of fuel for Iran's civilian reactors, provided they were under full supervision of the U.N. nuclear watchdog and spent fuel was returned in full to the supplier, the diplomats said. In addition, the EU3 would agree in principle to European companies building a nuclear power station in Iran besides the Bushehr reactor being completed by Russia, provided Tehran ratified a protocol allowing intrusive spot inspections and complied fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The "comprehensive package" will include a political and security dimension and the promise of greater trade and economic cooperation, on which talks conducted by the executive European Commission have been making good progress. The EU3 are also dangling the prospect of civilian aircraft sales. Politically, the EU would offer support for security cooperation in the Gulf region and a regular political dialogue on issues such as energy security, stabilising Iraq and Afghanistan, and fighting terrorism and drugs trafficking. None of this is very new or goes much beyond what the EU3 have been discussing with Iran since last December. One EU official involved said the package would be "a lot of gift-wrapping around a pretty empty box", since the EU could not commit commercial European companies to building power stations in Iran, especially if the United States made its opposition clear. The Bush administration made two gestures to support the EU effort in March. It stopped blocking Iran's application to start talks to join the World Trade Organisation and agreed to consider selling civilian aircraft spare parts. However, Washington is not considering any more carrots now, U.S. officials say. The limited nature of the European incentives on offer reflected the low level of international confidence in Iran's nuclear intentions, a senior EU diplomat said. "Is it going to work? I would bet 'No'," he said. "But it is worth trying, and it gives the Iranians a clear choice." Tehran would have to choose between growing international isolation if it resumed enrichment and the prospect of increasing cooperation with Europe and integration into the global economy if it gave up sensitive nuclear work. "This is like an old game of chicken. Who will swerve first," a senior U.S. official said. "I think what Iran is doing and what the West is doing is just delaying what may be an inevitability, but delay is not such a small thing." © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Vows to Restart Some Nuke Activities From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday July 27, 2005 11:31 AM By ALI AKBAR DAREINI Associated Press Writer TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran will restart some nuclear activities, including a key step prior to uranium enrichment, despite a European agreement over its contentious atomic program, outgoing President Mohammad Khatami said Wednesday. But Khatami told reporters that Iran has ``no intention to end suspension of uranium enrichment,'' Khatami told reporters Wednesday. Enrichment is a key process in the nuclear fuel cycle. Uranium enriched to low levels is used as fuel in nuclear power plants to generate electricity, but further enrichment makes it suitable for use in a nuclear bomb. Iran has said it does not want to make atomic weapons despite American claims to the contrary. Tehran defends its right to pursue a nuclear program for peaceful purposes. Last November, Iran suspended all uranium enrichment-related activities to build international trust and avoid possible U.N. sanctions. But it has repeatedly stated that the suspension is voluntary and temporary. In May, European negotiators led by Britain, Germany and France secured an agreement from Iran to continue suspension of such activities in return for a comprehensive plan by Europeans by early August, including economic incentives. But Khatami, who will be replaced by ultraconservative president-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Aug. 6, said the government has already decided that uranium reprocessing activities will resume at a nuclear plant in central Iran no matter what the final European agreement entails. ``Whether the Europeans mention our right in their would-be proposals or not, we will definitely resume work in Isfahan,'' Khatami told a news conference after a Cabinet meeting. ``The end of the deadline is (when) the Europeans come up with their comprehensive plan,'' said Khatami. ``It was expected that they will agree to Isfahan restarting activities. If they don't, then the decision to resume activities in Isfahan has already been taken by the ruling system.'' The Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facility reprocesses raw uranium into a gas, the feedstock for enrichment. Iran has agreed to provide guarantees to continue suspension of its uranium enrichment activities, but negotiations have made little progress because Europe insists on a permanent freeze. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 6 MNA: Malaysian PM tells world to respect Iran's nuclear rights Supreme National Security Council Hassan Rowhani said on Tuesday that Iran has lived up to all of its nuclear commitments and is currently awaiting Europe’s final proposal on the country’s nuclear program. Speaking in a meeting with Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in South Africa, Rowhani said that Iran has fully cooperated with the International Atomic Energy Agency. After two years of inspections of Iran’s nuclear sites, the IAEA has confirmed that the country’s nuclear activities over the past 25 years were all meant for peaceful purposes, Rowhani emphasized. “The agency announced that it had observed no sign of a deviation in Iran’s nuclear activities toward a nuclear weapons program.” Rowhani referred to the three agreements made between Iran and the European Union big three of Britain, Germany, and France in October 2003, February 2004, and October 2004, saying, “Iran has abided by all of its commitments mentioned in the agreements.” He called Tehran-Kuala Lumpur ties friendly and close, adding, “Exchanges of opinions and bilateral ties between Iran and Malaysia on important regional and international issues will strengthen the interests of the Islamic world and Third World countries.” Rowhani called on industrialized countries to show goodwill toward developing countries and to refrain from hindering them in their path toward independence and progress. For his part, the Malaysian prime minister called Iran’s nuclear policy very wise. Abdullah advised the Iranians to give the Europeans the opportunity to present their nuclear proposal in August, saying that the continuation of cooperation between Iran and the EU is essential. Iran has adopted the best approach to gain the confidence of the international community about the peaceful nature of its nuclear activities by signing the additional protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and allowing IAEA inspections of its nuclear sites, he added. Abdullah also called on the international community to respect Iran’s right to make use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes as a signatory to the NPT. South African President Thabo Mbeki also said on Tuesday that like any other member of the NPT, Iran is legally entitled to use nuclear technology. In a meeting with Rowhani, Mbeki said Iran-Europe cooperation on Tehran's nuclear program has been successful and praised Iran's policy of confidence-building. HL/HG End MNA © 2003 Mehr News Agency ***************************************************************** 7 Korea Herald: How long will N.K. ignore Japan? When Japan's top negotiator Kenichiro Sasae delivered his opening speech on the first day of the six-party talks on Tuesday, North Korea's Kim Kye-gwan hardly glanced his way. Throughout the opening ceremony, Kim did his best to ignore his Japanese counterpart, while Sasae continuously tried to catch Kim's attention. What the two share are domestic pressures to be as hostile toward each other as possible, because of matters irrelevant to the nuclear issue - North Korea's kidnapping of Japanese citizens and refusal to comply with Tokyo's demand to reveal all information on some Japanese who were taken by North Korea to train spies in the 1980s. North Korea is openly annoyed by Japan's attempt to bring the issue up at the disarmament talks and refuses to sit for one-on-one discussions. Tension escalated again yesterday when Sasae reportedly brought up the kidnapping issue once again during his keynote speech, calling on North Korea to reach a comprehensive solution on nuclear and missile problems and the abduction case through the six-party and bilateral talks. The Japanese government expressed its displeasure about the situation yesterday saying that North Korean officials have ignored a request from Japan for a meeting in Beijing to discuss the abduction cases. "We asked for a bilateral meeting, but there has been no response," Hiroyuki Hosoda, the Japanese government spokesman is quoted as saying at a regular press briefing in Tokyo. But as the negotiations got down to brass tacks with the announcement of keynote speeches yesterday, it is becoming increasingly harder for North Korea to ignore Japan, one of the key players in the six-nation talks and one of the most lucrative providers for the impoverished state if an agreement is reached. Within relatively more amicable talks this time, it is equally becoming burdensome for Japan to cling to the abduction issue, as other negotiators criticize Japan for distracting the focus of the disarmament talks. With the six countries including the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia entering genuine negotiations, there will be a watch on whether Japan and North Korea manage to put aside their differences. Back in Tokyo, the Japanese government has continued to press the abduction issue. "Japan and North Korea should discuss the abductions," Japan's Prime Minister Koizumi told reporters in Tokyo yesterday. "Japan has its own position. It is important that during the talks, we can focus on issues that may differ from concerns of other nations," he said. (angiely@heraldm.com) By Lee Joo-hee and Kim Man-yong The Korea Herald, Herald Business correspondents 2005.07.28 ***************************************************************** 8 Korea Herald: U.S., North Korea put down new demands Additional burden as bargaining starts BEIJING - The United States and North Korea unveiled at the six-party talks yesterday the newest versions of their demands, with reportedly diverse positions which are likely to be an additional burden as the two sides strive for substantial progress. Chief delegates of the six countries trying to end the North Korean nuclear standoff laid out their positions as the fourth round of the long-stalemated negotiations moved through a second day. But the United States and North Korea remained on parallel courses, with the former promising security assurances and economic aid in return for verifiable nuclear dismantlement and the latter demanding normalized relations with Washington for a full dismantlement, it was understood. The United States reportedly presented a three-step proposal that would first require North Korea to dismantle all nuclear weapons and programs through effective verification. Other parties would then provide security assurances and economic cooperation. The parties would also deal with multilateral issues, including North Korean missiles and human rights concerns. North Korea reportedly presented a vastly different scenario, proposing as a first step its pledge to dismantle verifiably while relationships with the United States were normalized. The United States would then forgo its policy to overthrow North Korea's regime and build up legal and systematic tools for peaceful coexistence. The third step would include fulfilling obligations to implement trust, removing nuclear weapons and threats in South Korea, and providing compensation for denuclearization. The proposals differ significantly in content to the ones made in June 2004, but are similar regarding the level of differences between the two sides. North Korea's insistence for a concurrent normalization of relations will add to the U.S. burden while the U.S. demand for discussion of missiles and the human rights issue have previously been rejected by the North. The definition of denuclearization between the North and the United States also varies substantially. North Korea demands that no nuclear weapons exist or enter South Korea by air or sea, while the United States, along with South Korea and Japan, only refer to North Korea's nuclear program. But U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill also waved an olive branch, it was understood, by saying that as the top negotiator, he would undertake to normalize relations with the DPRK. DPRK is the acronymn for Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the North's formal name. North Korea for its part assessed it hopes to draw up a "talks-for-talks" agreement at the end of this round of the current negotiations and reach an accord to take aboard the first step. The "talks-for-talks" phrase has emerged as one of the most frequently used expressions here, meaning an agreement based on verbal pledges. For example, if the North or the United States makes a verbal pledge, the other side would not execute any action until an actual action-to-action agreement. The two sides reportedly contradicted each other concerning Washington's 2004 proposal, with the United States saying it would discuss the plan in-depth while North Korea reiterated it cannot accept it. South Korea suggested in its keynote speech a comprehensive talks-for-talks agreement for North Korea to pledge verifiable dismantlement in return for security assurances and normalized relations, South Korean government officials said. "We met with North Korean counterparts after the keynote speeches and gave a detailed explanation of our proposals, and vice versa," South Korea's top negotiator Song Min-soon told reporters. Sources quoted Song as saying all parties must seek a way to achieve substantial progress by putting aside individual interests. The participants did agree negotiations have reached a new level with the first plenary session, at which each of the six for the first time officially stated their views on how to reach the unilateral goal of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula. After Hill led off, his counterpart chief negotiators from Russia, South Korea, Japan, North Korea and China each delivered abbreviated keynote speeches at the Fang Fei Yuan conference hall in the Daioyutai State Guest House in western Beijing. Japan's head negotiator Kenichiro Sasae reportedly raised tension by addressing the controversial issue of past abductions of Japanese by the North Koreans, calling on the North to solve the problem along with the concerns about its nuclear ambitions and missiles. China said it was important to draw up a joint statement to lay down a foundation on which to take step-by-step measures, while Russia suggested freezing North Korea's nuclear programs could be the first stage of denuclearization, it was understood. All six delegates spent the last three days since arriving over the weekend sounding out each other in bilateral meetings to figure out the starting point for the getting the negotiations going again after being on hold for the past 13 months. The plenary session got underway at 9 a.m. and went on for several hours, but the entire proceedings were closed to the hordes of journalists who descended on Beijing along with the delegations from the six-party nations. "Starting from the plenary session, the negotiations will enter a new phase with the member countries revealing their true intentions, thereby getting the negotiations into full gear to try to narrow down the differences," a South Korean official said. Clearly cautious and seeking to curb optimism as the actual negotiations process gets moving, government officials emphasized there were tough roads to traverse to the ultimate destination: a North Korean pledge to denuclearize. But there were nevertheless positive signs, with the United States and North Korea both showing visibly changed attitudes at the talks. The two sides engaged in a rare three-hour bilateral marathon on Tuesday afternoon after the opening session, and Hill later described the session as "very good" and "business-like" and "without any rhetoric." The United States was focusing on gauging the sincerity of North Korea's statements that its objective is to denuclearize the peninsula, albeit with complicated motives. Unlike the past hard-line U.S. position, Hill made clear Washington is willing to take corresponding measures consistent with North Korean actions. North Korea, for its part, has now begun explaining what it means by denuclearization. In his latest meeting with Hill, North Korea's top negotiator and Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye-gwan reportedly claimed North Korea dismantling its nuclear programs cannot by itself make a nuclear-free peninsula. Kim claimed all threats of nuclear war must be eradicated, meaning it wants the United States to completely remove all possibilities of attacking the North, halt nuclear-related military drills and ban stopovers of nuclear aircraft carriers at Korean ports. The United States reiterated it had no intention of attacking the communist country and that it recognized North Korea as a sovereign regime, while emphasizing North Korea must "permanently, fully and verifiably" dismantle all nuclear projects. It remains to be seen whether the two countries will manage to overcome their deep-rooted distrust and reach a middle point. South Korea, which has earned itself the role of an important facilitator by proposing an incentive for North Korea of massive electricity aid, focused on returning home with at least a joint talks-for-talks agreement at the end of these six-party negotiations. China was more focused on preventing the worst case scenario rather than seeking the best outcome as the host to the crucial international talks. While echoing the resolution to see substantial progress toward denuclearization of the peninsula, China is likely to try to persuade North Korea to consider the proposals from the United States and South Korea. Japan remained under pressure to accomplish two conflicting goals: satisfying domestic demands to clear up the abduction issue with North Korea and cooperating with other members to lure North Korea into giving up its nuclear ambitions. Japan, which sees a direct nuclear threat from North Korea, shares the same determination as the United States in that North Korea must dismantle all nuclear-related programs, including nuclear power development. Russia is more of an observer in the six-party talks and therefore supports practical approaches, including a joint statement at the end of this round of talks without bringing up North Korea's abduction of Japanese in the 1980s, North Korea's human rights issues, and other non-nuclear problems. (angiely@heraldm.com) By Lee Joo-hee and Kim Man-yong Korea Herald and Herald Business correspondents 2005.07.28 ***************************************************************** 9 Daily Yomiuri: North Korea ready to talk on N-program Hidetoshi Ikebe and Masahiko Takekoshi North Korea's chief delegate to the six-way talks said Tuesday his government was ready to form a "strategic decision" to make the Korean Peninsula nuclear-free, but stopped short of clarifying whether Pyongyang would abandon development of such weapons immediately. In his opening remarks to the fourth-round of six-way talks, North Korean Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan said a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula would happen only if all parties show their political will and make strategic decisions. "We're ready [for such a decision]. I believe the delegates of the United States and all other members also are ready," Kim said, attending the six-way talks that were being held for the first time since June 2004. Later Tuesday, the United States and North Korea held bilateral talks, during which Pyongyang responded to a U.S. proposal made in previous discussions to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula. The United States was represented by Christopher Hill, assistant secretary of state for East Asia and the Pacific. "They talked about their concern about the sequencing of the proposal and the importance they attach to sequencing, where they don't want to have obligations ahead of other people's obligations," Hill told reporters following his talks with Kim. North Korea has called for the provision of energy assistance as "compensation" for freezing its nuclear programs and called on Washington to change its "hostile" policy toward it. However, it has not agreed to dismantle its nuclear programs in a complete and verifiable manner, as the United States and other countries have called for. Pyongyang also insisted the nuclear weapons of U.S. forces stationed in South Korea must be removed as part of denuclearizing the peninsula. Meanwhile, North Korea has shown its positive stance on having the talks continue and bringing about concrete results by setting no closing date for the negotiations. "The six-way talks are a realistic and effective format of dialogue to seek a peaceful solution to the Korean Peninsula's nuclear problems," Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing said at the outset of the six-way talks. Following Li, envoys from China, Japan, North Korea, Russia, South Korea and the United States each delivered brief opening remarks before the delegates moved on to a closed-door session. Hill stressed the importance of pursuing a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula using peaceful measures. Pointing out that the six-way talks were at a "critical juncture," Hill said the United States was ready for "serious negotiations," hinting that Washington was paying enough attention to North Korea's demand for energy assistance so as to make progress in the current round of talks. Hill reiterated the United Sates had no intention of invading North Korea and regards the reclusive country as a sovereign nation. "We view [North Korea's] sovereignty as a matter of fact. The United States has absolutely no intention to invade or attack," he said. The chief Japanese delegate, Kenichiro Sasae, echoed Hill by saying there was an immediate need to resolve North Korea's nuclear issue in a peaceful manner. For that purpose, Sasae urged Pyongyang to make a "strategic decision" just as Kim indicated. Sasae, director general of the Foreign Ministry's Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau, also raised the issue of Japanese abducted to North Korea. Reiterating Japan's willingness to normalize diplomatic relations with North Korea, Sasae said the precondition for doing so was a "comprehensive solution to such concerns as nuclear capabilities, missiles and abductions." (Jul. 27, 2005) Copyright © The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 10 AFP: North Korea offers to dump nuclear weapons if US normalises ties 27/07/2005 10h57 Chinese paramilitary police guard the gate of the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing where nuclear talks are held ©AFP - Peter Parks BEIJING (AFP) - North Korea offered to dismantle its nuclear weapons if the United States normalises relations and pledges not to topple the regime on the second day of talks aimed at ending its atomic drive. The Stalinist state said it was willing to allow any disposal of its weapons to be verified but did not say if this meant International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors could return to the country, according to a source. The inspectors were thrown out of North Korea in December 2002 after the United States accused the North of running a uranium enrichment program, sparking the three-year standoff. "In the word-for-word agreement, the DPRK pledges to liquidate its nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons program verifiably if the DPRK and the US normalise relations, build trust and remove the nuclear threat," North Korea's chief delegate Kim Kye-gwan told the talks, according to a source in attendance. "In return, the United States vows to drop its policy to topple the DPRK system and vows to establish a legal and institutional system for peaceful coexistence," Kim said. In a keynote address, Kim also spoke of how to compensate the North for economic loss caused by denuclearisation, said the source, who was talking to a small group of reporters. The Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea (DPRK) is the North's official name. The North has long urged Washington to establish diplomatic relations and provide assurances of non-aggression if the deadlock is to be broken. While the US has said it recognises the North Korea's sovereignty and has no intention of attacking it, it has made no commitment to normalising relations. Impoverished North Korea is anxious to normalise ties in order to access international funds and aid, such as loans from the World Bank, and aid from US allies such as South Korea and Japan, analysts said. Establishing diplomatic relations with Washington could also signal a greenlight to foreign investors that they can safely pour money in the country. So far, the main protaganists have adopted a less confrontational tone than in the previous three rounds and China is looking to build on the momentum of two lengthy bilateral contacts between North Korea and the United States. Chief US envoy Christopher Hill told reporters late Tuesday he had "good discussions" with Kim on the first day of the talks that also involve China, Japan, Russia and South Korea. "It was very businesslike. We avoided any rhetoric. It was an effort to get all the issues on the table, to make sure we know what is important to each of us, so it was positive in that sense," he said. The two sides discussed the US proposal put forward in June 2004 that required North Korea to give an up-front pledge to dismantle all its plutonium- and uranium-based weapons programs before receiving any energy or other assistance. North Korea at the time rejected the US offer and instead wanted a step-by-step approach to dismantling its atomic arms program. This remains a key sticking point. In an effort to reach a breakthrough, South Korea has offered to provide the North with 500,000 tonnes of rice and some 2,000 megawatts of electricity if it abandons its nuclear ambitions. Seoul further suggested Wednesday a joint communique should be issued at the conclusion of the talks. In it, North Korea would pledge to dismantle its nuclear programs while the other nations would promise to normalise ties and offer security guarantees and economic cooperation, said a South Korean government official. North Korea abandoned the six-party talks last year, complaining of a hostile US policy, and has since claimed it already possesses nuclear weapons. But a softer US approach, coupled with a threat to take the issue to the United Nations, enticed it back to the negotiating table. Delegates at the talks say the atmosphere is much better than before. Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005 ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: New Round of Six-Party Nuclear Talks Begin From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday July 27, 2005 2:46 AM AP Photo BEJ104 By AUDRA ANG Associated Press Writer BEIJING (AP) - Negotiators on Wednesday began a second day of talks aimed at persuading North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions after the United States and China both expressed determination to make long-awaited headway toward a settlement. In negotiations Tuesday, Washington also assured North Korea it has no intention of attacking, and Pyongyang promised to work toward a denuclearized Korean Peninsula, opening moves that also indicated a shared goal of progress. The latest round of talks resumed in Beijing, the closest ally of the isolated, communist North, after a 13-month boycott by North Korea, which had cited ``hostile'' U.S. policies. Delegates struck an amiable note before the meeting Tuesday, smiling and clasping hands for a group photo. The other participants are South Korea, Japan and Russia. No details of the session on Wednesday morning were immediately released. The chief U.S. and North Korean envoys seemed especially determined to move ahead after three earlier rounds of talks produced no breakthroughs. The two men held a one-on-one meeting Tuesday - their second in as many days, and a departure from Washington's previous refusal to have direct contact with the North. ``These talks are at a critical juncture,'' U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill said at the opening ceremony. ``We do not have the option of walking away from this problem.'' His North Korean counterpart, Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan, said, ``The fundamental thing is to make real progress in realizing the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.'' ``This requires very firm political will and a strategic decision of the parties concerned that have interests in ending the threat of nuclear war,'' Kim said. ``We are fully ready and prepared for that.'' Hill directly addressed one of the North's main sticking points, assuring Pyongyang that Washington recognized its sovereignty and would not attack to end the standoff. ``We view (North Korea's) sovereignty as a matter of fact. The United States has absolutely no intention to invade or attack,'' Hill said. ``Nuclear weapons will not make (North Korea) more secure,'' he said. ``And in fact, on the contrary, nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula will only increase tension in the region.'' Qin Gang, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, also expressed optimism. ``This is a solid foundation for us to usher our talks into a stage of more in-depth discussion and make important progress,'' he said. ``We need to show faith, confidence, resolve and patience. We have to make unremitting efforts.'' After his one-on-one session with Kim, Hill told reporters that the North Koreans expressed concerns about the ``sequencing'' of proposals. Washington has said it wants verifiable disarmament before the North is rewarded, while Pyongyang insists on getting something in exchange for a nuclear freeze and more concessions as it disarms. ``They do not want to have obligations ahead of other people's obligations,'' Hill said. Russia's Interfax news agency, citing unidentified North Korean sources, said the North also demanded that the United States withdraw nuclear weapons from the South as part of any settlement. Both Washington and Seoul deny that any U.S. nuclear weapons are present in the South. It's not clear whether Pyongyang also is referring to visits to nearby waters by American nuclear-armed submarines. ``The North Koreans are asking a lot of the Americans,'' said Steve Tsang, a political specialist at Oxford University. ``Before the Americans can even know whether the North Koreans actually have nuclear weapons or not, and before the North Koreans dismantle their nuclear weapons if they have them, the Americans will have to remove any of their nuclear installations from South Korea, be they weapons or other items,'' Tsang said. ``It's not easy for the U.S. government to accept,'' he added. Even so, delegates have tried to show their commitment to progress by setting no end date for the talks, unlike earlier rounds that lasted three days. In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said that despite determination on all sides, developments would be gradual. It would be progress, he said, for all parties to agree to another round of talks. Moscow's negotiator, Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Alexeyev, suggested Washington might be expected to grant Pyongyang's wish for diplomatic relations as part of a settlement. A possible stumbling block is Japan's insistence on resolving the issue of its citizens abducted by the North. South Korea's negotiator, Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-soon, appeared to warn Japan not to derail the negotiations, saying it ``would definitely not be desirable to take up issues that would disintegrate the focus of the talks.'' Song also repeated South Korea's offer to supply the North with 2 million kilowatts of electricity if it agrees to disarm. The latest nuclear standoff with North Korea erupted in late 2002, when U.S. officials accused the country of running a secret uranium enrichment program. Since then, the North has pulled out of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and taken steps that would allow it to harvest more radioactive materials for atomic bombs. In February, the North publicly claimed it had nuclear weapons, but there has been no independent confirmation. Hill said that if North Korea ``permanently, fully and verifiably'' dismantles its nuclear programs, the U.S. and other countries would offer measures ``consistent with the principle of 'words for words and actions for actions.''' That phrase was contained in a statement issued by the Chinese chairman at the end of the last round of talks in June 2004 and has been repeatedly invoked by North Korea as a demand. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 12 Korea Times: When Will Nuke Talks See ˇ®White Smoke?ˇŻ Hankooki.com > The Korea Times By Park Song-wu Korea Times Correspondent BEIJING _ Chief delegates from six countries attending the long-awaited negotiations on North KoreaˇŻs nuclear program are signaling that, despite different views on ways to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula, the talks are going smoothly. All participating countries are apparently determined to produce a meaningful result this time. But one unsolved question is when this result will come, ending the fourth round of talks that reconvened Tuesday after a hiatus of 13 months. Seoul officials have been tight-lipped on the schedule, leaving more than 60 South Korean reporters _ most of them arriving in Beijing on Sunday _ utterly lost. Yet even though it is difficult to get an answer from government officials, there are a number of hints. South KoreaˇŻs Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry booked return tickets on behalf of reporters in two groups with dates marking July 31 and Aug. 1. In addition, most of the reporters have received a 10-day visa from the Chinese Embassy in Seoul, meaning their departure to South Korea should be made by Aug. 2. But, unfortunately, the two clues are still not enough to guess when the talks will finish. A South Korean official in Beijing made the guess work more difficult by saying that it is always possible to change the airline schedule. He also said that extending the duration of stay in Beijing would not be difficult, given that China is the host of the six-party talks. Under this condition, many people predict that the talks will likely last until all participating countries reach at least a ``broadˇŻˇŻ agreement, focusing on North KoreaˇŻs abandonment of all their nuclear program in return for a multilateral security guarantee. For that end, a top South Korean diplomat half-jokingly said in a recent meeting with reporters that he wanted to see the fourth round of the six-party talks proceed in a ``papal conclaveˇŻˇŻ style. The voting by cardinals, who should be kept in strict seclusion until a new Catholic leader is elected, would be a good model for the six nations to adopt if they want to produce a substantive result, he said. Answering a figurative question on when it would be possible to see ``white smokeˇŻˇŻ from the Diaoyutai state guesthouse, the official venue for the six-party talks, another South Korean official in Beijing jokingly said that it would be strange to christen an unborn baby without yet knowing whether it is boy or girl. At the Vatican, officials burn the ballots after the votes are counted each time, producing smoke. When a winner is selected, the ballots are burned alone, making the smoke white. If there is no winner, a chemical is mixed with the ballots, making it black. im@koreatimes.co.kr 07-27-2005 20:53 ***************************************************************** 13 Reuters: N.Korea digs in on day two of nuclear crisis talks Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:23 AM ET By Jack Kim and Teruaki Ueno BEIJING (Reuters) - North Korea staked out a tough position on Wednesday on the second day of six-party talks on its nuclear weapons programmes, demanding U.S. concessions as the other five outlined proposals for resolving the crisis. But with an unusually high level of one-on-one contacts between the North and the United States and a new, open-ended format, the mood at the long-delayed fourth round of talks also including South Korea, Russia, Japan and China remained hopeful. Delegates held a plenary session lasting almost three hours on Wednesday at which they clarified their positions. They followed up with a series of bilateral meetings in the afternoon. The morning session saw all six negotiators offering views on how to denuclearise the Korean Peninsula, Xinhua news agency said. The U.S. and North Korean views remained sharply divergent. One diplomatic source in Beijing said that North Korean negotiator Kim Kye-gwan had told the session: "If relations between North Korea and the United States are normalised and nuclear threats from the United States are removed, we will abandon our nuclear weapons and nuclear programme." For his part, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill insisted that Pyongyang first abandon its weapons programmes in a verifiable way, the source told Reuters. A senior U.S. official told reporters the North Koreans had objected to the American proposal, first put forward in June last year, that Pyongyang move first. "They were not entirely satisfied by it and had some concerns about the sequencing of obligations, feeling their obligations were frontloaded and the obligations of the other parties were backloaded," the official told a briefing. He said the elements laid out in the June 2004 proposal remained the basis of Washington's position but hinted that there might be some flexibility on timing. "As for timing and sequencing, I think we have to see where we are with the other parties," he said. A South Korean official said Seoul, meanwhile, had proposed that the six adopt a joint document setting out two "pillars" or matching promises without specifying the sequence of events. "These are: one, North Korea would pledge to dismantle its nuclear programmes. The other pillar is the other countries would promise to normalise relations with the North, guarantee its security and to offer economic aid," the official told reporters. STRATEGIC AND SUBSTANTIVE There was still no sign North Korea was any closer to taking the "strategic and substantive decision" that Japanese chief negotiator Kenichiro Sasae had urged it to make, to commit itself to scrapping its nuclear programmes. The senior U.S. official said Hill and North Korean envoy Kim, at a one-on-one meeting on Tuesday, had addressed a number of issues that would be germane to a final agreement, including Pyongyang's alleged programme to enrich uranium for weapons use. Japan's Kyodo news agency, citing an unnamed source, said the North had denied having any kind of uranium enrichment scheme, even for civilian purposes. "We did not achieve an agreement with them on that but we did agree to keep talking about it," the U.S. official said. The North acknowledges having a programme for reprocessing plutonium, which can also be used for manufacturing weapons. Despite the predictable wrangling, the two sides seemed to be taking a less confrontational approach this time than during previous six-party forums spread over almost three years. At Tuesday's opening plenary session, Hill sought to reassure the North, which it had labelled just months ago as an "outpost of tyranny", that Washington considered it a sovereign state which need not fear American attack. Three previous rounds saw no progress and a stalemate this time might prompt Washington to take the issue to the United Nations and open debate on possible sanctions, which China opposes and North Korea has warned would trigger conflict. If the talks go well, the rewards could help the impoverished North out of diplomatic isolation and offer much-needed aid. South Korea has said it would supply Pyongyang with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, roughly equivalent to the North's total power output, if it scrapped its nuclear plans. Standard and Poor's raised Seoul's long-term foreign currency rating to A from A-minus on Wednesday, but said ties with the North would remain a constraint. "It remains our view ... that the (six-party) talks will be protracted and inconclusive, or if they conclude, that DPRK compliance will be difficult to monitor," the agency said. The nuclear standoff erupted in October 2002 when U.S. officials accused Pyongyang of pursuing a clandestine weapons programme, prompting it to expel nuclear inspectors. Early this year North Korea announced that it had nuclear weapons. It demanded Washington provide aid, security guarantees and diplomatic recognition in return for scrapping them, a sequence that remains at odds with the U.S. position. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 Reuters: N.Korea digs in on day two of nuclear crisis talks Wed Jul 27, 2005 5:44 AM ET (Recasts with North Korean statement, South Korean proposal) By Jack Kim and Teruaki Ueno BEIJING, July 27 (Reuters) - North Korea staked out a tough position on Wednesday on the second day of six-party talks on its nuclear weapons programmes, demanding U.S. concessions as the other five outlined proposals for resolving the crisis. But with an unusually high level of one-on-one contacts between the North and the United States and a new, open-ended format, the mood at the long-delayed fourth round of talks also including South Korea, Russia, Japan and China remained hopeful. "During their bilateral contacts with the United States, the North Koreans demanded the United States remove nuclear weapons from the Korean peninsula as part of mutual efforts to denuclearise the Korean peninsula," a diplomatic source in Beijing told Reuters. Washington, which keeps more than 30,000 troops in South Korea, says it no longer has such weapons in the country. Delegates held a plenary session lasting almost three hours on Wednesday at which they clarified their positions. The parties were holding a series of bilateral meetings in the afternoon. China's Wu Dawei said after the morning session that all six negotiators had offered opinions on how to denuclearise the peninsula, Xinhua news agency said. A South Korean official said Seoul had proposed that the six countries adopt a joint document with two sets of promises. "These are: one, North Korea would pledge to dismantle its nuclear programmes. The other pillar is the other countries would promise to normalise relations with the North, guarantee its security and to offer economic aid," the official told reporters. And despite the North's hard line, U.S. chief negotiator Christopher Hill said at the talks he would start work on normalising Washington's relationship with Pyongyang -- one of its key demands, South Korea's Yonhap news agency reported. STRATEGIC AND SUBSTANTIVE But there was still no sign North Korea was any closer to taking the "strategic and substantive decision" that Japanese chief negotiator Kenichiro Sasae had urged it to make, to commit itself to scrapping its nuclear programmes . At the last round of talks in June 2004, Washington offered security guarantees and South Korean aid in return for the North agreeing to dismantle -- not just freeze -- its nuclear programmes in a verifiable way. But North Korea said on Wednesday the proposal was "not logical, and accepting it would be difficult", Kyodo news agency cited sources at the talks as saying. In one-on-one talks with the United States on Tuesday, Pyongyang had denied having a uranium enrichment programme, Kyodo reported, citing unnamed sources. The North acknowledges having a programme for enriching plutonium, which can also be used for manufacturing weapons. Nonetheless, the two sides seemed to be taking a less confrontational approach this time than during previous six-party forums spread over almost three years. At Tuesday's opening plenary session, Hill sought to reassure the North, which it had labelled just months ago as an "outpost of tyranny", that Washington considered it a sovereign state which need not fear American attack. Three previous rounds saw no progress and a stalemate this time might prompt Washington to take the issue to the United Nations and open debate on possible sanctions, which China opposes and North Korea has warned would trigger conflict. If the talks go well, the rewards could help the impoverished North out of diplomatic isolation and offer much-needed aid. South Korea has said it would supply Pyongyang with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, roughly equivalent to the North's total power output, if it scrapped its nuclear plans. Standard and Poor's raised Seoul's long-term foreign currency rating to A from A-minus on Wednesday, but said ties with the North would remain a constraint. "It remains our view ... that the (six-party) talks will be protracted and inconclusive, or if they conclude, that DPRK compliance will be difficult to monitor," the agency said. The nuclear standoff erupted in October 2002 when U.S. officials accused Pyongyang of pursuing a clandestine weapons programme, prompting it to expel nuclear inspectors. Early this year North Korea announced that it had nuclear weapons. It demanded Washington provide aid, security guarantees and diplomatic recognition in return for scrapping them, a sequence that remains at odds with the U.S. position. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 15 Reuters: RPT-N.Korea cool to U.S. nuclear offer--U.S. official Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:39 AM ET (Edits paragraph 5) BEIJING, July 27 (Reuters) - North Korea responded coolly on Wednesday to U.S. proposals aimed at resolving the three-year crisis over its nuclear weapons plans, a senior U.S. official said on Wednesday. At six-party talks in Beijing, North Korea voiced concern over a U.S. offer dating back to June 2004 to provide security guarantees and South Korean aid in return for the North agreeing to dismantle -- not just freeze -- its nuclear programmes in a verifiable way. Pyongyang has insisted on security guarantees and aid pledges before it moves to scrap its weapons programme, and the senior official told reporters the North Koreans had objected to the proposal that they should move first. "They were not entirely satisfied by it and had some concerns about the sequencing of obligations, feeling their obligations were frontloaded and the obligations of the other parties were backloaded," he told a briefing after the second day of talks between the two Koreas, the United States, Japan, Russia and host nation China. The U.S. official said the elements laid out in the June 2004 proposal remained the basis of Washington's position but hinted that there might be some flexibility on timing. "As for timing and sequencing, I think we have to see where we are with the other parties," he said. Participants were now focusing on agreeing some form of statement as a framework, "a set of agreed principles on the basis of which we can narrow the scope of issues and lay out an eventual schedule for negotiation of an overall agreement", he aded. "Our focus was to try to develop a consensus among the parties as to what elements should go into a statement of agreed principles," he said. Chief U.S. negotiator Christopher Hill told reporters: "We obviously have some differences with them about the sequencing of these issues. He added: "We've got to make sure that everyone remembers, especially the DPRK, what the purpose of this meeting is and really figure out a way that they can dismantle these nuclear weapons. Here we are in the 21st century, there's just no reason why a country should be building up a nuclear arsenal." © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 16 [southnews] US new nukes 60 years after first bomb Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 01:22:37 -0500 (CDT) Sixty years after the first atomic bomb was tested in the New Mexico desert, the United States still has some 2,000 nuclear weapons on hair trigger alert and is considering new weapons such as earth-penetrating bunker busters. US considers new nuclear generation 60 years after first bomb WASHINGTON (AFP) Jul 26, 2005 Sixty years after the first atomic bomb was tested in the New Mexico desert, the United States still has some 2,000 nuclear weapons on hair trigger alert and is considering new weapons such as earth-penetrating bunker busters. The US administration has agreed to pare back its nuclear arsenal from about 10,000 warheads today to about 6,000 in 2012 under the Moscow Treaty reached with Russia in 2001. But even as it moves to retire much of its Cold War arsenal, it has pressed a reluctant Congress for funds for nuclear bunker-buster studies, refurbished nuclear testing facilities, and a facility to build the plutonium triggers for new weapons. The US Strategic Command in Omaha, Nebraska, is reported to be developing "global strike" options, including a nuclear option, against potential adversaries with nuclear weapons such as Iran and North Korea. More than 15 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, nuclear weapons "are alive and well," said Robert S. Norris, an expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an arms control and environmental advocacy group. Norris points to the administration's Nuclear Posture Review of 2001 as "the revealing document" that shows its intention to use nuclear weapons to counter a new cast of potential adversaries armed with weapons of mass destruction. The review called for a "new triad" in which conventional and nuclear forces would be meshed in a "global strike" capability, enabling the United States to respond to a threat anywhere in the world on very short notice. It envisioned more precise long-range missiles armed with conventional warheads as well as smaller, lower yield nuclear tips. The other parts of the triad are missile defense systems and a revived infrastructure of weapons labs and production facilities that had deteriorated since the end of the Cold War. "So the vision of the Bush administration is that we are going to need nuclear weapons well out into the middle of the 21st century, and beyond. I mean for decades to come," said Norris. But the administration appears not to have counted on Representative David Hobson. The Ohio Republican, chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the Energy Department's nuclear weapons programs, stunned the administration by rejecting last year's request for new nuclear weapons funding. He nixed nine million dollars in funding for research into new low yield "mini-nukes;" denied another 27.6 million dollars request for study of a Robust Nuclear Earth-Penetrating Weapon; and put off a request for another 30 million dollars for a new plant to manufacture the plutonium pits that trigger nuclear explosions. "The development of new weapons for ill-defined future requirements is not what the nation needs at this time," Hobson said in a speech February 3 to the Arms Control Association. "What is needed, and what is absent to date, is leadership and fresh thinking for the 21st Century regarding nuclear security and the future of the US stockpile," he said. The United States currently has 5,300 operational nuclear warheads, and another 5,300 in reserve, said Victoria Sampson, an expert at the Center for Defense Information. "We have about 2,000 which are on hair trigger alert, which means they can be ready to go within minutes of that decision to launch," she said. Hobson and others are worried that new nuclear weapons initiatives could lower the threshhold for their use, and warned it would send the wrong signal at a time when the United States was demanding that North Korea and Iran stop their weapons programs. But the administration has struck back with a request for 8.5 million dollars of renewed funding for the nuclear earth penetrator in 2006. It also has asked for 25 million dollars to get its Nevada test site ready to resume testing in 18 months if needed, instead of the 24 to 36 months it would currently take. Those requests are working their way through Congress where opposition remains strong. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld argued that only "very large, very dirty nuclear bombs" could now destroy the increasing numbers of facilities that potential adversaries have buried deep underground. "So the choice is: do we want to have nothing and only a large, dirty nuclear weapon, or would we rather have something in between. That is the issue," he said in April. "It seems to me studying it makes all the sense in the world," he said. But scientists warn that no earth-penetrating nuclear weapon could bore deep enough to trap devastating fallout that the National Academy of Sciences has concluded would still kill more than a million people on the surface if it was near a densely populated urban area. The archives of South News can be found at http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/southnews/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: southnews-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 17 Las Vegas SUN: Nevada congressmen divided on energy bill Today: July 27, 2005 at 11:5:26 PDT By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada's congressional delegation is divided on the massive energy bill that could go to the floor of the Senate and House this week. A key component of the bill, which was just approved by Senate and House negotiators, is more than $6 billion for new nuclear power plants and other nuclear programs. Michele Boyd, legislative director of Public Citizen's Energy Program, said the bill's nuclear provisions not only mean more nuclear waste, but more pressure to complete the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said she will continue to oppose the bill. "Buried in this bill are a few provisions that do seek to promote more renewable energy, but they pale in comparison to the mountain of tax breaks that will go to oil and gas producers who are already reaping record profits and to forms of energy that pollute the environment and create more deadly nuclear waste." Berkley said. Berkley voted against the House version of the bill in April. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., and Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., voted for it. Exact language contained in the bill will not be public until the House and Senate staff complete a conference report, but lawmakers finished meeting early Tuesday morning. Porter said "historically" there are a number of things in the previous versions of the bill that he has supported. He said he is "very cognizant and concerned" about the potential for more nuclear waste and he still adamantly opposes Yucca. Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., also will still support the bill. He is not opposed to nuclear power, spokeswoman Amy Maier said, however, he wants to see the nuclear waste problem addressed in a scientific and sound matter. "That is not Yucca Mountain," she said. There are ways to reduce the amount of fuel and different ways to manage it than digging a hole and burying it, she said. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., voted in favor of the Senate version of the bill in June. Reid has not said yet how he will vote on the final bill, spokeswoman Tessa Hafen said. Hafen said the nuclear components of the final energy bill make Reid's effort to keep nuclear waste at power plants even more necessary. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 18 HindustanTimes.com: UK will toe US line on N-fuel Wednesday, July 27, 2005 | Updated: 11:41 IST Pramit Pal Chaudhuri New Delhi, July 26,2005 The UK has denied reports it is opposed to the Indo-US joint statement on nuclear issues. The British High Commission on Tuesday said the UK warmly welcomed the Indo-US agreement and was looking hard to see how India could be better integrated into international nuclear regimes. The UK stressed the obligations the nuclear deal placed on India and was less specific about accommodating India into the international regime. The UK said it was pleased India had agreed to hive off its civilian nuclear sites and be guided by restrictive regimes like the MTCR and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). In return, the UK would discuss with international partners how to work with India on civil nuclear matters. Officials said the UK was on board with the USs argument India was a unique nuclear case and deserved to be inside the nuclear regime. Britains support will be crucial when it comes to winning over the many European members of the NSG who oppose India. Britain will push for a common EU position favourable to India, preferably before the India-EU summit in New Delhi in September. ***************************************************************** 19 STUFF: Bill to lift ban on nuclear-propelled ships defeated New Zealand's leading news and information website Thursday, 28 July 2005 ACT MP Ken Shirley last night lost a bid to have lifted the ban on nuclear-propelled ships entering New Zealand waters. Mr Shirley's member's bill would not have lifted the ban on nuclear weapons but would have removed clause 11 of the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone Disarmament and Arms Control Act 1987. This clause banned any ship that was wholly or partly dependent on nuclear power from entering New Zealand waters. Mr Shirley's New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament and Arms Control (Nuclear Propulsion Reform) Amendment Bill would have got rid of this clause. Mr Shirley said last night the clause was not needed because no foreign warship could come to New Zealand without being invited to do so by the government of the day. He said his bill would not have become "operative" until there had been a referendum on the nuclear issue put to the voting public. "How can you vote against that?" he asked his colleagues in Parliament. However, all the other political parties did vote against his measure and the bill was not given its first reading, stopping it in its tracks. ***************************************************************** 20 Japan Times: Japan starts nuke talks with abduction demand Wednesday, July 27, 2005 BEIJING (Kyodo) As the fourth round of six-nation talks on defusing the North Korean nuclear threat started Tuesday, Tokyo, as expected, reiterated its demand that Pyongyang resolve the issue over its abductions of Japanese. Japan's chief negotiator, Kenichiro Sasae, director general of the Foreign Ministry's Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau, said getting North Korea to drop its nuclear arms and missile programs and come clean on the abductions are issues that must be comprehensively resolved before Tokyo can entertain establishing diplomatic relations with Pyongyang. Tokyo hopes to discuss the abduction issue with Pyongyang bilaterally on the sidelines of the six-way talks, which involve the two Koreas, Japan, the United States, China and Russia. North Korea has repeatedly voiced opposition to Japan raising the abductions during the multilateral discussions. Japan has addressed the issue in past six-party talks as well as during bilateral talks with North Korea on the sidelines of the six-nation forum. South Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min Soon, South Korea's chief delegate to the talks in Beijing, again urged Japan on Tuesday not to raise the abduction issue. He also urged the U.S. not to take up North Korea's human rights record. "Discussions should be focused on the (nuclear) issue," Song said in the opening session of the fourth round of the six-nation talks, convened in the morning. Differences between Japan and North Korea over the abduction issue have since 2002 prevented the two countries from normalizing diplomatic ties or even resuming talks to that end. The Japan Times: July 27, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 21 Reuters: Snubs all round for ASEAN as ministers skip forum Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:36 AM ET (Adds background, edits) By Ben Blanchard and Ed Cropley VIENTIANE, July 27 (Reuters) - A major Asia-Pacific security forum suffered another serious setback on Wednesday when Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing said he would skip the meeting for a surprise trip to Myanmar. His Indian counterpart, Natwar Singh, also pulled out of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) annual meeting on Thursday and Friday, dealing yet another blow to a security institution already struggling for relevance after no-shows by top diplomats from Washington and Tokyo. "I'm going to Myanmar tonight," Li told reporters on the sidelines of an Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) meeting in Vientiane without offering any further details. An aide said Li would not return to the Lao capital after his visit to Yangon -- which announced on Tuesday it would be skipping its turn as ASEAN chairman in 2006 -- because of an "unplanned event". China watchers said protocol-minded China may have felt awkward with its foreign minister sitting down opposite mere deputies from Washington, Tokyo and New Delhi. But his absence casts an even longer shadow over ARF, which is already missing U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her Japanese counterpart Nobutaka Machimura, who have more pressing interests elsewhere. Machimura is in New York lobbying for a permanent Japanese seat on the United Nations Security Council. Rice's office insists other "essential travel" is behind her absence from the ARF, a regular fixture for her predecessors. "In southeast Asia, they've fallen back a little too easily on platitudes and generalities rather than delivering outcomes," said Ross Babbage of Canberra-based consultancy Strategy International. "The major external players want to talk substance and get on and get things done. Now ASEAN is paying the price." NORTH KOREA THERE, BUT ELSEWHERE Li's decision to head to Yangon and meet the former Burma's military junta smacked of China seeking to firm up already strong ties with its internationally reviled but resource-rich southern neighbour, he added. "This is a great opportunity for the Chinese to underline their 'special relationship' with Burma," Babbage said. The resumption in Beijing of six-way talks to resolve North Korea's nuclear crisis -- an issue that has long dominated ARF meetings, given the presence of top diplomats from Pyongyang and Washington -- has also pushed it deeper into obscurity. With typical resolve, ASEAN officials refused to accept the big country pullouts had turned their big day in the spotlight into a diplomatic sideshow. "Lots of them are here, but they are just leaving," spokesman M.C. Abad told a news conference. "The fact that many of them are here assures us they remain committed to the objectives of the ARF. They have said so." Australia, which has been trying to foster closer ties in Asia, was one of the few ASEAN partners expressing a commitment, making clear it would ratify a regional non-aggression pact in October to allow for its inclusion in a 16-country East Asia Summit in December. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 22 www.satribune.com: India Should be Forced to Open Up its Nuclear Installations WASHINGTON DC, July 28, 2005 | ISSN: 1684-2057 | Manmohan Singh excites Bush, but Cheney is not interested India Should be Forced to Open Up its Nuclear Installations By Sampathkumar Iyangar Special to the South Asia Tribune AHMEDABAD, July 28: Civilian nuclear cooperation between US and India is touted to be greatest achievement of the visit of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his US visit early this month. Spin doctors have gone to town with the claim that the Indian delegation has struck a great deal with the US. Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran claimed immediately after the release of the Singh-Bush joint statement that it would help India get "the whole range of civilian nuclear energy cooperation open to us, including what many people have been talking about  fuel for the Tarapur Atomic Power Station near Mumbai. Seen dispassionately, he pointed out, this was clearly a "major breakthrough for India." Bared of all hullabaloo and hype, the factual position of the outcome of the visit is not as dramatic. President George Bush did promise India full cooperation in developing its civilian nuclear power program in exchange for New Delhi's commitment to adhere to international regimes aimed at curbing arms proliferation, provided the Indians move quickly to fulfill their obligations. Bush did assure Singh that he will work to achieve full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India as it realizes its goals of promoting nuclear power and achieving energy security. The statement noted that the President would seek from Congress to adjust US laws and policies and that the United States would work with friends and allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India, including but not limited to, expeditious considerations of fuel supplies for safeguarded nuclear reactors at Tarapur. The quid pro quo for such cooperation is clearly enunciated in the document: Prime Minister Singh had agreed that India 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. According to Congressional sources it is Bush's intention to seek Congressional approval to implement the agreement on civil nuclear cooperation this year. Does that mean that the mandarins of nuclear establishment of India will come out from behind the thick veil of secretiveness and mystery that shrouds its deals to practice a semblance of transparency and accountability? It is unlikely, unless some fundamental changes take place in the polity of the region and anarchic attitudes of the people at the helm, that President Bush will continue to pursue his initiative with Congress beyond a scheduled review of Indias steps in the direction of assuming same responsibilities and practices when he visits South Asia in 2006. For, it is not going to be easy for the President to convince arms control advocates who dominate the Congress. One of them, Democratic Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts minces no words, This administration's rogue, shoot-from-the-hip move to launch nuclear cooperation with India puts the interests of industry ahead of our national security." More significantly, the idea of ending isolationism and opting for international nuclear cooperation is unpalatable also to a powerful coterie of fake scientists, unscrupulous business houses, and other vested interests in India. These elements stand to lose huge recurring incomes in the event of transparency and accountability being forced on the establishment. The coterie has already started work on sabotaging any possibility of ending isolationist policies. What is more worrying is the fact that this coterie has at its beck and command some of the most talented strategic affairs pundits and brilliant ultrapatriotic lobbyists in the Ministry of External Affairs. Currently, the goings on in the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) are beyond the purview of the countrys judiciary, statutory auditing agencies, and even the Parliament, let alone any international safeguards. Any discussion of its affairs is considered to run counter to national security. Huge funds are gobbled up year after year by this coterie just for enriching its members with no tangible or intangible benefit to a billion impoverished people who pay through their nose to foot the bill. Over the years, these nuclear mullahs have achieved such a sacred position that any criticism of their misdeeds is equated to blasphemy. According to noted economist Swaminathan SA Aiyar, Indian nuclear scientists who successfully achieved the feat of reinventing the wheels of nuclear electricity and weaponry never had any commercial orientations. They got unlimited money with no commercial control or penalties. The old Indian nuclear establishment is surely unhappy since it remains stuck in the siege mentality that began after Pokhran-I in 1974. It had to somehow keep out the dreaded foreign inspectors who would expose the dirty truth that Indias civilian and defense nuclear programs were one and same. . . If international players are allowed access to the field,.the Indian establishment, long hailed as a hero of self sufficiency, will be exposed as uneconomic, obsolete, and more importantly, grossly unsafe. While on the safety aspect of Indias nuclear facilities, the Indian judiciarys role vis a vis the heist going on in the name of nuclear self reliance has been far from responsible. When the NGO Peoples Union for Civic Liberties (PUCL) petitioned the court to direct DAE to furnish details of documented safety deficiencies in nuclear facilities that threatened the environment, their Lordships dismissed the public interest petition unceremoniously. The court ruled that the right of the citizens to life cannot be paramount and is subservient to the interests of the State! A shameful verdict indeed for a country that takes pride in calling itself the biggest democracy of the world! Bigwigs of the Indian atomic establishment have openly expressed their opposition to the suggestion by American analysts Selig Harrison and Ashley Tellis that the best way for the US to integrate India into the global non-proliferation order as a de facto nuclear weapons state and allow it access to nuclear equipment and fuel is to insist that all existing and future power reactors be safeguarded by the IAEA. These so-far-unchallenged protectionist scientists insist that safeguards should apply not for their current white elephants but only for any new facility that is created with outside equipment or help. Dr AN Prasad, former Director of the Bhabha Atomic Research Center (BARC), has assumed the leadership of the pack of the desk bound scientists who only invent tall claims. He told Chennai-based newspaper The Hindu that the suggestion of allowing safeguards "goes against the national interest." Unable to hide any longer the flopping of their futile attempts in reinventing wheels with regard to various types of reactors after squandering monstrous sums, Indian nuke mandarins have recently climbed on to the Fast Breeder bandwagon. They have started peddling the merits of Fast Breeder Reactors (FBR), which no country in the world has so far succeeded in developing commercially, so that international vigil can be avoided and unlimited budgets can continue. According to Prasad, "Since FBRs will be the mainstay of India's nuclear power program for some time, and since there is a lot to be established for the first time and improved upon to achieve a level of maturity required to make it a success, bringing in safeguards at this stage just because they are civil nuclear facilities will seriously hamper our efforts and cut into our freedom to pursue the development of this program." Continuing his specious argument, he declared: "Only those who have hands-on experience in operating such facilities and also dealing with intrusive safeguards can fully appreciate this aspect" and warned that the issue "should not be taken lightly." It is of note that FBRs utilize plutonium and the distinction between civil and military applications becomes still more undistinguishable in their case. Prasad's concerns are shared by several serving and retired DAE officials who feel India needs US support for its nuclear energy sector only to supplement capacity and facilitate supply of uranium. The DAE establishment insists the FBR must be the mainstay of the Indian nuclear power program and that any light water reactors that Russia, France or the US might supply will be an "additionality." In the context of the Prime Minister's visit to Washington, Prasad said any change in US policy on the nuclear supplies front should be "carefully assessed to see if there are any unacceptable conditions." At no point should India "compromise the basic inherent strength so relentlessly built over the years under heavy odds." For reasons obvious, isolationist scientists of DAE have traditionally enjoyed the support of Indian Foreign Service (IFS) mandarins and strategic affairs pundits funded by the Ministry of External Affairs. No wonder, even before the ink in the joint statement could dry, Foreign Secretary Saran declared on July 19 that India had not comprised its sovereignty to get civilian nuclear technology from the United States. Saran emphasized: This issue is "very important for everybody to understand because there may be sometimes a perception that somehow we have taken on responsibilities or obligations which are going to be onerous. Not at all." He reiterated his point: "We will not accept any kind of conditionality that others are not willing to accept." Saran acknowledged that India was not averse to a few conditions. "But we will not be discriminated against and this comes out loud and clear," he said, adding, "We are doing exactly what the United States of America and other countries are doing. Nothing more." Transparency and accountability are the absolute preconditions to safeguard public interests when handling the inherently dangerous technology. There can be no place for secretiveness, and the mediocrity, nepotism, and corruption that it breeds, in a nuclear establishment. The Government of India should be forced to scrap the archaic Atomic Energy Act, to open all the atomic facilities for credible international inspection, to come clean on safety deficiencies, purge the organizations of mediocre and fake scientist who had gained entry and ascendance due to arrant nepotism, and ensure proper audit for the vast sums invested as well as for responsible environmental practices before any civilian nuclear cooperation can materialize. The writer is a technocrat who specializes in the development of components for nuclear and aerospace applications. He has mounted a campaign against irresponsible practices and proliferation crimes. Copyright © 2002-05 South Asia Tribune Publications, L.L.C. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 Scoop: Annan Welcomes Seven-Nation Nuclear Initiative Wednesday, 27 July 2005, 12:51 pm Press Release: United Nations Annan Welcomes Seven-Nation Nuclear-Non-Proliferation Initiative New York, Jul 26 2005 7:00PM United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan today welcomed an "encouraging" seven-nation initiative which he said could lead to General Assembly consensus on strengthening adherence to nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament agreements. The political declaration was announced today by the foreign ministers of Australia, Chile, Indonesia, Norway, Romania, South Africa and the United Kingdom. According to a statement issued by a UN spokesman in New York, Mr. Annan had been deeply troubled by the failure of the Review Conference of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), held at UN Headquarters in May, to achieve substantive agreement to strengthen collective security against the many nuclear threats to which all States and peoples are vulnerable. He is therefore "deeply encouraged" by the agreement announced today by the ministers, who represent a diverse group of States, the statement said, adding that Mr. Annan thanked Norway's Foreign Minister, Jan Petersen, for spearheading the initiative. "The political declaration they have adopted and the input for the 2005 World Summit they have submitted to the President of the General Assembly provide the basis, the Secretary-General expects, for a wide-ranging consensus," the statement said, referring to the Assembly's upcoming September summit, where world leaders are expected to renew their commitment to the implementation of agreed development targets and take decisions on UN reform. "The Secretary-General hopes that leaders will use the opportunity offered by the World Summit, and the added impetus which these seven foreign ministers have provided, to make bold commitments and address the pressing challenges to the nuclear non-proliferation regime," Mr. Annan said. ***************************************************************** 24 Chongqing Daily News Group: Nuclear industry to seek foreign help 2005-07-27 11:50 ˇ@ˇ@BEIJING, July 27 -- China's ambitious plans to build some 30 nuclear reactors within the next 15 years will provide vast opportunities for foreign architecture &engineering (A) companies to cash in on the expanding clean energy sector, industry authorities said. ˇ@ˇ@"The gigantic project, which means building approximately two reactors each year, will see a great demand for professional services in fuel resources procurement, project management &consulting, as well as infrastructure engineering," said Zhao Chengkun, senior advisor with the preparatory office of State Nuclear Power Technology Corp of China (SNPTC). ˇ@ˇ@He was speaking yesterday at a nuclear forum in Beijing. ˇ@ˇ@China, the world's second largest energy consumer after the United States, now has a policy of "actively promoting nuclear power construction." ˇ@ˇ@In an effort to satiate the country's surging power demands, China aims to have a total nuclear installed capacity of 40 gigawatts by 2020, which will make up 4 per cent of the nation's aggregate power generation, from the current 2.3 per cent. ˇ@ˇ@When building nuclear plants in previous years, nuclear research institutes were responsible for the research and design of a whole project, which lacked an integrated chain for A services. ˇ@ˇ@"But the old system only applied to small-scale nuclear plant construction, and does not suit the country's (new) scheme to massively drive the nuclear power generation," SNPTC's Zhao said on the sidelines of the forum. ˇ@ˇ@Zhao thought the establishment of joint-ventures by Chinese and foreign firms would be one way of introducing professional A services. ˇ@ˇ@China's nuclear industry has actually already begun to try and enhance the A ability of the country's existing nuclear project research institutes, noted Zhao. ˇ@ˇ@"For example, the nuclear industry engineering research and design institute in Shanghai has improved the overall strength of its A arm," Zhao said. ˇ@ˇ@Another concern relevant to China's aspirations to accelerate its nuclear plant construction regards the supply of the fuel source uranium. ˇ@ˇ@According to Pan Ziqiang, director of the science &technology commission of the China National Nuclear Corporation, China has little in the way of uranium although more unproven reserves have yet to be explored. ˇ@ˇ@"The country will beef up investment in exploring fuel resources for the growing number of nuclear power plants across the nation," Pan said yesterday at the forum. ˇ@ˇ@He said that in recent years, the country has found a host of potential reserves of nuclear plant fuel, but did not elaborate. ˇ@ˇ@Furthermore, around one third of the country has not yet been checked for uranium reserves, and areas that have been looked into are only tapped down to a depth of 500 metres. ˇ@ˇ@"Places below 500 metres are believed to also be rich in uranium reserves," Pan added. http://www.cqnews.net/ All rights reserved District,Chongqing Zip code:400010 FaxˇG023-63907665 E- mail:info@cqnews.net ***************************************************************** 25 RIA Novosti: IAEA director general to appraise prospects of Armenian nuclear power plant 27/ 07/ 2005 YEREVAN, July 27 (RIA Novosti, Gamlet Matevosyan) - Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohamed ElBaradei arrived in Yerevan, the Armenian capital, Wednesday. The Armenian Foreign Ministry said he was scheduled to meet with Armenian leaders and visit Armenia's nuclear power plant. The plant was put into commission in 1980 and closed in March 1989 for political reasons. The plant was reopened in November 1995 following the power crisis in the independent republic. The plant's second unit has a first generation Russian reactor and produces 30%-40% of the country's power. Experts say the plant can function until 2016. In September 2003, the plant came under the trust management of INTER RAO UES, a subsidiary of Rosenergoatom and Russia's RAO UES electricity monopoly. The European Union has insisted on the plant's conservation and is ready to allocate 100 million euros for this purpose. However, Armenian experts say that some 1 billion euros are needed to create alternative energy sources in Armenia. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 26 TomPaine.com: A Nuclear Swindle Wenonah Hauter July 27, 2005 Wenonah Hauter is director of the energy program for Public Citizen, a Washington, D.C.-based public interest organization with 150,000 members. In one of the biggest taxpayer bailouts in recent years, the energy bill about to pass out of Congress stands on the cusp of providing the nuclear industry and the oil industry, among others, with the sweetest deal that energy executives have seen in the last 50 years. Passage of this costly and flawed bill will prove to the American public that Congress cares more about rewarding business interests than protecting consumerswho will predictably suffer from higher energy bills and corporate abuse enabled by this legislation.  Despite cries for reduced foreign oil dependence, lower gas prices, strong global warming provisions and a general need to conserve energy, this bill instead reaches out to reward two industries that dont deserve the gifts theyre being bestowed: the nuclear and oil industries. These industries serve as an example of how our energy future is being dictated by corporate interests, not common-sense policies that will ensure a healthier environment for generations to come. Like Banana Republic officials on the take, Congress has accepted $90 million from these industries since 2001 in exchange for providing them with billions of dollars in subsidies and regulatory rollbacks. To begin, the nuclear industry is on the edge of its seat, hoping to win billions in cradle-to-grave subsidies and incentives to build new nuclear reactors. The conference report thus far includes $7 billion in research, development and construction subsidies, with another $7.3 billion in tax breaks pending in the yet-to-be released tax package. Those dollars aside, the bill contains unlimited taxpayer-backed loan guarantees for the construction of new reactors and extends the industrys limited liability in the case of an accident to new reactors. This bill contains just about every conceivable taxpayer subsidy and incentive for the 50-year-old nuclear industry to build new reactors. Contrary to the public relations spin coming from the pro-nuclear lobby, nuclear energy is not the answer to climate change or energy independence. Its five fatal flaws are more than enough reason to vote against this dirty and expensive technology: Nuclear power is expensive and relies on massive taxpayer subsidies; heightens proliferation risks; produces radioactive waste that remains dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years; endangers public health and security with the threat of accidents or attacks; and continuously fails to adhere to adequate safety standards. Given the latest revelations about data falsification in analyses of the proposed Yucca Mountain dump sitein addition to other numerous unresolved safety problems at the siteand the reports by the National Academy of Sciences and the Government Accountability Office pointing out security vulnerabilities of the highly radioactive waste stored at reactor sites, the government should not be promoting the construction of new reactors, which will only add to the nuclear waste problem. Not to be outdone, however, is the oil industry, which also stands to gain enormous benefits from the pending energy bill, including a likely buffet of subsidies and tax breaks that are still in last-minute negotiations and havent yet been released to the public. One of its newer ventures is in liquefied natural gas, which is natural gas super-cooled into a liquid form. This is done to more easily transport natural gas to the United States from destinations not linked by pipeline. For example, importing natural gas from Canada can be accomplished by sending natural gas through a pipeline; importing natural gas from Indonesia, Nigeria or Norway must be done by transporting LNG by tanker. LNG can pose significant security and environmental hazards, particularly to coastal communities that house these facilities. The energy bill limits the ability of states and local communities to have adequate say in how dangerous, proposed liquefied natural gas facilities are sited. Support for liquefied natural gas facilities on our coastlines is shortsighted because it fails to account for the harm it can do to consumersboth to their wallets and their security. Relying on LNG imports will make the United States more dependent on foreign sources of energy, particularly OPEC, which dominates the global LNG market. This would be a serious mistake at a time when experts warn us of the dangers of relying on other countries for our natural gas. Not only would it make us beholden to OPEC, but it would create a climate ripe for price gouging. Lawmakers have one final opportunity to jettison this bill. This legislation is a poison pill for consumers, the environment and the economy, and lawmakers now have one final opportunity to spit it out. TomPaine.com.] [ /] [ /] ***************************************************************** 27 Xinhua: India building 8 more nuclear power reactors www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-07-27 18:21:26 NEW DELHI, July 27 (Xinhuanet) -- India is constructing eight more nuclear power reactors while one reactor in Tarapur has been synchronized with the grid last month, a senior government official said here Wednesday. Replying to a question of the Upper House of the Indian Parliament whether the government proposed to set up some more nuclear power stations in the country, Minister of State in the Prime Minister Office (PMO) Prithviraj Chavan said that the total capacity addition in the tenth and eleventh plans through the completion of eight reactors would be 1300 and 3160 mega watts respectively. The percentage of electricity generated from nuclear power was about 2.9 percent of the total generation, compared with 20 percent in the United States, 32 in Germany, 29 in Japan and 19 in the UK, Chavan said. The generation target for the tenth plan was 82,495 million units, he added. India and the United States have recently signed a nuclear power deal under which the latter would help India's civiliannuclear program despite its military nuclear capabilities and its refusal to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). India remains one of only four states that have not signed the NPT.Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 28 NRC: Entergy Operations, Inc., Arkansas Nuclear One Independent Spent FR Doc E5-3993 [Federal Register: July 27, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 143)] [Notices] [Page 43463-43465] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27jy05-135] Fuel Storage Installation; Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding a Proposed Exemption AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC. 20555. Telephone: (301) 415-1179; fax number: (301) 415-1179; e-mail: cmr1@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is considering a request dated March 21, 2005, from Entergy Operations, Inc. (applicant or Entergy Operations) for exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(a)(2) and 10 CFR 72.214 pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, for the Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO), [[Page 43464]] Unit 1 and Unit 2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, located 6 miles west-northwest of Russellville, Arkansas. In consideration of the request, the NRC would also grant exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(b)(2)(I) and 72.212(b)(7). The exemption would authorize the applicant to store damaged spent nuclear fuel (SNF) assemblies in a Holtec HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1 design, Multi-Purpose Canister (MPC) -32. Environmental Assessment (EA) I. Identification of Proposed Action By letter dated March 21, 2005, Entergy Operations requested an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(a)(2) and 10 CFR 72.214, specifically, exemption from complying with Appendix B, Section 2.1, of the HI-STORM 100 Cask System CoC (1014), Fuel Specifications and Loading Conditions. The NRC action would also include granting exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(b)(2)(I) and 72.212(b)(7). Approval of the exemption request would allow storage of uncanned damaged SNF assemblies in a HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1 design, MPC-32. Damaged SNF assemblies may be stored in an HI-STORM 100, Amendment 2 design, MPC-32 when properly canned. Entergy Operations has identified five previously loaded intact fuel assemblies that have been reclassified as damaged SNF assemblies. A damaged SNF assembly is defined in the HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1 CoC in part as one with greater than pinhole leak or hairline cracks. Each of the five SNF assemblies classified as damaged contain one interior rod characterized as defective. In accordance with Amendment 1 to CoC 1014 granted to Holtec for the HI-STORM 100 cask system, and as codified in 10 CFR 72.214, the MPC-32 is not permitted to store damaged fuel assemblies. ANO as a general licensee, is authorized by the NRC to use spent fuel storage casks approved under 10 CFR Part 72, Subpart K. For the NRC to permit Entergy Operations to continue to store the five uncanned damaged SNF assemblies in four HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1 design, MPC-32's, the NRC, must grant Entergy Operations an exemption from the general license conditions defined in 10 CFR 72.212. The regulations in 10 CFR 72.212 state that the general license for storage of SNF at power reactor sites is limited to storage of SNF in casks approved under the provisions in 10 CFR Part 72. By exempting Entergy Operations from 10 CFR 72.214 and 72.212(a)(2), 72.212(b)(2)(I), and 72.212(b)(7), Entergy Operations will be authorized to use its general license to store uncanned damaged SNF assemblies in the HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1 design, MPC-32. The proposed action before the Commission is whether to grant the exemption under 10 CFR 72.7. The ISFSI is located 6 miles west-northwest of Russellville, Arkansas, on the ANO Power Plant site. The ANO ISFSI is an existing facility constructed for interim dry storage of spent ANO nuclear fuel. II. Need for the Proposed Action Five uncanned damaged SNF assemblies are currently loaded into four HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1 design, MPC-32's stored at the ANO ISFSI. Unloading of the damaged SNF assemblies would subject personnel to a significant unnecessary dose, generate additional contaminated waste, increase the risk of a possible fuel handling accident, and increase the risk of a heavy load handling accident. Discharge of the damaged SNF assemblies from storage in the MPCs would result in inadequate storage capacity in the ANO Unit 2 Spent Fuel Pool. If the damaged SNF assemblies are discharged into the spent fuel pool, storage of new fuel and the restoration of normal full core offload capability prior to and after the next refueling outage would be challenged. Recovery of spent fuel pool space could be significantly hindered due to double handling of ANO Unit 2 fuel in addition to material and scheduling conflicts with ANO Unit 1 activities to the extent that ANO Unit 2 core offloads could be jeopardized. III. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The potential environmental impact of using the HI-STORM 100 system was initially presented in the Environmental Assessment for the final rule to add the HI-STORM 100 system to the list of approved spent fuel storage casks in 10 CFR 72.214 (65 FR 25241; May 1, 2000). Furthermore, each general licensee must assess the environmental impacts of the specific ISFSI in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(b)(2)(iii). This section requires the general licensee to perform written evaluations to demonstrate compliance with the environmental requirements of 10 CFR 72.104, ``Criteria for radioactive materials in effluents and direct radiation from an ISFSI or MRS [Monitored Retrievable Storage Installation].'' The HI-STORM 100 system is designed to mitigate the effects of design basis accidents that could occur during storage. Design basis accidents account for human-induced events and the most severe natural phenomena reported for the site and surrounding area. Postulated accidents analyzed for an ISFSI include tornado winds and tornado generated missiles, design basis earthquake, design basis flood, accidental cask drop, lightning effects, fire, explosions, and other incidents. Considering the specific design requirements for each accident condition, the design of the HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1, cask system using an MPC-32 basket design, would prevent loss of containment, shielding, and criticality control. The loading of damaged SNF has no impact on the structural aspects of the containment boundary. The HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1 design permits storage of damaged SNF assemblies in the MPC-24 and MPC 68 which utilize the same outer containment boundary as the MPC-32. Dose surveys performed prior to placing each cask in service, including those MPC-32s containing the damaged SNF assemblies, demonstrated that each cask satisfied the dose requirements defined in the HI-STORM 100 Amendment 1 CoC. Any relocation of the damaged fuel rods, in the fuel assembly, within the MPC has a negligible effect on the keff (criticality control) of the system predominantly due to the fact that there are no more than two individual damaged fuel rods per MPC. Without the loss of either containment, shielding, or criticality control, the risk to public health and safety from the continued storage of five damaged SNF assemblies in four HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1 design, MPC-32s, is not compromised. By permitting the continued storage of five uncanned damaged SNF assemblies using HI-STORM 100 system, Amendment 1 design, MPC-32s, there will be no additional occupational exposure due to unloading activities, and offsite dose rates will remain well within the 10 CFR Part 20 limits. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined that an acceptable safety margin is maintained and that there are no significant environmental impacts as a result of continuing to store five damaged SNF assemblies in four HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1, MPC-32s at the ANO ISFSI. IV. Alternatives to the Proposed Action The staff evaluated the alternative to the proposed action to deny approval of the exemption. Denial of the exemption request would result in unloading of the [[Page 43465]] damaged SNF assemblies subjecting personnel to unnecessary dose, the generation of additional contaminated waste, an increase in the risk of a possible fuel handling accident, an increase in the risk of a heavy load handling accident, and result in inadequate storage capacity in the ANO Unit 2 Spent Fuel Pool jeopardizing the ability to fully offload the ANO Unit 2 core. V. Agencies and Persons Consulted On July 11, 2005, Bernard Bevill from the Radiation Control Work Unit, Arkansas Department of Health, was contacted about the EA for the proposed action and had no concerns. Finding of No Significant Impact The environmental impacts of the proposed action have been reviewed in accordance with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR Part 51. Based upon the foregoing EA, the Commission finds that the proposed action of granting an exemption from 10 CFR 72.212(a)(2), 72.212(b)(2)(I), 72.212(b)(7), and 72.214 so that Entergy Operations may continue to store uncanned damaged SNF assemblies in a Holtec HI-STORM 100, Amendment 1 design, MPC-32, at the ANO, Units 1 and 2 ISFSI, will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment. Further Information In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of NRC's ``Rules of Practice,'' final NRC records and documents regarding this proposed action, including the exemption request dated March 21, 2005, are publically available in the records component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). These documents may be inspected at NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of July 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. E5-3993 Filed 7-26-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 29 NRC: Portland General Electric Company, Trojan Nuclear Plant, FR Doc E5-3994 [Federal Register: July 27, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 143)] [Notices] [Page 43461-43462] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27jy05-133] Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation; Notice of Consideration of Approval of Proposed Corporate Restructuring And Opportunity For A Hearing AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of consideration of approval of proposed corporate restructuring and opportunity for hearing. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415-1179; fax number: (301) 415-1179; e-mail: cmr1@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC) is considering the issuance of an order under 10 CFR 72.50 approving the indirect transfer of Special Nuclear Materials License No. (SNM) -2509 for the Trojan Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) currently held by PacifiCorp Holdings, Inc. (PacifiCorp) as minority owner and non-operating licensee of the Trojan ISFSI. The indirect transfer would be to MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company (MidAmerican). The indirect transfer will occur in connection with the sale of PacifiCorp, a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Scottish Power plc, to NWQ, LLC, a Delaware limited liability corporation and a wholly- owned subsidiary of MidAmerican. PacifiCorp will continue to be a 2.5% non-operating licensee of the Trojan ISFSI and as such PacifiCorp's license is not being transferred to another party. Instead, under the transaction, MidAmerican will acquire all of the issued and outstanding common stock of PacifiCorp. According to an application for approval filed by PacifiCorp, MidAmerican would acquire all of the issued and outstanding common stock of Pacificorp to the Trojan ISFSI following approval of the proposed indirect license transfer. No physical changes to the Trojan ISFSI or operational changes are being proposed in the application. Pursuant to 10 CFR 72.50, no license, or any part included in the license issued under 10 CFR Part 72 for an ISFSI shall be transferred, assigned, or in any manner disposed of, either voluntarily or involuntarily, directly or indirectly, through transfer of control of the license to any person unless the Commission gives its consent in writing. The Commission will approve an application for the indirect transfer of a license, if the Commission determines that the proposed transferee is qualified to hold the license, and that the transfer is otherwise consistent with applicable provisions of law, regulations, and orders issued by the Commission pursuant thereto. As provided in 10 CFR 2.1315, unless otherwise determined by the Commission with regard to a specific application, the Commission has determined that any motion relevant to the license of an ISFSI which does no more than reflect the indirect transfer action involves no genuine issue as to whether the health and safety of the public will be significantly affected. No contrary determination has been made with respect to this specific application. In light of the generic determination reflected in 10 CFR 2.1315, no public comments with respect to such determinations are being solicited. The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene, and written comments with regard to the indirect license transfer application, are discussed below. Within 20 days after the date of publication of this notice, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of approval of the indirect transfer for the subject ISFSI operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's rules of practice set forth in Subpart M, ``Hearing Requests and Procedures for Hearings on License Transfer Applications,'' of 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing [[Page 43462]] or petition for leave to intervene is filed within 20 days after the date of publication of this notice, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestors/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner/ requestor intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner/requestor is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner/requestor to relief. A petitioner/ requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(a)(1)(I)-(viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555- 0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, hearingdocket@nrc.gov; or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415-3725 or by e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. Requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene should be served upon Douglas L. Anderson and Jon A. Andreasen of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company, 666 Grand Avenue, Des Moines, Iowa 50303; M. Douglas Dunn, Steven M Kramer, and Carla J. Urquhart of Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy L.L.P., 1 Chase Manhatten Plaza, New York, New York, 10005, ph.: (212) 530-5000; Jeffery B. Erb of PacifiCorp, Suite 1900, 825 N.E. Multnomah, Portland, Oregon, 92732; and Sam Behrends IV and Robert M. Andersen of LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, L.L.P., 1875 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite 1200, Washington, DC 20009-5728, ph.: (202) 986-8000, facsimile: (202)986-8102. The Commission will issue a notice or order granting or denying a hearing request or intervention petition, designating the issues for any hearing that will be held, and designating the presiding officer. A notice granting a hearing will be published in the Federal Register and served on the parties to the hearing. As an alternative to requests for hearing and petitions to intervene, by August 26, 2005, persons may submit written comments regarding the license transfer application, as provided for in 10 CFR 2.1305. The Commission will consider and, if appropriate, respond to these comments, but such comments will not otherwise constitute part of the decisional record. Comments should be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Further Information For further details with respect to this action, see the application dated June 30, 2005, available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dated in Rockville, Maryland this 20th day of July 2005. Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Licensing Section, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. E5-3994 Filed 7-26-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 30 NRC: Carolina Power And Light Company, H. B. Robinson Steam Electric FR Doc E5-3995 [Federal Register: July 27, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 143)] [Notices] [Page 43462-43463] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27jy05-134] Plant, Unit No. 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, section 68, ``Criticality Accident Requirements,'' subsection (b)(1) for Facility Operating [[Page 43463]] License No. DPR-23 issued to the Carolina Power and Light Company (the licensee) for operation of the H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (HBRSEP2) located in Darlington County, South Carolina. The NRC is issuing this environmental assessment pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21 and is making a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.68, ``Criticality Accident Requirements,'' subsection (b)(1) during the spent fuel pool activities related to the underwater handling, loading, and unloading of the dry shielded canister (DSC) NUHOMS -24PTH as described in proposed Amendment No. 8 to Certificate of Compliance No. 1004 listed in 10 CFR 72.214. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated February 22, 2005, as supplemented on May 10 and July 6, 2005. The Need for the Proposed Action In 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1), the Commission sets forth the following requirement that must be met in lieu of a monitoring system capable of detecting criticality events: Plant procedures shall prohibit the handling and storage at any one time of more fuel assemblies than have been determined to be safely subcritical under the most adverse moderation conditions feasible by unborated water. Section 50.12(a) of 10 CFR allows licensees to request an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 if the application of the regulation is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule and special conditions are met. The licensee stated that compliance with 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) is not necessary for underwater handling, loading, and unloading of the DSC NUHOMS-24PTH in the HBRSEP2 spent fuel pool to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) will still be satisfied if the exemption is granted. The details of the NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the exemption to the regulation. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site. There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released off site. There is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non- radiological impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for HBRSEP2 dated April 1975, and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (NUREG-1437 Supplement 13) dated December 2003. Agencies and Persons Consulted On July 11, 2005, the staff consulted with the South Carolina State official, Mr. Michael Gandy of the South Carolina Department of Health, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment set forth above, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment and is therefore issuing this FONSI. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letters dated February 22, May 10, and July 6, 2005. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, . Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to . Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of July, 2005. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Chandu P. Patel, Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-3995 Filed 7-26-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 31 RedNova News: UK Nuclear Business Sinks into the Red Posted on: Tuesday, 26 July 2005, 21:00 CDT Jul. 24--UK nuclear generator British Energy will admit it has sunk into the red when it reports its long-delayed results for the year to 31 March on Wednesday. Analysts expect the company to announce a pre-tax loss of Ł143m (E207m, $255m) for the year, compared with a Ł232m profit the preceding year, as a result of low power output and a failure to benefit from recent high power prices. James Brand at Deutsche Bank said: "They're still making a loss, but that's going to change quite significantly next year. This is a transitional year with significant increases in forward prices yet to feed through into reported numbers." British Energy has hedged forward some two thirds of its power output at Ł26 per mwh, while power prices have surged to nearly Ł60a mwh. Meanwhile, the company's programme of power plant upgrades has kept output low, with the company only producing some 59.8 twh of electricity. Analysts will be looking keenly for more information on what price the company has been able to achieve for forward contracts for the year ahead, which will effectively decide its profitability in the coming year. Deutsche Bank sees the company's operating profit soaring from a loss this year, to Ł769m next year and more than Ł1.1bn in 2006-2007. This outlook has driven British Energy shares up from an average of Ł250 in January to Ł407 in June, as it tracked the rise in UK power prices. Since peaking at 447p on July 11, though, they have tumbled back down to 389p as the forward power market dropped. Analysts will also be looking for an update on the company's plans to extend the lives of its power stations by between five and ten years. ----- For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com. © 2002-2005 RedNova.com. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 32 ITAR-TASS: China plans to build thirty nuclear reactors within 15 years 27.07.2005, 13.50 XIANGGANG, July 27 (Itar-Tass) -- China is planning to build around thirty nuclear reactors in the following fifteen years. The realization of this ambitious project offers great possibilities for cooperation with foreign companies, the China Daily said on Wednesday with reference to a spokesman for the China National Nuclear Corporation. By the year 2020 the nuclear power stations will account for four percent of the overall electric energy produced in China against 2.3 percent at present, the spokesman said. China will have to increase power production capacity to 40 Gigawatt, the source said. The overall capacity of nine nuclear reactors used in China at present is 6.7 Gigawatt. © ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved. You undertake not to copy, ***************************************************************** 33 Guardian Unlimited: Energy Deal Has Tax Breaks for Companies From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday July 27, 2005 10:31 AM AP Photo DCLJ105 By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - A wide-ranging energy bill expected to move through Congress this week includes more than $8.5 billion in tax incentives and billions of dollars more in loan guarantees and other subsidies for the electricity, coal, nuclear, natural gas and oil industries. Efficiency and conservation programs would get about $1.3 billion of the more than $14.1 billion in total tax breaks over 10 years, according to lawmakers who have been briefed on the legislation worked out in negotiations between the House and Senate. About $3 billion in tax breaks would go for renewable energy source, mostly to subsidize wind energy. Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, the ranking Senate Democrat participating in the energy negotiations, bemoaned the reduction in support for energy efficiency and conservation programs in the tax package. The Senate had approved more than $3 billion in tax breaks. But he said he will support the bill when it comes before the Senate, possibly as early as Thursday. The House could take up the measure late Wednesday. ``Given the makeup of the Congress today and given the policies of the administration this is as good a bill as I think we could hope to get,'' Bingaman said in a conference call with reporters. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., who led Senate negotiators, said the measure would help diversify the nation's energy portfolio by spurring development of new technologies to help put in service the next generation of nuclear reactors and find ways to burn coal with less pollution. ``We mandate more conservation and higher efficiency,'' said Domenici, citing among other things new efficiency standards for 14 commercial appliances such as large refrigerators and cooling systems. Still, the bill was criticized by some Democrats in Congress, as well as outside watchdog groups, for funneling billions of dollars to mature energy companies that are cash rich because of soaring oil prices and gasoline that is averaging $2.29 a gallon nationwide. ``The energy bill does little to nothing to reduce our dependence on Middle East oil,'' said Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., who criticized the bill's failure to seriously address automobile fuel efficiency. The nuclear industry, corn farmers and the coal industry did particularly well with the legislation. The bill would require refiners to double the use of ethanol, mostly from corn, as an additive to gasoline to 7.5 billion gallons a year by 2012. A boon to farmers, it also would cost the taxpayer because ethanol gets a substantial tax break compared to gasoline, said Myron Ebel, an energy analyst for the Competitive Enterprise Institute. A last-minute proposal added to the tax package late Wednesday by House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., also would provide a 30 percent tax credit, up to $30,000, for the installation of equipment to sell gasoline consisting of 85 percent ethanol. There are only about 400 such retail outlets, mainly in the farm belt region, and the tax incentive is designed to spur construction of more, according to a Hastert aide. The nuclear industry hailed the legislation. It reaped major benefits, including ``risk insurance'' totaling $2 billion if there are permitting or regulatory delays in construction of the first six new nuclear power reactors. The bill also provides loan guarantees for future reactors and a green light for building a $1.25 billion next-generation nuclear plant that could produce hydrogen as well as electricity. The legislation also boosts the coal industry with loan guarantees and $2.9 billion in tax breaks mostly for development of technology to make coal more environmentally friendly and develop ways to capture climate-changing carbon emissions. Oil and gas producers would get $1.5 billion in tax breaks as well as royalty relief for certain deep-well drilling. A $500 million program, paid for by royalty relief, would help oil companies drill for oil in extremely deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Another $1 billion is earmarked for coastal restoration in five states with offshore oil production. As House-Senate conferees worked late into the night this week on the final paragraphs of the legislation, a proposal was made, and approved, to provide $250,000 for a study of ``irradiated fuel'' - although many of the conference participants acknowledged they had no idea what that was. ``Lawmakers let go any financial inhibitions and started spending like a bunch of drunken sailors,'' said Jill Lancelot, president of the watchdog organization Taxpayers for Common Sense. ``This energy bill is filled to the brim with massive giveaways for mega-rich energy companies.'' --- On the Net: Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee: http://energy.senate.gov/public/ House Energy and Commerce Committee: http://energycommerce.house.gov/ Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 34 Brattleboro Reformer: Yankee still shut down, probe continues July 27, 2005 Brattleboro, VT By CAROLYN LORIé Reformer Staff BRATTLEBORO -- Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant remains shut down today, after an electrical problem took it offline on Monday afternoon. Rob Williams, spokesman for the plant, said the incident is still under investigation. It is believed that a broken electrical insulator in the plant's switchyard caused the problem. The insulator, said Williams, was sent out for inspection. No radiation was released during the incident and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission classified it as a non-emergency. The plant's generator and reactor remain at high temperatures, which is known as a "hot" shutdown. If the plant remains inactive for an extended period of time, plant operators could be forced to go to a "cold" shut down, which would make returning to power more complex and costly. In the meantime, Vermont's utilities are buying power on the spot market, which is considerably more expensive than power from Vermont Yankee. Copyright ©1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., ***************************************************************** 35 Brattleboro Reformer: Groups to study VY radiation emissions July 27, 2005 Brattleboro, VT By CAROLYN LORIé Reformer Staff BRATTLEBORO -- At the behest of local organizations, the Radiation and Public Health Project will be examining the levels of Strontium-90 in baby teeth belonging to children living within a 50-mile radius of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear reactor in Vernon. Strontium-90 is one of the many radioactive byproducts of nuclear fission believed to cause cancer. Its release from power plants is monitored by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The project is being organized by the Citizens Awareness Network and Traprock Peace Center of Deerfield, Mass., with financial support from the New England Coalition. All three groups oppose nuclear power and have been active in efforts to shut down Vermont Yankee. At a press conference on Tuesday, Agnes Reynolds, a registered nurse and a research associate with the Radiation and Public Health Project, announced preliminary results of the study. Since December 2004, 26 baby teeth have been collected from counties all over Vermont and New Hampshire. Nine of those teeth belonged to children living in Windham County or Cheshire County in New Hampshire, while 17 where from elsewhere. According to Reynolds, the teeth from Windham and Cheshire counties showed levels of Strontium-90 that were 61 percent higher than the others. Because the sample was so small, Reynolds said the early findings are not statistically significant. The project hopes to collect at least 100 teeth from Vermont, Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Baby teeth would have the highest concentration of the radioactive isotope, as not enough time has passed for it to decay. Strontium-90 has a half-life of about 28 years. It can be carried in wind and rain and enters the body through contaminated food and cow's milk. Once in the body, it mimics calcium and gets deposited in bones and teeth. The Radiation and Public Health Project is a New York based non-profit founded by scientists and physicians. The group has been collecting baby teeth from around the country since 1998, the majority of them from children living near nuclear power plants. More than 4,400 teeth have been tested for Strontium-90 levels. According to the project's Web site, baby teeth belonging to children living within 100 miles of a nuclear power plant have significantly higher levels and that the overall levels have been climbing throughout the country since the 1980s. Those findings, however, have been disputed. In July, 2004, the Nuclear Energy Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based policy organization for the nuclear industry, issued a report claiming that Strontium-90 releases from power plants are so low they can hardly be detected. The radioactive isotope is present in the environment, the group claims, because of nuclear bomb tests carried out during the Cold War. Information posted at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Web site, supports that claim. The federal regulator also states that the second largest release of Strontium-90 occurred during the 1986 accident at the Chernobyl nuclear reactor in the Ukraine, which could also account for elevated levels found in baby teeth since then. Robert Stirewalt, public information officer at the Vermont Department of Health, said department staff were reviewing material from the Radiation and Public Health Project and would state their position today. Tuesday's press conference was attended by state Sens. Roderick Gander, D-Windham, and Jeanette White, D-Windham, and Rep. Steve Darrow, D-Putney. White said she hoped the Department of Health would at least help get the word out about the study, through its various state-wide programs. Copyright ©1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., ***************************************************************** 36 Buffalo News: Payments for uranium exposure possible Would aid employees of Bethlehem Steel News Staff Reporters 7/27/2005 [ border=] WASHINGTON - A long-awaited bipartisan agreement has been reached on a bill to compensate workers injured by radiation exposure from making hydrogen bombs, including hundreds from the old Bethlehem Steel plant in Lackawanna. Both New York senators and all members of the Erie Niagara delegation in the House agreed Tuesday to support the bill. It would give the workers a second chance at qualifying for up to $150,000 plus medical benefits that was once denied by the Bush administration's Labor Department on grounds that physical proof of radiation exposure was not available. Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., said, "These workers who were hurt in the line duty have got to be repaid." Those who worked at Bethlehem and other H-bomb sites from 1949 through 1952 would be aided under the legislation. "This bill frees suffering workers and their families from a process that has failed them for too long," said Rep. Brian Higgins, D-Buffalo, whose district includes the Lackawanna site. With Congress controlled by Republicans, the support of Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds, R-Clarence, is considered crucial to the bill's success in this session that will run to Dec. 31, 2006. Reynolds will be the lead sponsor in the House. "No one who deserves compensation should have it denied, period," said Reynolds. "This legislation will fulfill a national commitment we made to these "Veterans of the Cold War' by providing them with compensation that is long overdue." Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., said the legislation "faces an uphill fight" because the Bush administration is opposed to expanding the benefit program enacted in 2000. Clinton said the bill "will enable employees to be added to a "special exposure (category)' and receive compensation under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program if exposure records do not enable case-by-case decisions to be made." Clinton said, "Too many applicants for this help have been unjustifiably turned down." To be eligible for reconsideration under this category, Clinton explained, they must have worked at an eligible facility for a total of 250 days, and fewer than half the workers at the plant were monitored for radiation exposure, and exposure records are not available. She said the bill can affect other H-bomb production sites. Rep. Louise M. Slaughter, D-Fairport, said, "Despite many incidences of work-related illnesses and deaths, employees across this country have not found relief because of insufficient records that not only delay site profiles, but also make dose reconstruction virtually impossible." The news was welcomed by Ed Walker of the Bethlehem Steel Action Group, which has pushed the government to extend special category status to the thousands of former Bethlehem Steel workers who have filed claims under the program. The government has acknowledged Bethlehem Steel workers were exposed to radiation during uranium rolling operations at the plant in the late 1940s and early 1950s. "It's finally here, the day we've all been hoping and praying for," said Walker, a former bricklayer at the plant. "It's a great breakthrough for us. We feel we have been unfairly treated and this is bringing some justice to the group and the program." The Department of Labor has denied Bethlehem Steel employees any compensation for their sickness if they worked there after 1952, after H-bomb operations there stopped. The bill does not appear to address the problems of those post-1952 workers. Critics of this ruling about post-1952 workers said the Department of Labor failed to take into account the dangers of lingering contamination of the facilities at which the work took place - ignoring that some materials can remain radioactive for thousands of years. e-mail: dturner@buffnews.com jbonfatti@buffnews.com Buffalo News Services | Copyright 1999 - 2005 - The Buffalo News ***************************************************************** 37 Bellona: Emergency drills at nuclear facility in Murmansk Exercises simulating an emergency situation at Atomflot nuclear maintenance facility took place yesterday in Murmansk, an Atomflot official told RIA Novosti. 2005-07-27 18:14 The exercises simulated a situation where a container with spent nuclear fuel, loaded from a floating technical base near the shore, has been damaged. The goal of the exercises was to test the skills of the company's personnel in emergency situations and check the readiness of the system that warns residents in the Murmansk region and neighboring countries about the danger of radiation. "The exercises are being carried out under a Russian-U.S. cooperation agreement on research of the radioactive impact on the population and environment," the source said. He also said experts from the U.S., Sweden, Norway, and relevant Russian ministries are attending the exercise as observers, RIA Novosti reported. Publisher: , President: Information: , Technical contact: Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 38 WSJ: Industrial chemicals in tiny doses raise health issue Monday, July 25, 2005 By Peter Waldman, The Wall Street Journal For years, scientists have struggled to explain rising rates of some cancers and childhood brain disorders. Something about modern living has driven a steady rise of certain maladies, from breast and prostate cancer to autism and learning disabilities. One suspect now is drawing intense scrutiny: the prevalence in the environment of certain industrial chemicals at extremely low levels. A growing body of animal research suggests to some scientists that even minute traces of some chemicals, always assumed to be biologically insignificant, can affect such processes as gene activation and the brain development of newborns. An especially striking finding: It appears that some substances may have effects at the very lowest exposures that are absent at higher levels. Some scientists, many of them in industry, dismiss such concerns. But the new science of low-dose exposure is challenging centuries of accepted wisdom about toxic substances and rattling the foundation of environmental law. Modern pollution restrictions aim to limit exposures to levels past studies have found safe. For example, it's known mercury can cause learning problems in children if it's above 58 parts per billion in the bloodstream. Dividing 58 by 10 to provide a margin of safety, U.S. regulators advise that children and young women not accumulate more than 5.8 parts per billion of mercury, by limiting consumption of certain fish such as tuna. But what if it turned out some common substances have essentially no safe exposure levels at all? That was ultimately what the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency concluded about lead after studying its effects on children for decades. Indications some other chemicals may have no safe limits have led regulators in Europe and Japan to bar the use of certain compounds in toys and in objects used to serve food. In the U.S., federal scientists are devising new tests that could be used to screen thousands of common chemicals to make sure they're safe at extremely low exposures. Using advanced lab techniques, scientists have found that with some chemicals, traces as minute as mere parts per trillion have biological effects. That's one-millionth of the smallest traces even measurable three decades ago, when many of today's environmental laws were written. With some of these chemicals, such trace levels exist in the blood and urine of the general population. Some chemical traces appear to have greater effects in combination than singly, another challenge to traditional toxicology, which tests things individually. The human body is complex, and effects seen in tests on small laboratory animals and in human cells don't necessarily mean health risks to people. "The question is what do we do about these low levels once we know they're there," says Steve Hentges of the American Plastics Council, a trade association. For their part, companies and industry groups have attacked low-dose research as alarmist and are challenging the findings with scientific studies of their own. Some industry studies have contradicted the low-dose findings of university and government labs. One reason, says Rochelle Tyl, a toxicologist who does rodent studies on contract for industry groups, is that academics seek "to find out if a chemical has an intrinsic capacity to do harm," while industry scientists try to measure actual dangers to people. The result is that low-dose research has sparked a number of heated scientific and regulatory controversies: -- Tiny doses of bisphenol A, which is used in polycarbonate plastic baby bottles and in resins that line food cans, have been found to alter brain structure, neurochemistry, behavior, reproduction and immune response in animals. Makers and users of the chemical maintain, citing a Harvard review of 19 studies, that the chemical is harmless to humans at such levels. -- Minute levels of phthalates, which are used in toys, building materials, drug capsules, cosmetics and perfumes, have been statistically linked to sperm damage in men and genital changes, asthma and allergies in children. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has detected comparable levels in Americans' urine. Manufacturers say there is no reliable evidence that phthalates cause any health problems. -- A chemical used in munitions, called perchlorate, is known to inhibit production of thyroid hormone, which children need for brain development. The chemical has been detected in drinking-water supplies in 35 states, as well as in fruits, vegetables and breast milk. The EPA has spent years mulling what is a safe level in drinking water. The Defense Department and weapons makers maintain it is harmless at much higher doses than those that Americans ingest. -- The weed killer atrazine has been linked to sexual malformations in frogs that were exposed to water containing just 1/30th as much atrazine as the EPA regards as safe in human drinking water. The herbicide's main manufacturer, Syngenta AG, says other studies prove atrazine is safe. The EPA favors more study. With so much still unknown, regulators are proceeding on different tracks in different countries. Japan's government designates about 70 chemicals as potential "endocrine disruptors" -- substances that may, at tiny doses, interfere with hormonal signals that regulate human organ development, metabolism and other functions. Japan has just completed a $135 million research push on endocrine disruptors, including setting up a national research center. The Japanese government also has banned certain phthalates in food handlers' gloves and containers, after detecting them in food. One manufacturer, Fujitsu Ltd., has pledged to phase out its use of most suspected endocrine disruptors over coming years. The European Union has banned some kinds of phthalates in cosmetics and toys, and it is considering a ban on nearly all phthalates in household goods and medical devices. The EU also is planning to require new safety tests for thousands of industrial chemicals, many of which already exist in people's bodies at trace levels. Industry, which would have to bear the cost of proving countless current products safe, is fighting the measures, calling them a massive unnecessary burden. In the U.S., there are divisions within the government. The White House plays down the issue, saying the low-dose hypothesis is unproved. But many federal scientists and regulators at the EPA and Health and Human Services Department are forging ahead with new methods for assessing possible low-dose dangers. Legislatures in two states, California and New York, are considering bills that would ban use of certain phthalates in toys, child-care products and cosmetics, while a California bill would restrict bisphenol A. One of the early scientists to focus on possible low-dose risks was biologist Theo Colborn of the World Wildlife Fund. Studying the decline of certain birds, mammals and fish in the upper Midwest, Dr. Colborn spotted some patterns: Species that struggled to survive in the industrialized Great Lakes thrived in inland areas that were less polluted. And some offspring in more-polluted regions had gender abnormalities, such as feminized sex organs in males. She theorized that trace amounts of chemicals in the environment were disrupting hormones. Dr. Colborn and colleagues popularized low-dose concerns in a series of conferences, articles and a best-selling 1996 book called "Our Stolen Future." That year the EPA asked an outside advisory panel to consider ways of screening industrial chemicals for hormonal effects, a process still incomplete. In 2000, a separate EPA-organized panel, after reviewing 49 studies, said some hormonally active chemicals affect animals at doses as low as the "background levels" to which the general human population is subject. The panel said the health implications weren't clear but urged the EPA to revisit its regulatory procedures to make sure such chemicals are tested in animals at appropriately small doses. The EPA hesitated. It responded in 2002 that "until there is an improved scientific understanding of the low-dose hypothesis, EPA believes that it would be premature to require routine testing of substances for low-dose effects." The Bush administration's regulatory czar, John Graham -- administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the White House Office of Management and Budget -- later publicly dismissed as unproven the idea that the hormonal system could be disrupted by multiple low-dose exposures to industrial chemicals. For the past two years, the administration has proposed funding cuts for EPA research on suspected endocrine disrupters, but Congress has kept the funding roughly level at about $10 million a year. Since the review panel met in 2000, scientists have published more than 100 peer-reviewed articles reporting further low-dose effects in living animals and in human cells. These findings are generating some early insights in the thorny process of translating laboratory data into conclusions about human health. One of the most provocative is that some hormonally active chemicals seem to have more effects at extremely low exposures than at higher ones. This challenges an axiom of toxicology stated by the Swiss chemist Paracelsus nearly 500 years ago: The dose makes the poison. Toxicologists traditionally derive risk by exposing rodents to chemicals to find the lowest dose that leads to tumors, birth defects or other readily observable effects. Regulators then divide the highest "no-observable-effect" dose by an "uncertainty factor" -- anywhere from 10 to 1,000 -- to set a maximum human exposure they can be confident is safe. But now researchers have found chemicals that have hormonal effects on lab animals and on human cells in much tinier amounts than their standard no-observable-effect levels. And with some of these chemicals, as the tiny doses given to animals are increased, the effects recede. Then, at much higher levels, broad systemic impacts appear, such as reduced body weight. An example is bisphenol A, or BPA, the ingredient in polycarbonate baby bottles and food-can linings. It evidently is widespread in the environment. In the U.S., the CDC has found traces of it in 95 percent of urine samples tested. In Japan, researchers have detected BPA in fetal amniotic fluid and the umbilical cords of newborns. Studying BPA in rats in 1988, the EPA concluded the lowest exposure with an "observed adverse effect" was 50 milligrams a day per kilogram of body weight. Dividing 50 by an uncertainty factor of 1,000, the agency set a daily safe limit for humans of 0.05 milligrams of BPA per kilogram of body weight. Since then, however, academic scientists in several countries have done more than 90 studies that have found BPA effects on animals and human cell cultures from exposures well below this level. The EPA used a relatively crude measure of the chemical's effects: changes in rodents' body weights. The new studies looked at subtler, hormone-related effects. Some studies found changes in rodents' reproductive organs and brains at doses as low as 0.002 milligram per kilogram of body weight per day. That is just one-25,000th the dose that the EPA said was the lowest exposure having an observable adverse effect. Seeking to explain this pattern, scientists cite the endocrine system's exquisite sensitivity. Animals and humans secrete infinitesimal amounts of various hormones, such as estrogen, that trigger responses when they occupy special receptors on the cells of various organs. BPA is among numerous chemicals that can mimic estrogen by occupying cells' estrogen receptors. When they do this at critical phases of development, the chemicals can trigger unnatural biological responses, such as brain and reproductive abnormalities. At higher doses, however, BPA and other endocrine disruptors -- instead of triggering the unnatural responses -- appear to overwhelm the receptors. That explains, scientists say, why some chemicals seem to have more potent hormonal effects at very low doses than at higher ones. Mr. Hentges of the American Plastics Council says studies show BPA is harmless at the tiny levels to which humans are exposed. In 2001 the plastics council agreed to pay Harvard's Center for Risk Analysis, part of the Harvard School of Public Health, $600,000 to review BPA studies. The 10 panelists found "no consistent affirmative evidence of low-dose BPA effects" on the basis of 19 studies that were selected by April 2002 for review. However, many more BPA studies kept coming out, and when the center published its report last fall, three of the 10 panelists declined to be listed as authors. "There are other papers published after the 'cut-off' date that the panel did not review that may have altered their conclusions," says one of the three, Paul Foster of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. A fourth, Claude Hughes of Quintiles Transnational Corp., a pharmaceutical consulting firm, signed but made the same point in a journal commentary criticizing the report and calling for a new EPA risk assessment. The Harvard risk center's executive director, George Gray, acknowledges that a "torrent of new papers on BPA" may have made it impossible for the panel to review everything by its deadline. The plastics council's Mr. Hentges says his group reviews all studies on BPA and believes none have changed the basic conclusion of the Harvard report. "We continue to believe that the weight of evidence indicates BPA poses no risk to human health," he says. Environmental chemicals don't exist in isolation. People are exposed to many different ones in trace amounts. So scientists at the University of London checked a mixture. They tested the hormonal strength of a blend of 11 common chemicals that can mimic estrogen. Alone, each was very weak. But when scientists mixed low doses of all 11 in a solution with natural estrogen -- thus simulating the chemical cocktail that's inside the human body today -- they found the hormonal strength of natural estrogen was doubled. Such an effect inside the body could disrupt hormonal action. "In isolation, the contribution of individual (estrogen-like chemicals) at the concentrations found in wildlife and human tissues will always be small," wrote the scientists, led by Andreas Kortenkamp, who directs research on endocrine disruptors for the EU. But because such compounds are so widespread in the environment, the researchers concluded, the cumulative effect on the human endocrine system is "likely to be very large." To test chemicals, toxicologists traditionally dose animals with a single substance and then dissect them. But this method can't spot the subtle effects associated with today's multiple exposures to low-dose chemicals, says John Bucher, of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Now he and his boss, Christopher Portier, are revamping the federal government's National Toxicology Program, which sets standards for how chemicals are tested. Over about seven years, they hope to develop a series of lab tests that will ultimately screen some 100,000 industrial compounds, individually and in mixtures, for biochemical "markers" such as effects on specific genes. The chemicals then will be ranked by mechanism of action and suspected toxicity, and assigned priorities for further study. "It's taken us 25 years and $2 billion to study 900 chemicals," Dr. Portier says. "If this works, we can study 15,000 in a year." ------ Exposure Milestones Scientists have found effects on rodents from steadily smaller exposures to some chemicals, such as Bisphenol A, used in food-can linings and polycarbonate plastic. Daily dose in milligrams per kilogram of body weight 1988 (EPA's predicted safe dose for humans): 0.05 mg 1997 (Linked to enlarged prostate in male mice): 0.002 mg 1999 (Linked to early puberty in female mice): 0.0024 mg 2003 (Linked to altered sperm in male rats): 0.0002 mg Source: Scientific articles In the Laboratory Studies have linked some common chemicals with toxic effects, though not necessarily at levels to which humans are exposed: CHEMICAL: Bisphenol A (BPA) WHAT IT'S IN: Polycarbonate plastic bottles and food-can linings WHAT IT'S LINKED TO: Altered brain, behavior and sex organs in rats CHEMICAL: Dibutyl Phthalate (DBP) WHAT IT'S IN: Cosmetics, shampoos, pills, nail polish, plastic toys WHAT IT'S LINKED TO: Gene and hormone changes in rodents; genital abnormalities in human infants CHEMICAL: Diethylhexyl Phthalate (DEHP) WHAT IT'S IN: Polyvinyl chloride building products, food packaging, toys, medical tubing WHAT IT'S LINKED TO: Birth defects in mice; pre-term birth in human infants; early puberty in girls CHEMICAL: Perchlorate WHAT IT'S IN: Drinking water in 35 states, fruits, vegetables, breast milk WHAT IT'S LINKED TO: Brain and behavior changes in rats; thyroid effects in people Sources: Scientific articles; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Copyright ©1997-2005 PG Publishing Co., Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 39 Cape Cod Times: New RDX plume could hit Sandwich (July 27, 2005) By AMANDA LEHMERT STAFF WRITER CAMP EDWARDS - Army officials have uncovered a new plume of contaminants on the border of Camp Edwards that could reach into Forestdale. Temporary wells drilled last week and yesterday along the base border turned up levels of Royal Demolition Explosives, or RDX, at 6, 12 and 290 parts per billion - well above the Environmental Protection Agency's lifetime health advisory of 2 parts per billion. The shape and size of the plume have yet to be determined, Army officials said last night at a meeting of the Impact Area Review Team, an EPA-run citizens group that monitors the Army cleanup of the base. But a state Department of Environmental Protection official said the RDX concentrations are high enough that the plume could reach into the town of Sandwich. ''To have something this high, so far what we found is very unusual,'' said Len Pinaud, of the DEP. ''You could potentially have a plume on the other side of Route 130.'' Army officials said that the residents directly on the other side of the base boundary use town water, which would eliminate the risk that someone might be drinking the high levels of RDX. The nearest homes using private drinking wells that draw from groundwater are about a mile away on the Sandwich/Mashpee border, said Ben Gregson of the Army's Impact Area Groundwater Study Program, which investigates and cleans the Army contamination found at the base. RDX is used in military explosives and is considered a possible human carcinogen by the EPA. RDX has caused tumors in mice, but there is no similar human data available, according to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. The recent RDX detections were found as part of a larger investigation into the former contractor ranges on Camp Edwards. Starting in May, the Army began drilling small, temporary wells called drive points along the base boundary to get more data about the plumes and help determine whether any contamination may have crossed into the neighboring town. The contractor ranges were used from the 1950s to 1980s for munitions and other testing, but the Army has poor records about exactly what happened on the sites. The Army has found both perchlorate, another substance used in explosives, and RDX flowing from the contractor ranges, located just west of Forestdale. But the plumes in the area have RDX at levels that range from 10 to 20 parts per billion, said Pinaud - well below the 290 parts per billion found at the base boundary. Gregson said the Army is going to look for several areas where they can drill temporary wells to get more data quickly. Gregson said the Army has notified the Sandwich selectmen and board of health officials. He will brief them on the status of the contamination at the Aug. 11 selectmen's meeting, where he will ask about accessing town roads and properties to drill more wells. Army officials will also look for abandoned private drinking water wells or irrigation wells that will help them determine the extent of the plume. Amanda Lehmert can be reached at alehmert @capecodonline.com. (Published: July 27, 2005) www.capecodonline.com Copyright © 2005 Cape Cod Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 40 Lake County Record-Bee: Board OKs photo exhibit (DU) Lake County News July 27, 2005 Lyn Fischbein, left, shows photographs from a controversial exhibit to librarian Karen Jansen. (Record-Bee/John Jensen) John Jensen - Record-Bee staff LAKEPORT -- In a surprise upset a controversial art exhibit may be shown at a Lower Lake museum after a key dissenter reversed his opinion Tuesday. Initially, the supervisors had rejected, 2-3, a motion to approve an exhibit of photographs depicting child victims of depleted uranium exposure in Iraq at the Lower Lake Historic Schoolhouse Museum. The show is comprised of 60 18-inch by 24-inch photographs by Japanese photojournalist Takashi Morizumi and has been exhibited throughout Japan and the U.S. During the second vote, later in the day, the board gave discretion over the decision to Lake County Public Services Director Kim Clymire, who said the exhibit could take place as long as it has clear warning signs about the graphic content of some of the photographs. "There are some pictures I am concerned about in the exhibit," Clymire said. "I didn't want people coming into the museum for other reasons to be exposed." Dissenters in the first vote, Jeff Smith, Gary Lewis and Rob Brown supervisors for Districts 2, 3 and 5 respectively had opposed the exhibit on a variety of grounds but primarily relied upon a letter from Clymire. Clymire wrote in a letter to the board that he had seen the images and that some of the photographs in the exhibit are "very disturbing" characterizing them as "horrific" and in "poor taste." Expressing opposition to the showing of the exhibit at either the museum or Redbud library, Clymire wrote that he does not "generally support censorship." As it happens, Clymire had not seen the exhibit but instead had viewed the Web site of a scientist who is studying the affects of depleted uranium on Iraqi children where very graphic photographs of children suffering from extreme deformities are displayed under a warning that calls the photographs "horrific." Ultimately Clymire decided that the actual exhibit contained powerful imagery and aesthetic value to viewers. "Some photos might be moving to them I'm OK with it," he said. Brown, in the first vote, took the position that he would honor Clymire's negative position and asked that librarian Kathy Jansen weigh in on whether the show be allowed at Redbud Library. Later, Brown voted against the motion because he said, "I think the museum is there for Lake County history and issues totally related to Lake County. The library is the right place for it." He says he probably won't be going to the show at the museum. After sitting down with proponent Lyn Fischbein and looking at the photos, Jansen said she has "no problem," with the exhibit. And that she is "glad Lyn has agreed to take out the most shocking pictures." Fischbein, a retired teacher living in Long Valley, requested that the exhibit be shown at the Lake County museum and at Redbud Library, and proclaimed "censorship does not have a place in a democracy." District 1 Supervisor Ed Robey and District 4 Supervisor Anthony Farrington voted in favor of the motion. Both spoke on behalf of the exhibit, Robey voicing an objection to censorship and Farrington pointing out that much of what children see today on TV and in video games could be considered as violent or harmful as the photographs from the exhibit. Farrington, who called the photographs "very thought provoking," also suggested that photographic depictions of the distasteful aftermath of warfare could counter the onslaught of glamorized depictions of violence on television and in video games. One argument posed by the dissenters, that the show was not pertinent to Lake County, was addressed by Farrington who said, "this war touches soil everywhere." Depleted Uranium was used by U.S. military forces in Operation Desert Shield, commonly called Gulf War One, which lasted from Jan. 17 to Feb. 28, 1991. Contact John Jensen jjensen@record-bee.coM. © 2005 Record-Bee.com ***************************************************************** 41 [shundahaialert] Latest News on Nuke Dumps in Utah and Nevada Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:25:26 -0700 Dear friends, Here is the latest news on the Skull Valley and Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dumps. Please continue to support the work of Shundahai Network. Check our website www.shundahai.org for updates and information on ways to contribute. We all know it's not getting any easier in the current political climate, but we have to hold the line, maintain our resistance, and make progress. What else can we do? And now... the news! 7-26-05 Goshutes, Celebrities, Lobby DC Against Skull Valley High-Level Nuke Dump http://www.shundahai.org/NIRS_Goshutes_celebrities_vs_PFS_072605.htm 7-21-05 House Subpoenas Falsified Yucca Mountain Nuke Dump Records- New York Times http://www.shundahai.org/House_Subpoenas_Yucca_records_072105.htm 7-20-05 Senate Blocks US Dept of Transport Skull Valley Nuke Dump Plan http://www.shundahai.org/Senate_Blocks_USDOT_PFS_Posts.htm There ya have it... Love and solidarity, Pete Shundahai Network Shundahai Network www.shundahai.org P.O. Box 1115 Salt Lake City, UT 84110 Phone- 801.533.0128 Fax- 801.533.0129 shundahai@shundahai.org Online Fundraising Store- www.cafepress.com/shundahainet If you are a Myspace user, you can now add us! www.Myspace.com/shundahai Shundahai is a Newe (Western Shoshone) word meaning "Peace and Harmony with all Creation" ***************************************************************** 42 AU ABC: Alice to hold another waste dump meeting ABC Central Australia | Local News | Story 11:41 (ACST)Wednesday, 27 July 2005. 12:41 (AEDT)Wednesday, 27 The Northern Territory's Country Liberal Party's Senator Nigel Scullion says another nuclear waste dump information session will be held in Alice Springs after many people were unable to get to yesterday's session. The session yesterday was organised by Senator Scullion to provide information on the Federal Government's plans to establish a nuclear waste dump at one of three sites in the Territory. Senator Scullion says holding it during business hours on a week day meant many people could not get to it. "Obviously [there] needs to be other meetings in Alice Springs and in other places because people.. .couldn't get there, people from schools couldn't get there and we had someone from one of the local schools come and said it would be very useful if we came and gave information to the schools," he said. "So we will be holding another one probably on a Saturday.. .and for much longer periods of time so people can come and go and have a say at whatever level they want to have." A date has not yet been set for the next session in Alice Springs. ***************************************************************** 43 Casper Star Tribune: Searching for uranium Casper, Wyoming - Wednesday, July 27, 2005 GRAND JUNCTION, Colo. (AP) -- Western Colorado and eastern Utah, already a beehive of oil and gas exploration, now is seeing a rush to find uranium to meet rising demand from nuclear reactors around the world. This year more than 8,500 mining-claim permits have been filed in eight uranium-rich Colorado and Utah counties. For years claim activity was virtually zero. Only 100 million pounds have been produced annually, but the 435 nuclear reactors in the world, including 104 in the United States, need 180 million pounds. Demand will grow as China and India increase nuclear power, and President Bush pushs for the United States to expand its use. "No doubt about it, the world needs more uranium," said Tom Pool, chairman of International Nuclear Inc. in Golden. For the first time since 1974, the U.S. Department of Energy is preparing to put 13,600 acres of uranium-laced western Colorado lands up for bid next year. The Uravan Mineral Belt, a swatch of western Colorado desert that holds a unique combination of steel-hardening vanadium mixed with uranium, is a center of activity. "I see this boom not being a spike like in the early '90s. And I see it being more sustained than it was in the '70s and '80s," said Ed Cotter, the contract project manager for uranium leasing for the Department of Energy. It isn't likely to be a rush to get as much of the 75 million pounds of uranium and 282,000 pounds of vanadium in the Colorado Plateau out of the ground as fast as possible. "Companies are planning in a much more effective way for the future. They're making sure when you ramp up production, you ramp up carefully," said Stuart Sanderson, director of the Colorado Mining Association. Increased permit requirements and a lack of manpower and equipment - won't allow a rush to uranium production in any case. Copyright © 2005 by the Casper Star-Tribune published by Lee Publications, Inc., a subsidiary of Lee Enterprises, ***************************************************************** 44 Inyo Register: House demands more answers on Yucca Mountain Wednesday, July 27, 2005 Porter not buying argument that e-mails hinting at fudged data were equivalent of ‘water-cooler chatter' By Suzanne Struglinski WASHINGTON n Testimony given June 29 by a Yucca Mountain scientist at the center of the investigation into the alleged falsification of documents did little to help resolve the issue. "We have really just begun," said Rep. Jon Porter (R-Nev.), chairman of the House subcommittee looking into the allegations. "I still think there are a lot of questions to be answered." The June 29 congressional hearing seemed to further entrench the proponents and opponents of the planned nuclear waste repository 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, and about 15 miles from Death Valley in Inyo County, as the crow flies. Porter and other Nevada officials say a series of e-mails sent between project scientists as many as 10 years ago raise serious questions about the scientific integrity of the project. Scientists wrote about "fudging" work and made disparaging remarks about quality assurance. One e-mail suggested keeping two sets of documents n one for inspectors the other with the real data. Project supporters, though, dismiss the e-mails and say any questions about the science will be answered when the Energy Department applies to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license to build the repository. "We don't lay out our safety case in e-mails," Yucca Mountain project spokesman Allen Benson said. He said technical documents supporting the Energy Department's work on Yucca n not e-mails n will be evaluated by the commission. Still, the e-mails paint a troubling picture. U.S. Geological Survey scientist Joe Hevesi wrote of being able to poke holes in the scientific work. Hevesi had to be subpoenaed to testify before the House Federal Workforce and Agency Organization Subcommittee. But he provided few answers. He dismissed his remarks as "poor wording" or emotional responses. He and the Energy Department have described the e-mails as "water cooler chatter." Porter said Hevesi's statements "absolutely" do not take away any of the e-mail's value in the fight against Yucca Mountain. He said the testimony would open the door for other aspects of his investigation. Porter said Hevesi has agreed to meet with the subcommittee staff to answer at least 50 to 100 more questions. Two other scientists have also met with staff members. Porter said he would continue to put and would not hesitate to subpoena Energy Department documents or others involved with the e-mails. Nevada officials have long criticized project management and the science supporting the work. Porter said he is concerned by the frustration Hevesi seemed to have with the department management and Hevesi's inability to recall why he would write, "Live by the sword, Die by the sword" in one message. Porter also found it hard to believe that Hevesi did not know anything about the "Tiger Teams" he referred to in several e-mails beyond that they were part of a review process. "I am hoping for his sake he is telling us the truth," Porter said. Joe Egan, a Washington attorney who handles Yucca issues for Nevada, said the full story would come out when the state challenges the Energy Department's license application. State officials expect to depose scientists and others involved during their challenge. "This guy's deposition will be a lot more interesting," Egan said. "Clinton said he didn't have sex either." Egan said a deposition is different than testifying before a congressional subcommittee. They are likely to go document by document and line by line asking what he may have falsified or changed. Egan noted that Porter does not have all the documents yet so it was hard to ask specific questions. "We never got to the uncomfortable questions," Egan said. "We're lawyers, we're litigators, we can cross examine. We have much more time." Until then, Porter will use his subcommittee's jurisdiction over all federal agencies and their employees to investigate the problem, which includes looking at data that was allegedly changed to support the Energy Department's position. "The real question is, did in fact those findings that were changed, give the tools to DOE (the Energy Department), the Congress and the White House to make a decision that it was safe and based on sound science," Porter said in an interview. "I think those e-mails go to the genesis of the whole project and that is the mountain leaks, and it was chosen as the site because it didn't." Porter continues to battle with the Energy Department over getting documents. W. John Arthur, deputy director of the department's Office of Repository Development, said during the hearing that his appearance is part of the department's cooperation with the investigation. An e-mail from the Energy Department told Porter that he could go to the department headquarters to view certain documents. Even when the department has turned over documents, they have been incomplete, Porter said. He asked for an organizational chart of employees from 1995 to today, and it was sent without names. "I believe part of it is arrogance on the part of the Department of Energy because they have never really been questioned," Porter said. "I don't believe they have ever been questioned by Congress to this degree. I don't believe that they can find part of the documents that we've asked for, which is part of the management culture, but I think the bulk of it is arrogance." He said he would like to see that information in the next two weeks or he may request another subpoena. But site supporters say these issues should be dealt with in the licensing process. Rod McCullum, senior project manager for waste at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry's trade group, said the e-mails are just a tiny portion of thousands of pages of documents related to the Yucca project. He said there's nothing to support Porter's idea that the e-mails signify widespread problems with the project. "Mr. Porter wants to get to the truth, the vehicle that takes us to the truth will be the licensing process," McCullum said. "The ultimate test if the science is correct is the licensing process." (Distributed by Scripps-McClatchy Western Service) ©2005 ***************************************************************** 45 Salt Lake Tribune: Feud: The Utahn sought a check on the proposed Goshute N-waste site Article Last Updated: 07/27/2005 07:40:56 AM By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune Senate Minority Leader Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., delivers his remarks during a ceremony in the Capitol Rotunda honoring artist Constantino Brumidi, on his 200th birthday anniversary, Tuesday, July 26, 2005, in Washington. Brumidi, the political refugee from Italy who paintied "The Apotheosis of Washington" in the eye of the dome of the U.S. Capitol. (Manuel Balce Ceneta/The Associated Press) WASHINGTON - Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has thwarted Sen. Orrin Hatch's plan to require a terrorism-threat study of a private nuclear waste site proposed for the Utah desert. Hatch's Homeland Security proposal was stopped short Monday night because of objections raised by Reid, D-Nev. It was the latest instance where the nuclear neighbors have been at odds in their fight to keep the waste out of their own backyards. Hatch had planned to amend the Energy bill to require completion of the terrorist study before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could grant a license to Private Fuel Storage, the group seeking to store 44,000 tons of nuclear waste in the state. But Hatch said Reid threatened to bring down the entire Energy bill if Hatch's amendment was included, prompting Senate Energy Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., to ask Hatch late Monday to drop the effort. "I had the chairmen of both [the House and Senate committees] working with me, and Senator Reid misconstrued it and promised to stop the entire Energy bill if that amendment was attached to it," Hatch said. Reid's spokeswoman, Tessa Hafen, said the senator never threatened to block the entire Energy bill. Reid had concerns about Hatch's amendment, believing it could encourage other amendments affecting plans for a permanent waste dump in Yucca Mountain, Nev., which Reid is committed to stopping, she said. "It could have opened up a can of worms as far as nuclear waste issues go," she said. "His concern has always been about how the waste would be transported, so that's a concern of his, but it needs to be approached the right way," she said. "He just didn't feel that's the right way to do it." It would not be the first time Reid has scuttled efforts by Utah's delegation to stall or halt the PFS site. In the past two Congresses, he was among senators resisting Utah's efforts to designate the Cedar Mountain Wilderness Area near the Skull Valley reservation. The wilderness designation would prevent a rail line from being built across the wilderness area to ship nuclear waste to the proposed PFS site. Some in Utah's congressional delegation have suggested that Reid's opposition was a grudge against Hatch and Sen. Bob Bennett, who voted to send the waste to Yucca Mountain. Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, has once again included the wilderness language in a defense policy bill, which has passed the House and is now before the Senate, but Reid again opposes the measure. "People ask why the Utah delegation doesn't work with Sen. Reid" on nuclear waste issues, Hatch said. "Sen. Reid clearly doesn't have Utah's interests in mind and, in my opinion, America's national security interest, for that matter." Reid has proposed an alternative to both the Goshute facility and Yucca Mountain. He suggests the Energy Department should store nuclear waste at the facilities that generated it, but he has yet to introduce legislation to make such a policy change. The NRC is in the final stages of its review before deciding whether to license the PFS site, which would store nuclear fuel in steel and concrete canisters. A decision could come by the end of the summer. The state has vowed to go to court if the license is granted. Hatch said he would keep working to get the Department of Homeland Security to study the PFS proposal. "I believe if we're concerned about terrorism, then Homeland Security has to be involved in this, and I'm going to see that they are one way or the other," Hatch said. © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 46 AU ABC: Govt defends rainy site for nuclear dump - 27/07/2005 The King River, downstream from the proposed Fishers Ridge site (Image: David George/Northern Territory Department of Natural Resources, Environment and the Arts) The Australian federal government has defended its inclusion of a high rainfall site in its shortlist of possible locations for a nuclear waste dump. Earlier this week ABC Science Online reported concerns that a radioactive leak from a dump at Fishers Ridge in the Northern Territory could put at risk pristine catchments used for drinking and other purposes. The concerns were expressed by Peter Jolly of the Northern Territory's environment departmentwho helped to prepare a territory government report on the hydro-geology of the area. The shortlist of sites was based on preliminary assessment by the federal Department of Education, Science and Training(DEST). In response to questions put by ABC Science Online DEST says that the design of the facility, an environmental impact statement and licensing from the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agencywill ensure the facility does not present a hazard to the community or the environment. DEST says it based its assessment on Geoscience Australia's Hydrogeology of Australia publication, which indicates the region has extensive, highly productive aquifers. "This does not automatically make the Fishers Ridge site unsuitable for a radioactive waste storage facility," the statement says. "The design of the Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Facility will apply the 'defence in depth' principle which ensures multiple barriers between the waste and the environment." DEST says it is possible to ensure protection even if the waste is disposed below ground, rather than stored above ground. "A shallow water table does not preclude the siting of a disposal facility provided properly engineered barriers are in place, as has been demonstrated, for example, at the Drigg low-level waste facility in the UK." DEST also says that all radioactive waste will be solid, thus minimising the risk of radioactive material moving from the facility site in the event of an incident. Engineering may be flawed Jolly, who is a civil engineer as well as a hydro-geologist, says overseas experience has shown that a radioactive storage facility built to the best engineering principles was found to be flawed decades later. "The understanding is among engineers and some scientists is that you can engineer a facility anywhere that won't leak and nothing will move off-site," he says. "But experience has shown through the world that this isn't the case ... Accidents do happen." He says he would be concerned with storage of even low-level waste at the site because of the need to transport the waste through sensitive areas to get there. "There are too many sites of significance around there," he says. Related Stories Nuclear dump site gets thumbs down, News in Science 25 Jul 2005Nuclear fusion plant gets the all clear, News in Science 29 Jun 2005Could disorderly atoms contain nuclear waste? News in Science 4 Aug 2000 ***************************************************************** 47 AU ABC: Indigenous leader questions dump plans Thursday, 28 July 2005 The leader of an Aboriginal community neighbouring a proposed site for a Commonwealth nuclear waste dump wants more information about its potential impact given how close it is to the community and a sacred site. Fisher's Range, 40 kilometres south of Katherine, is one of three defence sites being considered in the Northern Territory. Robert Lee from the Jawoyn Association says Banatjarl shares the road to Fisher's Range. "It's next to where I live, it's only four kilometres away and I'm not too impressed at this stage," he said. Mr Lee says they are keen for objective information about the proposal. "How can it be best managed, not going to damage the environment, the sacred sites and stuff because we've got a sacred site not very far away." Mr Lee says he will meet Government officials next week to get objective information about the dump. But he says they have concerns about its potential impact, particularly as there are also important underground aquifers. Northern Territory Country Liberal Party Senator Nigel Scullion says issues like Mr Lee has raised will be considered when the site is chosen. ***************************************************************** 48 AU ABC: Catchment at no risk from nuclear dump: Govt. 27/07/2005. ABC News Online No extra risk: DEST says it has taken the hydrogeology of the area into account. By Anna Salleh, ABC Science Online The Federal Government has defended its inclusion of a high rainfall site in its short-list of possible locations for a nuclear waste dump. Earlier this week there were concerns that a radioactive leak from a dump at Fishers Ridge in the Northern Territory could put at risk pristine catchments used for drinking and other purposes. The concerns were expressed by Peter Jolly of the Northern Territory's Environment Department, who helped to prepare a Northern Territory Government report on the hydro-geology of the area. The short-list of sites was based on preliminary assessment by the Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). DEST says that the design of the facility, an environmental impact statement and licensing from the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency will ensure the facility does not present a hazard to the community or the environment. It says it based its assessment on Geoscience Australia's Hydrogeology of Australia publication, which indicates the region has extensive, highly productive aquifers. "This does not automatically make the Fishers Ridge site unsuitable for a radioactive waste storage facility," a DEST statement said. "The design of the Commonwealth radioactive waste management facility will apply the defence in depth principle which ensures multiple barriers between the waste and the environment." DEST says it is possible to ensure protection even if the waste is disposed below ground, rather than stored above ground. "A shallow water table does not preclude the siting of a disposal facility provided properly engineered barriers are in place, as has been demonstrated, for example, at the Drigg low-level waste facility in the UK," the statement said. DEST also says that all radioactive waste will be solid, thus minimising the risk of radioactive material moving from the facility site in the event of an incident. Engineering may be flawed Mr Jolly, who is a civil engineer as well as a hydro-geologist, says overseas experience has shown that a radioactive storage facility built to the best engineering principles was found to be flawed decades later. "The understanding is among engineers and some scientists is that you can engineer a facility anywhere that won't leak and nothing will move off site," he said. "But experience has shown through the world that this isn't the case...accidents do happen." He says he would be concerned with storage of even low-level waste at the site because of the need to transport the waste through sensitive areas to get there. "There are too many sites of significance around there," he said. In other developments: + A hydro-geologist says a radioactive leak at one of the sites short-listed as a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory could contaminate drinking water. (Full Story) Related Links: + ABC Science Online: News in ScienceThe ABC's Science Unit provides all the latest science news from an Australian perspective. ***************************************************************** 49 World Peace Herald: Ongoing challenges of nuke waste disposal By Andrea R. Mihailescu UPI Energy Correspondent Published July 27, 2005 WASHINGTON -- As the United States, Russia and six other states look to construct international storage sites for spent nuclear fuel, risks still surround storage facilities. "Electricity production at nuclear power plants will be up 100 to 200 percent by the middle of the century," according to estimates from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog. Nuclear power plants will emerge in Nigeria, Morocco, Vietnam, Turkey, Poland as well as a number of other countries in the next 15 to 20 years. But properly storing nuclear waste continues to be a challenge. Exelon Chief Executive Officer John Rowe said the United States is unlikely to construct new reactors until the industry has greater security about storage. His firm provided some 15 percent of U.S. nuclear energy. The greater the amount of fuel at a site, greater is the risk of an accident. "For all plants, that risk really doesn't change," David Lochbaum, nuclear safety engineer with the Union of Concern Scientists, a private nonprofit watchdog group, told North Carolina's News &Observer. "You have to store the spent fuel in the pool for the first five years. The consequences, however, are determined by how much spent fuel is in the pool. The more spent fuel, the greater the consequences will be." Wet pool storage is higher risk than dry cask storage since radioactive fire poses greater risks to a spent fuel pool. Fire causes the container for the fuel to break and release radioactivity. "The fire propels that radioactivity far and wide and puts more people in harm's way," said Lochbaum. "The chances of a spent fuel accident are low, but the consequences are high." While a wet pool has a capacity to hold hundreds and in some cases thousands of tons of spent fuel, dry cask hold some 20 tons. If an accident or act of terrorism hits a dry cask, the size of a radioactive cloud coming from a cask is much smaller than that coming from a spent fuel pool. Because equipment is necessary to prevent overheating at a spent fuel pool, it is more likely to have a spent fuel problem than a dry cask accident. Risk is greater when plant owners do not keep spent fuel pools to the minimum level. Lochbaum recommends transferring fuel that came out of a reactor more than five years ago into dry casks, which would reduce the spent fuel risk by maintaining minimum levels. As the House-Senate conference committee negotiates an energy bill that includes several proposals to increase nuclear power plant construction, the lack of proper nuclear waste storage still remains, raising questions about nuclear security. Congress has been planning to store the country's nuclear waste in the Yucca Mountain in Nevada since the 1970s. One interim suggestion raised was to construct a series of dry casket storage facilities that would keep waste safe for some 100 years. But such temporary sites could be unpopular in communities where they would be located. No country really has a long-term solution to nuclear waste disposal. France is looking to store waste for about 100 years in an interim site until deciding on a long-term repository while German plans to build a geological repository but has not yet opened one. IAEA Deputy Director Yuri Sokolov said: "Demand for nuclear power reactors and nuclear fuel supplies is the greatest China, India and Southeast Asia in general." The IAEA warned members about proper safekeeping and recycling of fuel supplies and its repatriation for safekeeping and recycling. "Facilities for the civilized keeping and recycling of spent nuclear fuel should be created at international nuclear centers in the United States, Finland, Russia and some other countries where such technologies have been created and are at the highest level," said Sokolov. Russian Atomic Energy Agency Head Alexander Rumyantsev said: "Such a center may incorporate fresh nuclear fuel storages, from where the fuel might be leaded to the user countries with newly-built nuclear power plants." Rumyantsev argues centers could create an emergency reserve of fresh nuclear fuel in case of a suspension of commercial supplies to the countries whose nuclear power industry is in the development phase. Under a U.S.-Russian agreement, the two sides held training exercises Tuesday to assess preparedness on unexpected potential damage to a facility with nuclear waste in the process of its transshipment from a technological platform to a ground for provisional storage. Observers from the United States, Norway and Sweden were present. Waste will continue to be a problem. Britain uses an expensive process by repossessing its waste. The United States continues to use swimming pools to store fuel. Industry experts say the best alternative is geological storage which is a method of interring waste very deep. After more than 50 years of nuclear power usage, the world has accumulated 200,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel of which, 70,000 tons has been processed while the rest is kept at nuclear power plants. This is fraught with possible risks if they are kept or recycled in incompetently or become available to international terrorists. Copyright © 2005 News World Communications Inc. ***************************************************************** 50 Ottawa Citizen: Ontario pays towns to take nuclear waste canada.com network April Lindgren Wednesday, July 27, 2005 TORONTO - Government-owned Ontario Power Generation paid more than $3 million to municipalities on the shores of Lake Huron this spring as part of a deal clearing the way for construction of North America's first deep rock nuclear waste storage facility. The cash, which some critics have decried as hush money aimed at silencing opposition, is the first instalment of a "hosting agreement" that will see the utility pay the Ontario communities of Kincardine, Saugeen Shores, Huron-Kinloss, Arran-Elderslie and Brockton $35.7 million over the next 30 years. In return, the five municipal councils have embraced OPG's plan to store low- and intermediate-level nuclear waste in a deep rock geologic repository at the Bruce nuclear plant in picturesque Kincardine. The plan for the repository includes digging 660 metres down into limestone and carving out 38 caverns, each as long as a football field, up to eight metres wide and 6.6 metres high. While the project is massive and involves radioactive waste that will remain contaminated for thousands of years, the proposal has attracted scant attention in a province that was in an uproar five years ago over Toronto's plans to dump city garbage into an old iron ore mine in Northern Ontario. "Our municipal council volunteered us as the site for this, which is almost unheard of in the world," says Jennifer Heisz, a critic of the scheme who lives one kilometre from the Bruce station. "OPG has not based this on health and safety considerations or the suitability of the site. It's based on our councillors volunteering the site in exchange for $35 million." Ms. Heisz questioned whether it was appropriate for OPG to pay for municipal council members to visit nuclear waste storage sites in Europe and the United States. She says many council members are less-than-objective decision-makers because they have relatives who work for the Bruce nuclear station or are themselves current or former employees or contractors who did business with the facility. She insists there should have been a formal referendum on a matter that will affect the community for years to come. And she railed against provisions in the formal agreement that allow OPG to cancel payments to the municipalities if there is any opposition to the deal. "The gag order aspect of this is terrible," Ms. Heisz said. "It stifles open debate. It has intimidated a lot of public representatives into not being able to represent the public for fear the town will lose the money." The 20-page agreement states early on that payments to Kincardine and the neighbouring communities can be halted if any or all of them "have failed to exercise best efforts to support the construction of (the) deep geologic repository." High-level waste -- used nuclear fuel -- is stored at the nuclear power station where it is generated and that will continue, said OPG spokesman John Earl. The Bruce station, however, has been the storage site for low- and intermediate-level waste from all of Ontario's reactors since 1974. Low-level waste, made up of minimally radioactive materials such as mop heads, protective clothing and floor sweepings, is placed in above-ground concrete warehouse-type structures. Intermediate-level waste, such as used reactor components, resins and filters, is stored mainly in steel-lined concrete containers that have been set into the ground. Mr. Earl said the Bruce site has been selected for the repository because "the community came and asked us to look at what the options are for the future and to look at deep geologic repository as the one that they considered to be the best technology available." The utility, he insisted, will "work diligently to meet the needs and satisfy the concerns of the community as we move this forward." Kincardine Mayor Glenn Sutton also makes no apologies for the money-for-waste deal he and the council signed with OPG last fall. "There has been extensive consultation," including a public opinion survey that found 60 per cent of residents support the project, Mr. Sutton noted. Seventy per cent of Kincardine's approximately 8,319 adult residents were contacted for the poll. When respondents who were neutral or refused to answer were excluded from the total, the approval rating climbed to 73 per cent. As the actual host community for the OPG project, Kincardine will receive the lion's share of the OPG money over the next three decades. The $2.94 million paid earlier this year has been used for park projects and a reserve fund for a possible hospital expansion. Mr. Sutton rejects suggestions the community has been bought off. "We did a survey of other jurisdictions across the world and the amounts paid as a hosting fee are consistent with other jurisdictions in Western Europe and the United States." He also disputes suggestions that becoming a major nuclear waste repository will put off the tourists and cottagers who flock to Lake Huron's beaches each year. "We've had a low-level waste storage site for the Bruce and Pickering and other nuclear plants for more than 30 years and it's been a very safe storage procedure and we've had basically no reaction." Indeed, OPG is currently seeking permission to triple the size of its current surface storage facility for low and intermediate nuclear waste to accommodate contaminated materials generated by the refurbishment of its aging nuclear reactors. About 60,000 cubic metres are stored at the Bruce site, which is equipped to handle 72,000 cubic metres. OPG wants to begin site preparation in December to expand that capacity to 212,000 cubic metres. The schedule for the deep geologic repository is also ambitious. The utility aims to launch an environmental assessment of the proposal by 2007 and to complete that process by 2010. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission would then be asked to issue the necessary licences so construction could begin by 2013. The goal is to begin storing waste in the caverns beginning in 2017. William Fyfe, a retired University of Western Ontario professor who is Canada's foremost Earth scientist and an international consultant on nuclear waste issues, attacked OPG's plans yesterday. "You do not put nuclear waste near things like the Great Lakes or the great rivers in case there's a leakage that you haven't expected," he said. "The Earth changes ... and nuclear waste is dangerous for at least one million years. "It wasn't that many thousands of years ago when we had ice on top of southern Ontario. That could happen again and when that happens, you get all sorts of new cracks and things formed." Mr. Fyfe, who has been a consultant to Switzerland and Sweden on nuclear waste, said it should be buried in areas where naturally occurring materials that are easily corroded or soluble have survived unscathed for millions of years. This indicates the geology is stable. "In Canada, we have a lot of these in old mining areas," he said, citing Sudbury as one example. Mr. Fyfe said OPG should consult experts, including the Swedes, who are burying their nuclear waste deep under the Baltic Sea, before pushing ahead with the Bruce project. The Swedes "are going underground more than a kilometre and if there ever was leakage, before the stuff gets into the sea, it has to go through a lot of clay sediments and things that accumulate from erosion on the ocean bottom that is very good at absorbing stuff. It is a perfect barrier." Norm Rubin, the director of nuclear research for the watchdog group Energy Probe, suggested that the number of jobs and economic activity generated in the Kincardine area by the Bruce station are factors in how the story is unfolding. "If you start making decisions during a short-term period when everybody and their brother-in-law is working for the company, and you make decisions that are irreversible, then you stand a really good chance of making a really regrettable decision. c The Ottawa Citizen 2005 ***************************************************************** 51 Alamogordo News: Monks walk atomic flame to Trinity Site Updated: July 27, 2005 - 01:02:03 By Laura Hunt, Staff Writer Jul 27, 2005, 12:57 pm Buddhist monks carrying a lantern lit by embers of the world’s first atomic bomb, which destroyed Hiroshima on the morning of Aug. 6, 1945, are on their way to the birthplace of atomic weapons — Trinity Site, New Mexico. The Japanese monks, joined by other peace protesters and supporters, started walking on July 16, the 60th anniversary of the test at Trinity Site. They have already carried the “atomic flame” from San Francisco, through southern California and part of Nevada. WALK FOR PEACE — Japanese Buddhist monks carry a lantern containing a remnant of the fire from the nuclear attack on Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945. They started walking from San Francisco July 16 and will reach Trinity Site, where the first atomic bomb was tested, Aug. 9 after a 25-day, 1,600-mile walk. There, the atomic flame will be extinguished during a televised ceremony. Photo from www.gndf.org After a 25-day, 1,600-mile walk, the flame will be extinguished at the Trinity Site on Aug. 9, the 60th anniversary of the Nagasaki bombing. The ceremony will take place during a television broadcast calling for world peace and an end to nuclear proliferation, said Matt Taylor, Global Nuclear Disarmament Fund co-executive director. Some Alamogordo residents were unaware of the monks’ journey. One resident, William Meadows, was angered by the news. “I’m a veteran of World War II, and I don’t think that these monks got any business coming over here,” he said, “because if it hadn’t been for the A-bomb, there would have been millions of people killed on both sides over there.” After learning about the monks’ plan, Meadows immediately called Congressman Steve Pearce and left a message with someone in his office. “Since when are the Japanese allowed to come down to Trinity Site? That’s what I’m asking the congressman, if he would stop them,” he said to the person on the other line. However, other residents were supportive of the monks. “I certainly understand the feelings of anybody who’s experienced that, like the Japanese,” said Walter Miller. “I’m not really fond of nuclear weapons proliferation myself, and I’d like to see them all stopped... It’s an admirable thing that they’re making that kind of trip.” James Haynes, Alamogordo resident, said the peace protest falls under freedom of speech. “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion,” he said. “You should do what you feel is right, and if these people feel the need to protest, they should be able to.” However, Taylor said the ceremony isn’t political, but humanitarian. “It’s not an anti-war thing,” he said, “and it’s not even an argument as to whether (the atomic bomb) should or shouldn’t have been used. It’s about ending a cycle and starting a new era.” In Zen culture, 60 years is the end of a cycle, Taylor said. “They believe that everything good and bad happens in circles,” he said. “The atomic bomb was born at Trinity Site, then used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For 60 years, the world has been living in fear that Nagasaki wouldn’t be the last place it was used. Now we’re living with nuclear terrorism every day, so in order to close this circle in a peaceful way, and not to end it in a destructive way, we’re walking it back to where it was born.” Buddhist monks have taken the flame on many peace walks around the globe, Taylor said, and now, the monks will finally extinguish the flame and end the cycle that started in 1945. “I think it’s really wonderful that Trinity Site will finally be connected to all of humanity,” Taylor said. Copyright © 2004 Alamogordo News, a Gannett Co., Inc. newspaper. ***************************************************************** 52 Guardian Unlimited: 'Any nuclear arsenal is a risk' The stakes are high as Pyongyang returns to the six-party talks Wednesday July 27, 2005 The Guardian Korea Times Editorial, South Korea, July 26 "It is heartening to see the six-nation talks to discuss North Korea's nuclear programme finally resume in Beijing ... The strong intentions and positive attitudes of leading diplomats provide sufficient reason for optimism on the fourth round of six-way talks coming after a 13-month impasse ... "Most promising were the changes in the stances of two key players - the United States and North Korea. That the two sides had a pre-conference meeting [on Monday] for the first time since the six-way format began, reflected their positive approaches ... North Korean leaders are urged to think deeply over who will be hurt most if the talks go adrift once again." Article continues Editorial, South Korea, July 25 "The fact that the six nations have agreed to meet again after a year-long hiatus indicates the prospect of substantive progress is brighter than when they met last ... Much of the credit for the improved outlook goes to Seoul and Washington. While Seoul has offered to provide 2m kilowatts of electricity to the energy-starved North, Washington has softened its attitude towards Pyongyang, refraining from making ad hominem attacks on the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-il ... "If Pyongyang demonstrates its firm commitment to nuclear disarmament, the other participating countries will respond to it with step-by-step measures that address its two overriding concerns - security and economic aid." Paek Mun-gyu Nodong Sinmun, North Korea, July 24 "Progress in the six-party talks will be unattainable if they are used to press one-sided demands for our abandonment of nuclear weapons without addressing the historical background of the nuclear issue and objective realities that made it inevitable for us to possess nuclear weapons ... Whether the denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula will become a reality and whether a nuclear war in this region will be prevented hinge on the success or failure of the talks ... "The US must come to the talks with a conscientious and wholesome stance and attitude ... Our republic's stance towards resolving the nuclear issue through dialogue and negotiation and realising the denuclearisation of the entire Korean peninsula is unwavering and steadfast. The US must show a sincere and serious attitude about fulfilling its responsibility and role without harbouring unwarranted suspicions of our stance." Via BBC Monitoring Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial, July 25 "It's unlikely great progress will be made in containing Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions. Yet engaging North Korea is a must, considering the alternatives. It's a must if only because North Korea has at least a couple of nuclear bombs and probably the capacity to produce - and sell - others ... "Any nuclear arsenal is a risk to its neighborhood. That's especially so when the man in charge is the erratic Mr Kim. The missiles in his stockpile could reach South Korea and Japan. Odds are that Mr Kim would not use them. His priority is the survival of his regime, and he knows launching an attack would bring counterstrikes. More to Mr Kim's liking would be producing weapons or weapons-grade materials and selling them to other nations or terrorist suppliers ... "The talks will be productive if the parties merely agree on how to define the issues. Freezing the nuclear programme is not the same as dismantling it. Success at this point would be a commitment to further talks leading to the verifiable end of North Korea's nuclear threat." Chosun Ilbo Editorial, South Korea, July 26 "The goal of Seoul, Washington and Tokyo is for Pyongyang to declare in writing that it will scrap its nuclear programmes, based on a judgment that a more ambiguous decision like merely freezing the programme would only buy Pyongyang time to wriggle out of a permanent solution. If the North does make that written commitment, it will get - also in writing - regime security guarantees and economic assistance including the supply of free electricity ... "Seoul must make it clear that progress in the nuclear dispute and in inter-Korean relations cannot be separated. If South Korea goes its own way instead with a stop-gap measure in the hope that it can then persuade the North to give up its nuclear programme once inter-Korean relations improve, it would lose out on both counts." Dong-A Ilbo Editorial, South Korea, July 26 "The North should consider what disadvantages its decision will bring about if it chooses to stick to its nuclear programme, jeopardising inter-Korean relations. Its problems with shortages of electricity and food will linger on ... "If [Pyongyang] renounces its nuclear programme, it can clear the way for regime security and economic development. However, if it continues to make unreasonable demands such as [retaining] its nuclear programme, there is no guarantee for the North Korean future." [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 53 Tri-City Herald: Report says Hanford needs more security This story was published Wednesday, July 27th, 2005 By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer The threat of terrorism at the Hanford nuclear reservation and three other Department of Energy cleanup sites will require security improvements costing an estimated $384 million to $584 million during the next several years, according to estimates in a Government Accountability Office report to Congress. Hanford security is expected to cost an additional $85 million annually to protect plutonium and unused reactor fuel that remains stored at the site. Plans include building an Interim Secure Storage Facility to hold the plutonium, which was produced for the nation's nuclear weapons program during the Cold War and remains stranded at the site. The site also has unused fuel intended for the Fast Flux Test Facility that requires weapons-grade security. Hanford officials have pushed to get the plutonium transferred this year to the Savannah River Site in South Carolina to reduce security costs at Hanford. But DOE has made no decision to consolidate plutonium in Savannah River. The GAO report said shipping and load restrictions on transporting the plutonium and Savannah River's inability to store and dispose of the material are delaying the transfer. Now the plutonium is stored in a heavily guarded vault at the Plutonium Finishing Plant in central Hanford. The reactor fuel also is stored at the plant. The interim building will allow DOE to reduce the area it needs to keep under increased security and allow the eventual demolition of the contaminated Plutonium Finishing Plant. No cost has been determined for the new building. The increased security costs have drawn the concern of state officials and watchdog groups. Although they are not disputing the need for increased security as long as weapons-grade material remains at Hanford, they are concerned security improvements will be paid for by reducing the money available for Hanford cleanup. The GAO report found generally good security under current standards at nuclear cleanup sites in Washington, Idaho, Tennessee and South Carolina that have weapons-grade plutonium or uranium. But DOE likely will not meet a 2008 deadline for improvements based on the 2004 Design Basis Threat, a classified document that increased the identified potential size and capabilities of adversary forces. DOE has focused more on security of its weapons sites than its cleanup and science sites with weapons-grade material since Sept. 11, 2001. To meet the 2004 Design Basis Threat, DOE will need to take several prompt and coordinated actions, according to the report. That includes consolidating plutonium and uranium at fewer sites. But without a comprehensive plan for consolidating material, completing the task by the 2008 deadline is unlikely, the GAO concluded. DOE also needs to turn its security force into an elite force, comparable to the U.S. military's Special Forces. Current security forces are employed by DOE contractors, but the elite force might be made up of federal employees, according to the report. Plans for an elite force are only in the conceptual phase, and forming the force by the 2008 deadline is unlikely, according to the GAO report. DOE also needs to invest in new security technologies, such as technology that would allow detection of terrorists at much greater distances than is possible at most cleanup sites now, the report said. Security systems at the five sites include a variety of alarms and sensors to detect intruders. They also have control points such as turnstiles, badge readers, vehicle inspection stations, radiation detectors and metal detectors. Security forces at most sites are equipped with automatic weapons, night-vision equipment, body armor and chemical protective gear, according to the report. Some protections are low-tech, such as "two-person" rules that prevent only one person from having access to plutonium. Among improvements recommended to security requirements is making sure all security officers participate in training exercises. Several of the officers interviewed complained that drills were not realistic. Part of the concern was safety limitations on driving over the speed limit, climbing fences, running up stairwells or defending facilities from rooftops. Some security forces also could use more protective gear, including body armor and chemical protective gear, according to the report. It noted that unlike weapons sites, cleanup sites do not have armored vehicles. In fact, several security officers complained that security vehicles were old and had maintenance problems, including doors that would not open. Some officers also said radios used for communication were unreliable, either because of short battery life or areas on nuclear reservations with no reception. The report did not specify which of the four sites had which shortcomings. © 2005 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 54 Daily Texan: Inclusion at lab is nothing new - University | 7/27/2005 UT's Los Alamos bid includes a network of other universities By Zachary Warmbrodt Although the UT System focused last week's Los Alamos bid announcement on the creation of a multi-university research network and criticized the current manager's lack of inclusiveness, lab employees said this week that partnerships already exist between hundreds of universities and the lab. Terry Lowe, program director for science- and technology-based programs for the laboratory, said his office coordinates contracts and memorandums of understanding with more than 100 universities, many outside the U.S. UT System Chancellor Mark Yudof announced July 19 a network of 33 universities and related institutions that will participate in peer review and collaborative research at the lab if the UT System and Lockheed Martin team wins the bid, which will be awarded in December. Yudof said Tuesday that the System's intention is to be more inclusive than the University of California, the lab's manager for more than 62 years. Lowe, who could not provide the exact number of individual universities that have working relationships with the lab, said there is "a fair amount of redundancy" between the institutions named by the UT System and those already working at Los Alamos. Undergraduates and faculty from UT-Austin have been researching manufacturing design at the lab this summer. There are more than 650 collaborative interactions funded under Lowe's programs - 260 of which are with institutions located outside of the U.S., he said. UT System spokesman Michael Warden said the difference between the two networks was "apples and oranges" but did not elaborate because of the competitive nature of bidding. None of the schools in UT's proposed network are from outside the U.S., he said. UT System's network will constitute a permanent agreement, unlike many of the lab's current outside partnerships. "It's just like what we do with hundreds of other schools, literally hundreds," said Vivek Dave, office leader for the lab's Manufacturing Science Institute, where five engineering undergraduates from UT-Austin have been working with students from universities such as Vanderbilt on developing better manufacturing systems since May. Dave said the types of manufacturing the students are working on is generic and is applicable to much more than just weapons. The students lack the security clearance to work with nuclear weapon components. UC is paying UT-Austin for its services, which include providing UT engineering professors to teach lab employees in Los Alamos's continuing education program. Other universities provide peer review and conduct on-site research. Dave said Lockheed could be touting the network in an effort to prove academic credentials. "[UC doesn't] need to go out and get universities on a competitive proposal, because we already interact with them on a day-to-day basis," Dave said. Regardless of who wins, he said the network is a good idea. "If you go back to the original charter of the Atomic Energy Commission, this is entirely consistent with the entire vision," Dave said. "They wanted the best minds from academia, from around the world really, to come together and solve difficult problems." ***************************************************************** 55 KTVB.COM: Idaho could be home to plutonium production First of a two-part series 06:48 PM MDT on Wednesday, July 27, 2005 Alyson Oüten Idaho's NewsChannel 7 BOISE -- It was "all systems go" for the Discovery space shuttle Tuesday. file photo The INL could be home to radioactive plutonium production use to aid space exploration. With seven astronauts on board, the shuttle lifted off at about 8:30 a.m. This is the latest of several proposed space missions by NASA, ventures in which Idaho may play a critical role. The Department of Energy wants to start producing radioactive plutonium in Idaho to aid with space exploration. In a special two-part series, NewsChannel 7 went to the Idaho National Laboratory for an in-depth look at the proposed plutonium production. The launch of the space shuttle Discovery is a symbolic step for NASA as it tries to get its space program back on track. In addition to missions like this, it's planning to send unmanned spacecraft even further into space, pushing the boundaries of our galaxy and placing more reliance on the power sources used to collect and relay data from these remote, uncharted territories. To do that, NASA uses so called space batteries, a radioactive resource designed to generate electricity for decades in order to power on-board computers. "Weve used plutonium 238 for many, many years to provide heat and to generate electricity," said John Grossenbacher, Idaho National Laboratory Director. John Grossenbacher is the new director of the Idaho National Laboratory, the agency tapped to build these space batteries for NASA, batteries powered by the rapid radioactive decay of plutonium. "Many, many years ago when we started looking at space missions and national security that would need this kind of heat or electricity, we surveyed the isotopes available and for a bunch of reasons, plutonium 238 turned out to be the best one," said Grossenbacher. Video Clip Watch Alyson Oütens report The U.S. hasn't made PU 238 since the 1980s. It currently relies on its dwindling domestic stockpile and on imports from Russia. But in its agreement with Russia, it cannot use those imports for military purposes. So, the Department of Energy wants to begin production again. This time here in Idaho at the Idaho National Laboratory. "Why here? Why in Idaho? asked NewsChannel 7. It's the nation's lead laboratory for nuclear energy; we have these kinds of expertise here," said Grossenbacher. In its draft environmental impact statement, the Department of Energy says it considers INL its top choice for this $1.5 billion plutonium production program. The DOE contends consolidation will increase efficiency and security by locating everything in one central facility. "Why not reduce the costs, reduce the number of people you have to have trained and qualified to handle this material and do the whole thing in one place. It's a nuclear energy source and this is the nation's lead laboratory for nuclear energy. I think we ought to be doing it," said Grossenbacher. If INL gets the green light, a new $300 million facility would be built in its desert campus, and at least a hundred new positions would be added. It could start plutonium production by 2012. Talking about the production of radioactive material gets the attention of a lot of people. "Do we want to take the chance and say, for the sake of space exploration; Ill put my health at risk and future generations and the environment? I would say no," said Ester Ceja, Snake River Alliance. Tonight on the News at Six and Ten, Alyson Oüten continues her in-depth look at this controversial issue, including some of the serious concerns surrounding this plutonium production proposal. KTVB MEDIA GROUP ***************************************************************** 56 lamonitor.com: Experts share crucial knowledge The Online News Source for Los Alamos CAROL A. CLARK, lanews@lamonitor.com, Monitor Staff Writer SANTA FE - Experts from the Los Alamos National Laboratory Decontamination Proficiency Team travel the region sharing crucial knowledge with first responders. During their Decontamination Proficiency Testing and Mass Causality Incidents training program, LANL hazardous materials specialists David Volz and Fred Bolton evaluate existing decontamination procedures to reveal and repair trouble spots. "A year ago we decided to take this training on the road to fire stations," Volz said. "Fred is the primary investigator for the research that spanned the training we're working on today. We do this training in conjunction with the Southwest Center for Public Health Preparedness in Oklahoma." They train firefighters, HAZMAT responders, military response teams, law enforcement officials, emergency medical workers, public health workers, safety professionals and others with potential exposure to or the need to decontaminate people and equipment following hazardous materials incidents involving nuclear, chemical, or biological contamination. Volz and Bolton kicked off a three-day training program for firefighters in Santa Fe Tuesday morning. Bolton reviewed various chemical contaminants and their potential hazard levels. Six groups of fire department personnel were trained to quickly and cleanly remove HAZMAT suits contaminated with liquids, powders and a gooey substance. SFFD Battalion Chief Doug Acton has been a member of the HAZMAT team for 13 years. He said his fire department has 120 fire fighters with 13 at technician level or higher. "Each shift has HAZMAT technicians on it," Acton said. "We'll be sending a team of five up to Los Alamos to take part in the annual HAZMAT challenge in August. It's a fun way to be competitive and to learn new techniques." As careful as the trainees were, a black light revealed significant areas of contamination on their simulated "skin" jump suits worn under their outer hazmat suits. One firefighter was contaminated by an improper lowering of the zipper on his jump suit. Small and large fire departments have the same HAZMAT issues. Most departments think the procedures they're using are adequate until they go through the LANL training program. "This happens everywhere we go," Volz said. "We all do it - we take perfectly good suits and ruin them during decontamination." That's what the training is all about. To get out of contaminated suits without contaminating skin. Volz explained that people in the decon industry used to believe that the solution for pollution was dilution but research has disproved that theory. The LANL training demonstrates better options for achieving better decon results. "Through our research at the lab, we have been able to reduce water use from 85 gallons to 8 ounces and the amount of contamination and waste by about 90 percent," Volz said. A slight dampening of the suit followed by a thorough brushing is the best method for removing a powder contaminate, Volz said. The LANL team arrives at each training site in their own trailer filled with equipment and supplies to conduct a thorough evaluation and training program. A large yellow tent, one of only nine in the state, is set up and ready within 15 minutes for a Mass Causality Incident. Streams of contaminated people enter through one door of the tent and are moved through as they are soaped, scrubbed, rinsed, undressed, dressed in modesty suits and moved out the other door. One of the most critical response skills following contamination is the ability to effectively decontaminate people. "Twenty years ago the toxicity of chemicals was not that great," Volz said. "Now they can be very dangerous." LANL will sponsor an annual HAZMAT challenge in August. Acton said he'll be sending a team of five to Los Alamos to take part - to have fun and learn new techniques. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 57 lamonitor.com: LANL says cleanup on pace The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor Officials of Los Alamos National Laboratory described their work on a court-ordered environmental cleanup program and said it is on schedule. Dave McInroy, the remediation project manager, said LANL had met milestones for the last two years before the order went into effect, was early or on time for every deliverable this year and on schedule for the next set of investigation reports due in September. An agreement was reached on the contentious issue in March this year, resolving several lawsuits and authorizing the New Mexico Environment Division to define and supervise the comprehensive cleanup process. An important provision in the consent order enables the state to impose penalties for any work that does not meet the schedule, $1,000 a day for the first 31 days, going up to $3,000 a day after that. Of 2,124 potential release sites (PRS) at Los Alamos National Laboratory that have been flagged for some form of remediation since investigations began in 1990, some 750 remain on the list to be completed, McInroy said. PRS is a collective term for contaminated areas or units under observation or management When the project ends in 2015, McInroy indicated, about 200 sites will remain unfinished because they will be related to ongoing operations. About half the total life-cycle budget of $1.5 billion has been expended. "That reflects assumptions that are in our baseline," he said. "NMED may come up with a different corrective measure than we were estimating." The topic was discussed at a public meeting at Fuller Lodge Tuesday night and included a presentation of an aspect of the remediation effort that addresses potential release sites that are related to new construction and infrastructure projects. Roy Bohn, project leader for facility integration, said that 35 percent of new projects impact at least one potential release site and a few of these must be addressed before construction. The Security Perimeter Road Project has impacted three PRS, for example. The Perimeter Security Project is setting up controlled access points on West and East Jemez Road into the main administrative area of the lab. An accelerated cleanup before construction avoids having to do the job later at greater cost. Other remediations are under way at Technical Area-55 (the Plutonium Facility), TA-33 (HP Site) and TA-50, where the Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility is located. These "muck and truck" efforts, as they are called, variously include characterization sampling, excavations, hauling off contaminated petroleum soil, a ground penetrating radar survey and trenching to locate a residual asphalt landfill. The facility integration program costs about $2.5-3 million annually of the remediation projects $60 million budget. McInroy said the lab was committed to carrying out the consent order. "At first it was pretty onerous," he said, but there were advantages in having regulatory agreements spelled out. "It helps us at least have a written document so we don't have to second-guess the regulators," he said. Progress on cleanup means more reliable federal funding, as well, he said. In response to a question about why NMED was not participating in the meeting, McInroy said he had talked to Hazardous Bureau Chief James Bearzi about attending. Bearzi is principally responsible from the state's perspective. "It wasn't our meeting," said Jon Goldstein, communications director for the New Mexico Environment Department this morning. "We've done lots of meetings and outreach on the order." About 50 people attended the meeting. LANL officials said they hoped to continue the meetings periodically in the future. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************