***************************************************************** 08/09/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.183 ***************************************************************** 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 UN Atomic Watchdog Agency Meets On Iran's Nuclear Programme 2 [NYTr] Iran Will Abandon Nuke Pledges If Attacked 3 Guardian Unlimited: Iran and EU in nuclear impasse 4 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Nuke Watchdog Holds Meeting on Iran 5 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Agency Assesses Iran Nuclear Activity 6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran condemns EU nuclear offer 7 Washington Post: Iran's Nuclear Program 8 Telegraph: Iran must be forced to give up nuclear weapons 9 Reuters: Iran says will drop nuclear pledges if attacked 10 AFP: Crisis looms as Iran resumes nuclear work 11 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Suspicious of Iran's Nuke Ambitions 12 Annan Praises 'spirit Of Mutual Respect' At Korean Nuclear Talks 13 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Wants U.S. to Change Policy 14 Reuters: Powers to meet separately ahead of fresh Korea talks 15 Reuters: U.S. negotiator unsure if can reach Korea nuke deal 16 US: Deseret News: Bush signs energy bill 17 [NYTr] Hiroshima Cover-Up Exposed 18 [NYTr] The Bomb: Why "We" Did It (Newsweek, 1995) 19 US: [toeslist] HIROSHIMA COVER-UP EXPOSED 20 Guardian Unlimited: We miscalculated and now history has us by the t 21 Tri-City Herald: 60 years after the secret 22 SF Chronicle: HIROSHIMA AND THE BIRTH OF NUCLEAR WARFARE / 23 SF Chronicle: HIROSHIMA AND THE BIRTH OF NUCLEAR WARFARE / Healing b 24 Xinhua: Australia seeks nuke co-op with China 25 AFP: With tears and prayer, Nagasaki marks 60 years after NUCLEAR REACTORS 26 US: NRC: RIN 3150-AH44 27 US: APP.COM: No need for reports on drywell corrosion to be submitte 28 US: NRC: Sunshine Act Meetings 29 US: Corvallis Gazette-Times: Arguments raised for, against atomic en 30 Fort St. John: N.B. nuclear plant angers wind developer NUCLEAR SECURITY 31 US: NRC: Energy Bill Provides for Enhanced Security at Commercial Nu NUCLEAR SAFETY 32 [du-list] Iraq and Afghanistan death toll: another take 33 Marshall Islands - Impact of US Nuclear Testing 34 US: Guardian Unlimited: EPA Proposing Radiation Exposure Limits 35 Bellona: Nuclear icebreaker burns again 36 US: Las Vegas SUN: New EPA radiation standard is called outrageous 37 US: Battle Creek Enquirer: Depleted uranium is WMD NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 38 US: Proposed Federal Rule on Radioactive Waste Repository Would 39 US: NEWS.com.au: China seeks nuclear material 40 US: NEWS.com.au: Uranium deal 'must have safeguards' 41 US: NEWS.com.au: Yellowcake all the buzz at forum 42 US: Guardian Unlimited: Australia Announces China Uranium Talks 43 US: Deseret News: Homeland Security to look at Utah site 44 Las Vegas RJ: Senators ask EPA for public hearings 45 Interfax: Radioactive wastes won't leave Lithuania - PM 46 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Feds to check out proposed PFS site 47 US: PBP: Nuclear waste from 1970s, '80s recovered, FPL says 48 US: Paducah Sun: Papers to be signed to clean up tainted groundwater 49 US: AU ABC: Senate to debate China uranium sales. 50 AU ABC: Darwin Port likely to handle returned nuclear waste. 51 US: AU ABC:P Debate begins on Australia's plans for a uranium agreem 52 Las Vegas SUN: EPA proposing 1 million year radiation rule for Yucca 53 Las Vegas SUN: Reaction to proposed EPA radiation standard for Yucca PEACE 54 US: Hundreds turn out to protest nuclear weapons in US DEPT. OF ENERGY 55 Albuquerque Tribune: Package from LANL contaminates lab 56 Courier Journal: Agreement reached to cleanup water table around Pad 57 SF Chronicle: Error at lab spreads nuclear material / Contamination 58 TheNewMexicoChannel.com: LANL Sends Contaminated Package To Pennsylv 59 lamonitor.com: Contamination found out of state ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 UN Atomic Watchdog Agency Meets On Iran's Nuclear Programme Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 12:00:27 -0400 UN ATOMIC WATCHDOG AGENCY MEETS ON IRAN’S NUCLEAR PROGRAMME New York, Aug 9 2005 12:00PM The United Nations agency entrusted with curbing the spread of nuclear weapons met today to discuss Iran’s nuclear programme, a day after the major oil producer re-started activities at a uranium conversion plant, with its chief hoping the present problem is “simply a hiccup in the process and not a permanent rupture.” The Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2005/dg_iran.html">IAEA) Board of Governors convened at the request of France, Germany and the United Kingdom, who have been seeking a negotiated solution to issues arising out of the disclosure two years ago that Iran had for almost two decades concealed its nuclear activities in breach of its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The Board has the power to refer the issue to the UN Security Council which could impose sanctions. Speaking to reporters in Vienna, IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei called on all parties to exercise maximum restraint, desist from taking any unilateral Iran voluntarily suspended operations last year of all uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities during the negotiations on its programme, which it insists is for peaceful energy production but which some countries, including the United States, say But yesterday it re-started activities at the Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) in Isfahan after rejecting the latest proposals from the three European Union (EU) countries, known as the EU3. Enriched uranium can be used for peaceful purposes such as generating energy or for making nuclear weapons and the EU3 have said a resumption of nuclear activities would mean the end of the negotiations. Mr. ElBaradei said Iran’s action essentially unravelled the suspension of enrichment related and conversion activities at the Isfahan “The Board has clearly stated in the past that although suspension of enrichment related and conversion activities in the Islamic Republic of Iran is a voluntary decision, it is nonetheless essential for confidence-building and for resolution of outstanding issues relevant to Iran's past undeclared nuclear activities,” he declared. “I don't believe that any of these issues can be resolved outside the negotiating process. Confidence building is a long-term process and requires a dialogue. I would request all parties to exercise maximum restraint, to desist from taking any unilateral action and to try to go back to where we were a week ago, basically, continue to work with the Agency to clarify outstanding verification issues and continue to work with Europe on a long-term framework agreement by which Iran's relationship with the West will be normalized,” “This is good for Iran, this is good for regional security and this 2005-08-09 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml ***************************************************************** 2 [NYTr] Iran Will Abandon Nuke Pledges If Attacked Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 16:52:00 -0500 (CDT) autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by mart Reuters - August 9, 2005 http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-08-09T104825Z_01_KWA814198_RTRUKOC_0_NUCLEAR-IRAN.xml Iran says will drop nuclear pledges if attacked By Amir Paivar TEHRAN - Iran, a signatory of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), would drop all its international nuclear pledges if its atomic facilities were attacked, the outgoing Defence Minister said on Tuesday. His comments came a day after Iran resumed uranium conversion work, fanning Western fears it may be seeking atomic weapons and defying European Union warnings that Tehran could be referred to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions. Iran insists its nuclear ambitions are limited to peaceful electricity generation. "The day our facilities are attacked, we will put aside all our nuclear commitments," Ali Shamkhani told reporters. He did not specify which commitments Iran would drop. Leading conservatives have called for Iran to follow North Korea's example and pull out of the NPT, a treaty aimed at halting the spread of nuclear arms. Shamkhani said he thought it was unlikely the United States would attack Iran's nuclear facilities, saying Washington must have learned its lesson from the bloody invasion of Iraq. U.S. officials have played down media speculation they may be planning military action against Iran. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of Israel, which also accuses Iran of developing atomic weapons, has said his country would prefer a diplomatic rather than military offensive against Iran at this stage. "Whatever is destroyed...will be rebuilt elsewhere," Shamkhani said. "Our nuclear capability cannot be destroyed by any bomb, because it lies in our universities." The U.N. atomic watchdog confirmed on Monday that Iran had resumed nuclear fuel work mothballed under a deal with Britain, France and Germany. Iran also formally rejected a package of political and economic incentives offered by the three on behalf of the EU and aimed at persuading it to scrap nuclear fuel work for good. Shamkhani said Iran's Shahab-3 missiles "are now accurate to within one metre of their target". Iran began upgrading the Shahab-3 in May. Tehran said last year it had begun mass production of the medium-range missiles, thought by military experts to have a range of 2,000 km (1,250 miles) - enough to reach Israel. With speculation mounting about new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's nominees for cabinet, Shamkhani asked for the defence candidate to be an insider. Iranian media have named the chief of the joint staff of the hardline Revolutionary Guards Ali Akbar Ahmadian as a possible candidate. But Shamkhani said Ahmadinejad had also spoken to Hossein Alaee, head of Iran's Defence Aircraft Industries Organisation. Alaee declined to comment. * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 3 Guardian Unlimited: Iran and EU in nuclear impasse Pressure grows to issue Tehran with 10-day ultimatum Ian Traynor in Vienna Wednesday August 10, 2005 The Guardian Iran came under concerted international pressure yesterday to back off from a confrontation with the west over its nuclear programmes as Europe's main powers sought to salvage an ambitious mediation effort. An emergency meeting of the 35-strong board of the UN nuclear authority, the International Atomic Energy Agency, convened in Vienna to try to plot a path out of a dangerous impasse. Russia, unusually, joined Britain, France, and Germany as well as the US and the IAEA chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, in appealing to Iran to restore a climate of confidence by halting the nuclear activities it relaunched on Monday. The resumption of uranium conversion outside the southern city of Isfahan broke a pact reached with Britain, France and Germany last November and brought two years of negotiations on the nuclear dispute to a head. The Europeans are threatening to "terminate the dialogue" if the Iranians do not back down. But, amid deepening pessimism and signs of a more hardline stance from the new Iranian regime of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, it appeared that both sides - Iran and the EU - had boxed themselves in. "It's hard to see where the EU goes from here," said a diplomat attending the meeting. "And the Iranians' response to the EU offers was so insulting that it does not seem they are going to back down either." The IAEA session was called by the EU trio, despite the opposition of Dr ElBaradei, after Tehran spurned a detailed package of political, trade and nuclear benefits from the Europeans at the weekend, then ended its freeze on uranium processing and called the EU's bluff on how to respond. Diplomats said the severity of the Iranian response on Monday and of a letter it delivered last week suggested a much less conciliatory line had been decided by the new administration. Mr Ahmadinejad told the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, yesterday that he had unspecified proposals on how to break the nuclear deadlock and salvage the negotiations. The US president, George Bush, welcomed Mr Ahmadinejad's statement as a positive sign but said he remained deeply suspicious over Tehran's intentions. "It is important for the Iranians to understand that America stands squarely with the EU3, that we feel strongly the Iranians need to adhere to the agreements made in the Paris accord and that we will be willing to work with our partners and deal with appropriate consequences should they ignore the demand," he told reporters in Texas. Yesterday's meeting was delayed by five hours as the EU trio lobbied frantically for support and sought to redraft a resolution warning the Iranians in a way that retained the support of the 35 board members. Germany was insisting that any form of words agreed had to have consensus backing. While diplomats said the Iranians would ratchet up the tension further today by having UN seals broken at nuclear equipment in Isfahan, the Europeans were seeking support for issuing a 10-day ultimatum to the Iranians. Sources said Peter Jenkins, the chief British delegate, had told the closed session that Dr ElBaradei should report to the board within 10 days on whether the Iranians had halted operations in Isfahan. If not, a further emergency IAEA meeting could be summoned which could decide to refer the dispute to the UN security council in New York and it could decide on sanctions against Iran. Almost all members of the board except the Americans would prefer to avoid shifting the dispute to New York and it was unclear if the ultimatum would win the backing of the board. Dr ElBaradei is against setting a 10-day deadline. "Deadlines are not really very productive," said a European diplomat in the negotiations. [UP] Guardian Unlimited ¿ Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 4 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Nuke Watchdog Holds Meeting on Iran From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday August 9, 2005 10:31 AM AP Photo VAH109 By SUSANNA LOOF Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Diplomats gathered Tuesday for an emergency meeting of the U.N. nuclear agency to assess Iran's resumption of uranium conversion, but the agency appeared unlikely to report Tehran to the U.N. Security Council. Iran on Monday restarted some uranium conversion activities at its nuclear plant at Isfahan after suspending them in November following an agreement with Britain, France and Germany and appeals by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The three European Union countries have been negotiating with Iran in an attempt to persuade the country to drop its uranium enrichment program and related activities in return for incentives. Their latest offer was rejected last weekend by Tehran. The three EU countries called Tuesday's emergency meeting of the IAEA's board of governors after Tehran announced plans to resume conversion, the process preceding enrichment. Highly enriched uranium can be used to make weapons; uranium enriched to lower levels is used to produce electricity. Iran insists its nuclear program is peaceful, but Washington accuses Tehran of covertly trying to build an atomic weapon. The 35-nation IAEA board could report Iran to the Security Council, which in turn could impose economic or political sanctions. However, a Western diplomat close to the agency said it did not appear that the board was ready to take that step. ``As of now, no one is talking about referral to the Security Council,'' said the diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to publicly discuss such issues with the media. ``It's at best going to be a warning, but even that is going to take a lot of hard negotiating.'' Officials in Washington would not directly answer questions about whether the United States intends to push for sanctions now. State Department spokesman Adam Ereli did say that Iran was ``thumbing its nose at a productive approach.'' U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan spoke Monday to the newly elected president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, about the country's nuclear program and the negotiations with the three EU nations and ``urged restraint and encouraged the continuation of the ongoing process,'' U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said at U.N. headquarters in New York. ``He hopes both sides will remain engaged in search for an acceptable solution,'' Dujarric said. Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said he thought that ``the board should act by making clear that if Iran does not suspend these activities within days or a couple of weeks, they will meet again and refer the case to the Security Council.'' Sending Tehran's file there now would have little effect and could even be counterproductive, Kimball said. ``The nationalist push for the Iranian nuclear program may only increase if the case is referred to the Security Council at this point,'' he said. ``It would be unwise not to give Iran the opportunity to change its mind.'' But David Albright, a former U.N. nuclear inspector who now runs the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, argued that Iran's violation of the agreement with the EU countries left them with no choice but to pursue a referral to the Security Council. ``There's so much mistrust of Iran because of what it has done on nuclear facilities in the past that there's little patience for Iran backtracking,'' he said in a telephone interview from Muenster, Germany, where he is doing research. Albright argued Iran had failed to give the European offer ``a fair reading,'' saying that accepting it would be economically more beneficial than pushing ahead with the nuclear activities. ``Iran is making several steps that may play well domestically and may sound tough, but could leave Iran extremely exposed to pressures of the international community,'' he said. ``It could get bombed, too. ... It could happen, if this continues.'' Iran has insisted it has the right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to carry out the entire fuel cycle - from raw uranium to fuel for a reactor. Europe fears that if Iran can develop fuel on its own, it will secretly produce material for a bomb. On Monday, work at Isfahan resumed after IAEA inspectors installed cameras and other surveillance equipment intended to ensure no nuclear material is diverted. IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said work had resumed as Isfahan before the surveillance equipment was tested. An exiled opposition group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, accused Tehran of exploiting the talks with the Europeans in a ``cat and mouse game'' to stall for time while covertly developing a nuclear weapons program. Meanwhile, German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said that though negotiations were difficult, they would be continued as long as the agreement reached between Tehran and the three EU countries remained in force. ``We are trying to prevent a negative trend with fatal consequences,'' Fischer said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 5 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Agency Assesses Iran Nuclear Activity [UP] Tuesday August 9, 2005 6:46 PM AP Photo VIE119 By WILLIAM J. KOLE Associated Press Writer VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency held an emergency meeting Tuesday to assess Iran's resumption of uranium conversion, while an Iranian dissident said Tehran has manufactured about 4,000 centrifuges capable of enriching uranium to weapons grade. The meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board of governors came a day after Iran restarted some activities at its nuclear plant at the central Iranian city of Isfahan. Alireza Jafarzadeh, who helped uncover nearly two decades of covert nuclear activity in 2002, told The Associated Press the centrifuges - which he said are unknown to the IAEA - are ready to be installed at Iran's nuclear facility in Natanz. Jafarzadeh, who runs Strategic Policy Consulting, a Washington-based think tank focusing on Iran and Iraq, said the information - which he described as ``very recent'' - came from sources within the Tehran regime who have proven accurate in the past. His claims could not be independently verified. The IAEA was taking the allegation ``seriously'' and will investigate ``should we find anything credible contained within it,'' spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said. In Tehran, Ali Hafezi, spokesman for Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, told AP Tuesday that the IAEA had been given a full disclosure of Tehran's nuclear program, including the number of centrifuges. He would not say how many centrifuges Iran has. Meanwhile, diplomats in Vienna said the IAEA's board of governors was likely to issue a resolution by Thursday urging Tehran to again suspend its nuclear activities. ``Iran must not be allowed to violate its international commitments and must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons,'' said Gregory Schulte, U.S. envoy to the IAEA. But there was no talk of reporting Iran to the U.N. Security Council, which could impose economic or political sanctions on the regime, according to a Western diplomat. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the debate within the closed-door meeting, which was adjourned until Wednesday afternoon. President Bush said Tuesday that he's deeply suspicious about Iran's nuclear ambitions, but the newly elected president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has indicated a willingness to negotiate. Bush also said if Iran does not cooperate, U.N. sanctions are ``a potential consequence.'' ``We'll work with our friends on steps forward, on ways to deal with the Iranians if they so choose to ignore the demands of the world,'' he said in Crawford, Texas. IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said he was hopeful the standoff could be resolved. ``The board will request Iran to reconsider its decision to unravel a part of the suspension,'' ElBaradei told reporters. ``The important thing for me at the end of the day is to go back to the negotiating process and avoid any escalation of the situation.'' Tehran, which had agreed to suspend nuclear activities in November, insists its nuclear program is peaceful, but Washington accuses it of covertly trying to build a weapon. Under the agreement, Iran had pledged to stop building centrifuges, which can be used to enrich uranium to levels high enough to fuel a nuclear weapon. Centrifuges also can be used for the peaceful generation of nuclear energy; uranium enriched to lower levels is used to produce electricity. Iran resumed work at Isfahan after IAEA inspectors installed cameras and other surveillance equipment intended to ensure no nuclear material is diverted. But ElBaradei said the surveillance equipment had not yet been tested. The agency previously had said it was aware of the existence of 164 centrifuges at Natanz, 300 miles south of Tehran. ``These 4,000 centrifuge machines have not been declared to the IAEA, and the regime has kept the production of these machines hidden from the inspectors while the negotiations with the European Union have been going on over the past 21 months,'' Jafarzadeh said Tuesday in a telephone interview from Washington. In 2002, Jafarzadeh - then a member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, an exiled opposition group - disclosed information about two hidden nuclear sites that helped uncover nearly two decades of covert Iranian atomic activity and sparked present fears that Tehran wants to build a bomb. The council is the political arm of the Mujahedeen Khalq, a group that Washington and the European Union list as a terrorist organization. Jafarzadeh said Iran was making ``extensive'' use of front organizations or companies for the production and testing of centrifuge parts. He identified the companies as Pars Tarash, Kala Electric and Energy Novin, and said all had office space in the downtown Tehran building that houses Iran's Atomic Energy Organization. The Iranian nuclear spokesman confirmed that the three companies work with the agency but provided no further details. Britain, France and Germany have been working on behalf of the 25-nation European Union to persuade Iran to drop its uranium enrichment program and related activities in return for support for its civilian nuclear program and other incentives. Tehran rejected their latest offer last weekend. Revealing the extent of the diplomatic rift between the two sides, the Iranian theocracy lambasted EU efforts to end the standoff, saying the terms of last week's proposal were insulting and violate international law. ``In sum, the proposal is extremely long on demands from Iran and absurdly short on offers to Iran and it shows the lack of any attempt to even create a semblance of a balance,'' said a terse letter given to the ambassadors of France, Britain and German in Tehran on Monday. ``It amounts to an insult on the Iranian nation, for which (France, Britain and German) must apologize,'' added the letter, which was obtained by AP on Tuesday. Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said he thought ``the (IAEA) board should act by making clear that if Iran does not suspend these activities within days or a couple of weeks, they will meet again and refer the case to the Security Council.'' Sending Tehran's file there now would have little effect and could even be counterproductive by encouraging nationalist sentiment, Kimball said. Iran has insisted it has the right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to carry out the entire fuel cycle - from raw uranium to fuel for a reactor. Europe fears that if Iran can develop fuel on its own, it will secretly produce material for a bomb. --- Associated Press writer Susanna Loof in Vienna contributed to this story. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran condemns EU nuclear offer Staff and agencies Tuesday August 9, 2005 Iran has described EU efforts to end the deadlock over the country's nuclear programme as insulting and in violation of international law, it was reported today. The comments, made in a terse letter to EU negotiators, reveal the extent of the diplomatic rift between the two sides. The letter - delivered yesterday to the Tehran ambassadors of France, Britain and Germany (EU3) - attacks European offers of long-term support for Iran's civil nuclear programme. "In sum, the proposal is extremely long on demands from Iran and absurdly short on offers to Iran, and it shows the lack of any attempt to even create a semblance of a balance," the document, obtained by the Associated Press, says. "It amounts to an insult on the Iranian nation, for which the EU3 must apologise." News of the letter came as the UN nuclear watchdog met in Vienna today to consider whether to issue a formal warning to Iran. Yesterday, Tehran announced that it had resumed uranium conversion at its nuclear facility at Isfahan. The move risks a showdown with the US, which wants Iran to be referred to the UN security council and economic sanctions imposed. Russia today joined a growing international chorus calling on Iran to stop uranium conversion "without delay". The Russian foreign ministry demanded that its key Middle East ally returned to talks over its nuclear future. "A wise decision for Iran would be to stop the work on converting uranium without delay and continue close co-operation with the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] to settle the remaining questions about the Iranian nuclear programme," it said in a statement. Russia has an $800m (£449m) contract to build the Bushehr nuclear reactor, a project that has caused concern in the US. Washington fears the reactor could help Tehran develop nuclear weapons, but Iran insists its nuclear ambitions are intended only for electricity generation. The IAEA's 35-nation board of governors met this afternoon to assess Iran's latest moves. The meeting was adjourned until tomorrow. Diplomats said it was likely the agency would issue a resolution by Thursday urging Tehran to again suspend its nuclear activities. Iran's new president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said today he had new ideas to resolve the nuclear standoff with the west and was ready to continue talks with the EU. "I have new initiatives and proposals which I will present after my government takes office," he said in a telephone conversation with the UN secretary general Kofi Annan, the ISNA students news agency reported. He added that Iran had done nothing unlawful by resuming uranium conversion at Isfahan. Meanwhile, it was claimed today that Iran had secretly manufactured around 4,000 centrifuges capable of weapons grade uranium enrichment - 25 times the quantity it has admitted to the UN. Alireza Jafarzadeh, an exiled Iranian dissident who in 2002 helped to uncover almost two decades of covert Iranian nuclear activity, said the centrifuges - rotating machines used in separation processes - were ready to be installed at Iran's nuclear facility in Natanz. Mr Jafarzadeh, who runs Strategic Policy Consulting, a Washington-based thinktank focusing on Iran and Iraq, said the information - which he described as "very recent" - had come from sources within the Tehran regime that had proved to be accurate in the past. "These 4,000 centrifuge machines have not been declared to the IAEA, and the regime has kept the production of these machines hidden from the inspectors while the negotiations with the EU have been going on over the past 21 months," Mr Jafarzadeh told the Associated Press. An IAEA spokeswoman said the nuclear watchdog would take the allegation "seriously", and would investigate "should we find anything credible contained within it". The organisation had previously said it was aware of the existence of 164 centrifuges at Natanz, which is 300 miles south of Tehran. Under an agreement with it, Iran had pledged to stop building centrifuges. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 7 Washington Post: Iran's Nuclear Program Tuesday, August 9, 2005; Page A16 LAST FRIDAY, Britain, France and Germany -- the three European nations that had been negotiating the future of the Iranian nuclear program -- put their final proposal on the table. Among other things, they offered Iran a role in the discussion of regional security issues, a trade and cooperation agreement, and technical advice on everything from seismology to aircraft safety. Most important, they promised Iran access to nuclear fuel and to nuclear technology that would be more than adequate, negotiators said, for the peaceful generation of nuclear power. In exchange, they asked Iran to cease enriching uranium -- a process that can lead to the production of nuclear weapons -- and to allow regular inspections of all Iranian nuclear facilities. In making their proposal, the Europeans were clear about its significance. Had Iran agreed to the proposal, negotiators said, the move would have been widely understood as a sign that the Iranian government wanted a responsible role in the international community and that Iran's nuclear program really was intended for peaceful purposes only. The choice, as some put it, was between "jobs and bombs": Does Iran prefer to be isolated from the rest of the world, economically and politically, or does Iran want to give up its nuclear ambitions and become part of the international economy? Yet on Saturday, Iran turned down the proposal. Now there is no further room for obfuscation, and no further reason to give Iranians the benefit of the doubt: The real aim of the Iranian nuclear program is nuclear weapons, not electric power. Those in Washington and elsewhere who have always believed that the Iranians want nuclear weapons have a right to feel that their skepticism was justified. Nevertheless, the experience of letting the Europeans do it their way, offering trade and economic incentives before bringing in sanctions or making any military threats, has been enormously important. Given both the history of flawed U.S. intelligence reporting on nuclear programs, and the fact that recent estimates place Iranian nuclear weapons six to 10 years in the future, it would have been extremely difficult for the United States on its own to get the rest of the world to agree on any sanctions regime. Now, any steps taken to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons will have international credibility. What remains to be seen is whether the Europeans will come through, as they have promised they would, with a tough-minded push for sanctions. So far, so good: Today, the International Atomic Energy Agency is to hold an emergency session to discuss the Iranian nuclear program, and most expect the IAEA to eventually refer the issue to the U.N. Security Council. But the real test is long-term. E.U. and U.S. leaders should prepare a program of serious economic, technological and military sanctions to back up the United Nations' statements. The United States should also continue to endorse the European proposal, which explicitly recognizes Iran's right to a peaceful nuclear program, giving Iran further incentive to choose "jobs" over "bombs." All involved must also start speaking to other countries -- China, Russia, Japan -- to build international momentum. The conclusion of these talks means that there is no excuse for Europe and the United States not to act in tandem; neither should they take any option off the table. It is no longer possible to consider the Iranian nuclear threat as anything but deadly serious. © 2005 The Washington Post Company SEARCH: News : | | | | | ***************************************************************** 8 Telegraph: Iran must be forced to give up nuclear weapons | Opinion | telegraph.co.uk (Filed: 10/08/2005) Iran's seemingly ineluctable progress towards acquiring nuclear weapons has publicly resumed with the conversion of raw uranium outside Isfahan. According to Alireza Jafarzadeh, an exiled dissident based in Washington, it may never have been suspended, despite an agreement to that effect reached last November with the European Union troika of Britain, France and Germany. He claimed yesterday that the Iranians had manufactured about 4,000 centrifuges, capable of enriching uranium to weapons-grade levels, at a plant in Natanz, and had hidden this activity from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), thus maintaining a well-tried pattern of cheating. Those hoping for a willingness to compromise took heart two years ago from the appointment of the supposedly pragmatic Hassan Rohani as the chief nuclear negotiator. By the same token, they have been dismayed this week by the choice of the conservative Ali Larijani as his successor. But in fact these changes have been mere footnotes to a text that, since the time of the Shah, has made nuclear weapons status a prime aim of national policy. Moreover, under the Islamic Revolution, that policy has been the prerogative not of the elected head of state but of the Supreme Leaders - Ayatollah Khomeini and, since 1989, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. America has been both percipient in recognising this reality and forthright in wishing to thwart it. It rightly sees Iran as a power hostile to Western interests through its desire to destroy Israel and its support for terrorist organisations such as Hizbollah. Yet the difficulties in deterring Teheran are immense. The acquisition of nuclear weapons as an expression of Iranian hegemony in the Gulf is popular at home, as the recent election as president of the conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has demonstrated. Iran would be hurt by economic sanctions imposed by America and the EU, and that would count for something in a country chronically unable to provide jobs for its youthful population. On the other hand, the regime may calculate that continuing high oil prices and sanctions-breaking by countries such as China would sufficiently compensate for any reduction in trade with, and investment from, the West. Beyond that, as a last resort, lie selective or comprehensive military strikes on Iran's nuclear installations. Given the Bush Administration's predicament in Iraq, where Iran has huge potential for mischief, there is as yet no appetite for this option. The next few months are likely to see a steady ratcheting up of the crisis, from yesterday's emergency meeting of the IAEA to an attempt to get the matter referred to the UN Security Council and then persuade China and Russia not to veto economic sanctions. Iran's past mendacity renders wholly unconvincing its claim to be innocently pursuing nuclear production of electricity. But bringing it to book is proving extraordinarily frustrating. Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2005. Terms &Conditions ***************************************************************** 9 Reuters: Iran says will drop nuclear pledges if attacked Tue Aug 9, 2005 6:48 AM ET By Amir Paivar TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran, a signatory of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), would drop all its international nuclear pledges if its atomic facilities were attacked, the outgoing Defence Minister said on Tuesday. His comments came a day after Iran resumed uranium conversion work, fanning Western fears it may be seeking atomic weapons and defying European Union warnings that Tehran could be referred to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions. Iran insists its nuclear ambitions are limited to peaceful electricity generation. "The day our facilities are attacked, we will put aside all our nuclear commitments," Ali Shamkhani told reporters. He did not specify which commitments Iran would drop. Leading conservatives have called for Iran to follow North Korea's example and pull out of the NPT, a treaty aimed at halting the spread of nuclear arms. Shamkhani said he thought it was unlikely the United States would attack Iran's nuclear facilities, saying Washington must have learned its lesson from the bloody invasion of Iraq. U.S. officials have played down media speculation they may be planning military action against Iran. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of Israel, which also accuses Iran of developing atomic weapons, has said his country would prefer a diplomatic rather than military offensive against Iran at this stage. "Whatever is destroyed ... will be rebuilt elsewhere," Shamkhani said. "Our nuclear capability cannot be destroyed by any bomb, because it lies in our universities." The U.N. atomic watchdog confirmed on Monday that Iran had resumed nuclear fuel work mothballed under a deal with Britain, France and Germany. Iran also formally rejected a package of political and economic incentives offered by the three on behalf of the EU and aimed at persuading it to scrap nuclear fuel work for good. Shamkhani said Iran's Shahab-3 missiles "are now accurate to within one metre of their target". Iran began upgrading the Shahab-3 in May. Tehran said last year it had begun mass production of the medium-range missiles, thought by military experts to have a range of 2,000 km (1,250 miles) -- enough to reach Israel. With speculation mounting about new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's nominees for cabinet, Shamkhani asked for the defence candidate to be an insider. Iranian media have named the chief of the joint staff of the hardline Revolutionary Guards Ali Akbar Ahmadian as a possible candidate. But Shamkhani said Ahmadinejad had also spoken to Hossein Alaee, head of Iran's Defence Aircraft Industries Organisation. Alaee declined to comment. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 AFP: Crisis looms as Iran resumes nuclear work 09/08/2005 07h41 Iranian technicians unsealing a container of radioactive uranium, 'yellow cake' ©AFP - Behrouz Mehri ISFAHAN, Iran (AFP) - Iran faced a confrontation with the international community as the UN's nuclear watchdog prepared to meet after Tehran resumed ultra-sensitive nuclear fuel work. Monday's announcement that Iran had resumed uranium conversion activities at its plant in the central city of Isfahan after a nine-month hiatus drew expressions of concern from the European Union and the United States. "Iran has resumed the conversion of uranium under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency," said the vice-president of Iran's Atomic Energy Agency Mohammad Saidi. Amid scenes of excitement, an AFP correspondent saw technicians in protective clothing opening a first barrel of raw mined uranium for conversion, while International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors installed security cameras to monitor the process. The European Union has called for an emergency meeting Tuesday of the IAEA board during which an ultimatum to suspend nuclear fuel work is expected to be issued. The meeting is the first step in a process that could see Iran referred to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions -- a US demand that the Europeans have been hoping to avoid through their dialogue with Tehran. However Iranian officials emphasised they were not worried about Security Council action, saying the Islamic republic's right to the nuclear fuel cycle is enshrined in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The nuclear programme has proved to be a rare point of unity for Iran's fractious political groups, with Islamists, reformists and those nostalgic for the imperial regime that launched the drive agreeing it is a source of pride. At the key meeting on Tuesday, the IAEA was expected to issue Iran with a stern warning rather than immediately take it to the Security Council. "The threat (of referral to the UN Security Council) is being held for a second meeting," a diplomat close to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) told AFP. Iran has been under investigation for more than two years by the IAEA , which has accused it of hiding controversial nuclear work but has yet to find any proof of a weapons programme. Conversion turns uranium ore or yellowcake into a feed gas for enriching uranium, which can be the fuel for reactors or the explosive core of atom bombs. In the United States officials Monday held out the threat of UN sanctions but expressed hope the European negotiations could be put back on track. Deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said Washington was looking to revive Tehran's discussions with a trio of European Union negotiators Britain, France and Germany. "We'll continue to work with the EU-3 in support of efforts to get this process back on track," Ereli said at a State Department briefing. Iranian photographers take pictures of a container of radioactive uranium ©AFP - Behrouz Mehri The IAEA's 35-nation board of governors meets Tuesday at 1300 GMT at the agency's headquarters in Vienna in an emergency meeting called by the European trio. France, Britain and Germany, which headed the negotiations with Iran on behalf of the European Union, took a tougher line, calling on Tehran to reverse course and return to talks. Iran's move has created a "grave crisis" that requires a united response from the international community, French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said in Paris. The minister said French officials had received a letter from Tehran giving a negative answer to a package of EU incentives offered in exchange for Iran suspending nuclear work that could be used to build weapons. The tone of the letter was "particularly alarming," Douste-Blazy said, adding that it was "contrary to the spirit of the negotiations we have held with Iran over the past two years." A diplomat in Vienna who saw the letter described its language as "colorful" and "intemperate." "I call on Iran to listen to the voice of reason and to return to fully respecting the Paris accord" struck last November which set the framework for the trade package and suspension of Iran's nuclear activities, Douste-Blazy said. German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said the European trio were doing everything in their power "to avert a negative development with disastrous consequences". A camera installed by the IAEA at the Isfahan UCF ©AFP - Behrouz Mehri A diplomat close to the IAEA said the European trio were re-working a resolution which had originally demanded "full and sustained implementation of the suspension" but not threatened immediate Security Council referral. A second diplomat said the resumption of work at Isfahan had "taken things to a different level. I do not know what the (IAEA) board is going to do Tuesday because things are moving very fast." But another diplomat pointed out that Iran has still not cut IAEA surveillance seals at Isfahan, where monitoring cameras must yet be installed, and has support from non-aligned nations for peaceful use of nuclear energy. "They'll find some way to get out of it," the diplomat said in an assessment of Iranian tactics. In New York UN Secretary General Kofi Annan urged Iran's newly-elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to show restraint. The crisis comes at a pivotal time after the ultra-conservative Ahmadinejad took office last week. Fears the new leader would take a tough stance intensified when he put a fellow hardliner in charge of the nuclear dossier. A government spokesman said Ali Larijani, a former boss of state-run media who has described giving up Iran's right to uranium enrichment for EU incentives as like swapping "a pearl for a sweet", would soon take up the post. Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005 ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Suspicious of Iran's Nuke Ambitions From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday August 9, 2005 8:01 PM By NEDRA PICKLER Associated Press Writer CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) - President Bush said Tuesday that he's deeply suspicious about Iran's nuclear ambitions, but that the country's new leader has indicated a willingness to negotiate. Bush said he got word Tuesday that the newly elected president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said he is willing to work with other nations amid concerns that his country is developing nuclear weapons. ``Just as I was walking in here, I received word that the new Iranian president said he was willing to get back to the table,'' Bush told reporters at a brief question-and-answer session at his Texas ranch. ``If he did say that, I think that's a positive sign that the Iranians are getting a message, that it's not just the United States that's worried about their nuclear programs, but the Europeans are serious in calling the Iranians to account and negotiating,'' he said. Bush said that if Iran does not cooperate, United Nations sanctions are ``a potential consequence.'' ``We'll work with our friends on steps forward, on ways to deal with the Iranians if they so choose to ignore the demands of the world,'' he said. In Washington, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld again called Iran ``notably unhelpful'' in U.S.-led efforts to pacify Iraq. He said some conventional weapons from Iran were reaching insurgents in Iraq, but suggested it was unclear whether elements of the Iranian government played a role in supplying them. ``It is true that weapons, clearly, unambiguously from Iran, have been found in Iraq,'' Rumsfeld said at a Pentagon press conference. ``It's notably unhelpful for the Iranians to be allowing weapons of those types to be crossing the border.'' Bush's comments came a day after Tehran restarted some uranium conversion activities at its nuclear plant at the central Iranian city of Isfahan. Britain, France and Germany have been trying to persuade Iran to drop its uranium enrichment program and related activities in return for incentives. Tehran rejected their latest offer last weekend. ``We're very deeply suspicious of their desires and call upon our friends in Europe, what's called the E.U.-3 - Germany, France and Great Britain - to lead the diplomatic effort to convince the Iranians to give up their nuclear ambitions,'' Bush said after a meeting with his economic advisers. Tehran, which had agreed to suspend nuclear activities in November, insists its nuclear program is peaceful, but Washington accuses it of covertly trying to build a weapon. Iran had pledged to stop building centrifuges, which can be used to enrich uranium to levels high enough to fuel a nuclear weapon. Centrifuges also can be used for the peaceful generation of nuclear energy; uranium enriched to lower levels is used to produce electricity. Iranian dissident Alireza Jafarzadeh, who helped uncover nearly two decades of covert nuclear activity in 2002, told The Associated Press Tuesday that Tehran has secretly manufactured about 4,000 centrifuges capable of enriching uranium to weapons grade. The IAEA previously had said it was aware of the existence of 164 centrifuges. Bush spoke shortly after the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency met in Austria to assess Iran's activities. Diplomats there said the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board of governors was likely to issue a resolution by Thursday urging Tehran to again suspend its nuclear activities. ``If the Iranians continue to balk, we'll work with the E.U.-3,'' Bush said. ``In other words, they're the lead negotiators on behalf of the free world. And we will work with them in terms of what consequences there may be, and certainly the United Nations is a potential consequence.'' Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 12 Annan Praises 'spirit Of Mutual Respect' At Korean Nuclear Talks Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 14:04:09 -0400 ANNAN PRAISES 'SPIRIT OF MUTUAL RESPECT' AT KOREAN NUCLEAR TALKS New York, Aug 9 2005 2:00PM United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan today praised the "spirit of mutual respect" achieved at the fourth round of the six-party talks for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, which took place in Beijing. He also found it encouraging that the participants were able to increase understanding and broaden areas of consensus, according to a <"http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2005/sgsm10037.doc.htm">statement delivered by a spokesman at the noon press briefing in New York. "The Secretary-General urges the Governments concerned to use the time before the round is resumed in three weeks to identify ways to reconcile their needs and concerns," the spokesman said. According to the statement, Mr. Annan extended special praise to China for "its dedication and tireless efforts to facilitate progress" as the host of the talks. 2005-08-09 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml ***************************************************************** 13 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Wants U.S. to Change Policy From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday August 9, 2005 7:46 PM By AUDRA ANG Associated Press Writer BEIJING (AP) - North Korea's envoy to nuclear disarmament talks in Beijing said Tuesday that the United States should change its policy on prohibiting Pyongyang from having a nuclear power plant. Vice Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan made the remarks upon his return to North Korea after 13 days of talks in Beijing failed to produce a statement of principles to guide future negotiations aimed at persuading Pyongyang to renounce nuclear weapons. ``The crux of resolving the nuclear issue is the differences between the policies of (the North) and the U.S.,'' Kim was quoted as saying by China's official Xinhua News Agency. ``The U.S. hasn't decided to accept (the North's) peaceful nuclear program.'' He added: ``If the U.S. really wants to make substantial progress in the Korean peninsula's nuclear issue, it had better make up its mind to change its policy.'' The discussions, which ended Sunday, were scheduled to resume the week of Aug. 29. The West is approaching the talks with Pyongyang differently than negotiations on Iran's nuclear program, asking Tehran to merely limit its activities in exchange for economic incentives, while insisting that North Korea drop even its civilian nuclear power program. Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Christopher Hill said the other five parties - including host China, South Korea, Japan and Russia - all rejected the North's demand for the nuclear power plant, which was promised to Pyongyang in a 1994 deal as part of a U.S. aid package. Hill said it was ``simply not on the table.'' The nuclear standoff erupted in late 2002 after Washington said North Korea admitted running a secret nuclear program in violation of the 1994 agreement to give up nuclear development. Pyongyang later withdrew from the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, then claimed in February that it had nuclear weapons. North Korea says that in exchange for renouncing nuclear weapons, it wants economic and energy aid, a peace treaty and normalized relations with Washington. It also wants the United States to remove any ``nuclear threat'' of its own from the Korean peninsula. The United States has some 32,500 troops in South Korea, but Washington says no nuclear weapons are deployed there and it has no intention of invading the North. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 14 Reuters: Powers to meet separately ahead of fresh Korea talks Tue Aug 9, 2005 7:50 AM ET (Adds North Korean officials' comments, paragraphs 13-16) By Kim Miyoung and Jon Herskovitz SEOUL, Aug 9 (Reuters) - Regional powers seeking to resolve a crisis over North Korea's nuclear weapons ambitions will meet separately during a recess in formal talks to try to narrow differences, South Korea's foreign minister said on Tuesday. Six-party talks in Beijing went into recess on Sunday after 13 days of intensive discussions with participants deciding to take a three-week break to consult their governments. One of the main stumbling blocks that prevented a joint statement was North Korea's insistence that it be allowed to pursue a peaceful nuclear programme. South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon said he would meet Chinese and U.S. officials over the next few days. North Korean officials would probably meet officials from Beijing to work out policy positions before the next round of talks, scheduled for the week of Aug. 29, he said. "We'll put our diplomatic efforts into making the best use of the three-week recess period to make significant progress when negotiations resume," Ban told a regular briefing. Energy-starved North Korea says it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power, which it says is vital to meet its electricity needs. U.S. officials fear North Korea could use a peaceful nuclear programme to help develop atomic weapons. Ban said the latest round of talks, which bring together the two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the United States, had moved forward the process toward finding a negotiated settlement to end Pyongyang's atomic ambitions. "This meeting was very meaningful and productive as North Korea and the United States managed to significantly narrow their differences, as did North and South Korea," Ban said. Ban said he thought it would be difficult for North Korea to persuade the other countries at the talks that it could maintain a peaceful nuclear programme given that it had withdrawn from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and expelled International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors. "North Korea needs to build trust," Ban said. Chief North Korean delegate Kim Gye-gwan arrived home on Tuesday presenting the talks outcome so far in a positive light. "The crux of resolving the nuclear issue is the differences between the policies of the DPRK and the United States ... The U.S. hasn't decided to accept the DPRK's peaceful nuclear programme." Kim told Xinhua news agency at Pyongyang airport. DPRK stands for Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the North's official name. "Although there were many difficulties, talks of the first phase established a 'groundwork' for future discussions," Xinhua quoted Kim as saying. "This is the significance of the talks," he said, adding: "... adjournment is a good idea at this stage." Kim Yong-il, the North Korean deputy foreign minister who greeted Kim Gye-gwan at the airport, told Xinhua that his government was satisfied with the first phase of the fourth round of the talks in comparison with the previous three rounds. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 15 Reuters: U.S. negotiator unsure if can reach Korea nuke deal Tue Aug 9, 2005 7:03 PM ET (Adds background, color, details, quote paragraphs 6-8, 11-15) By Saul Hudson WASHINGTON, Aug 9 (Reuters) - The U.S. negotiator said on Tuesday prospects were uncertain for reaching a deal on scrapping North Korean nuclear programs, but he expected the two nations to meet on narrowing their differences before a new session of six-party talks. "I just don't know, I just don't know. But I tell you if we don't get a deal it won't be because we haven't tried," Christopher Hill, the U.S. envoy to the talks, told reporters in answer to a question about the chances of an agreement. Talks in Beijing this month broke off after 13 days without agreement, but the United States, North and South Korea, Japan, China and Russia are due to resume negotiations aimed at hammering out the principles of a deal the week of Aug. 29 . Earlier on Tuesday, North Korea put the onus on the United States to resolve the stalemate, saying Washington should drop a key demand and allow Pyongyang to retain nuclear programs for peaceful purposes. But Hill reiterated that the North's wish to have a light-water reactor was unacceptable because of U.S. fears that the communist nation could switch the facility from research to weapon-making as he said they had in the past. The United States has proposed giving North Korea economic incentives and security guarantees in exchange for its dismantlement of nuclear programs. The Bush administration had been criticized for allowing North Korea to build its suspected nuclear arsenal while it shunned the bilateral negotiations Pyongyang wanted. But Hill changed the U.S. tactic and met repeatedly with the North during this month's round in what he said were business-like talks that allowed the two sides to explore their positions. KOREAN CLOUT The veteran negotiator of conflicts in the Balkans also predicted Washington would hold talks with the North Koreans to prepare for the resumption in Beijing. "I would imagine there will be some," he said. "If there is value to direct contacts we would have them." The fourth round of talks was the first in 13 months and the longest so far, raising hope that the sides were negotiating seriously after previous sessions involved scant back-and-forth to resolve differences. Still, Hill said it had been unclear if the North Korean negotiators had enough clout to strike a deal and the break would allow time to see how much backing they had from the government in Pyongyang. Hill, who said he tried to sleep well and exercise to avoid getting ill-tempered, said the North Koreans did not show the anger they had a reputation for during the marathon talks. But while he was close enough to go for walks with the Japanese and South Korean negotiators, his contacts with the North Koreans were less relaxed. "They were very careful, very formalistic," he said. © Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 16 Deseret News: Bush signs energy bill [deseretnews.com] Tuesday, August 9, 2005 Path is smoothed for oil shale development in Utah By Nedra Pickler Associated Press ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — As crude oil prices hit a new high Monday, President Bush signed a bill that will give billions in tax breaks to encourage homegrown energy production but won't quickly reduce high gasoline prices or the nation's dependence on foreign oil. "This bill is not going to solve our energy challenges overnight," Bush said in a speech shortly before he signed the 1,724-page bill at the Sandia National Laboratories. "Most of the serious problems, such as high gasoline costs or the rising dependence on foreign oil, have developed over decades. It's going to take years of focused effort to alleviate those problems." In the near term, the new legislation will extend daylight-saving time, give tax breaks to drivers who buy cars with fuel-efficient technologies, try to jump-start the construction of new nuclear power plants and smooth the way for development of oil-shale deposits in Utah and other Western states. Supporters say that in the long run, the new law will refocus the nation's energy priorities and promote cleaner and alternative sources of energy. "The bill recognizes that America is the world's leader in technology and that we've got to use technology to be the world's leader in energy conservation," Bush said. Environmental groups and other opponents say the bill amounts to a gift to energy companies that does nothing new to promote renewable energy. The bill's price tag — $12.3 billion over 10 years — is twice what the White House had first proposed. It does not include Bush's desire to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration. Drilling advocates, however, have a backup plan that is expected to unfold in mid-September. The measure funnels billions of dollars to energy companies, including tax breaks and loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants, clean coal technology and wind energy. Before signing the bill, Bush toured the Energy Department's national solar thermal test facility, which was built in 1976 in response to the oil embargo and energy crisis. Bush walked in a field of mirrored solar panels, wearing shirt sleeves and sunglasses to ward off the bright midday sun. For consumers, the bill would provide tax credits for buying hybrid gasoline-electric cars and making energy-conservation improvements with better windows and appliances in new and existing homes. Also, beginning in 2007, the measure extends daylight-saving time by one month to save energy, starting three weeks earlier in the spring, and adding a week in the fall. Bush traveled from his Texas ranch to sign the bill in the home state of Republican Sen. Pete Domenici, chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Domenici was the driving force in ending a four-year standoff in Congress and getting the measure passed with bipartisan support last month. New Mexico Sen. Jeff Bingaman, the Energy Committee's top Democrat, praised the passage of the bill but said more must be done to tap the potential of renewable energy, address global warming and use less oil from overseas. The bill did not "markedly reduce these imports," Bingaman said in a statement. "We need to build a consensus around effective steps to use less oil in our transportation sector, which is the basic cause of our increasing reliance on oil imports." Shortly before Bush signed the law, crude oil rose to a record high of more than $63 a barrel, reflecting market fears over the U.S. embassy closure in Saudi Arabia due to security threats and concerns that shutdowns of U.S. oil refineries would reduce supply. Also Monday, the Energy Department reported that the retail price of gasoline rose nearly 8 cents last week to average $2.37 a gallon nationwide, a new high. Deb Callahan, president of the League of Conservation Voters, said the bill will do nothing to improve the environment, reduce dependence on foreign oil or bring down gas prices even in the long term. "They did as little as they possibly could in order to have a nice talking point," she said. © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 17 [NYTr] Hiroshima Cover-Up Exposed Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 15:39:45 -0500 (CDT) UNDISC_RECIPS,WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Doug Hunt (activ-l) Editor & Publisher - Aug 5, 2005 HIROSHIMA COVER-UP EXPOSED by Greg Mitchell In the weeks following the atomic attacks on Japan almost 60 years ago, and then for decades afterward, the United States engaged in airtight suppression of all film shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the bombings. This included footage shot by U.S. military crews and Japanese newsreel teams. In addition, for many years all but a handful of newspaper photographs were seized or prohibited. The public did not see any of the newsreel footage for 25 years, and the U.S. military film remained hidden for nearly four decades. The full story of this atomic cover-up is told fully for the first time at _Editor & Publisher_, as the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombings approaches later this week. Some of the long-suppressed footage will be aired on television this Saturday. Six weeks ago,_ E&P_ broke the story that articles written by famed Chicago _Daily News_ war correspondent George Weller about the effects of the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki were finally published, in Japan, almost six decades after they had been spiked by U.S. officials. This drew national attention, but suppressing film footage shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was even more significant, as this country rushed into the nuclear age with its citizens having neither a true understanding of the effects of the bomb on human beings, nor why the atomic attacks drew condemnation around the world. As editor of _Nuclear Times_ magazine in the 1980s, I met Herbert Sussan, one of the members of the U.S. military film crew, and Erik Barnouw, the famed documentarian who first showed some of the Japanese footage on American TV in 1970. In fact, that newsreel footage might have disappeared forever if the Japanese filmmakers had not hidden one print from the Americans in a ceiling. The color U.S. military footage would remain hidden until the early 1980s, and has never been fully aired. It rests today at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland, in the form of 90,000 feet of raw footage labeled #342 USAF. When that footage finally emerged, I corresponded and spoke with the man at the center of this drama: Lt. Col. (Ret.) Daniel A. McGovern, who directed the U.S. military filmmakers in 1945-1946, managed the Japanese footage, and then kept watch on all of the top-secret material for decades. "I always had the sense," McGovern told me, "that people in the Atomic Energy Commission were sorry we had dropped the bomb. The Air Force -- it was also sorry. I was told by people in the Pentagon that they didn't want those [film] images out because they showed effects on man, woman and child. .. They didn't want the general public to know what their weapons had done -- at a time they were planning on more bomb tests. We didn't want the material out because ... we were sorry for our sins." Sussan, meanwhile, struggled for years to get some of the American footage aired on national TV, taking his request as high as President Truman, Robert F. Kennedy and Edward R. Murrow, to no avail. More recently, McGovern declared that Americans should have seen the damage wrought by the bomb. "The main reason it was classified was ... because of the horror, the devastation," he said. Because the footage shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was hidden for so long, the atomic bombings quickly sank, unconfronted and unresolved, into the deeper recesses of American awareness, as a costly nuclear arms race, and nuclear proliferation, accelerated. The atomic cover-up also reveals what can happen in any country that carries out deadly attacks on civilians in any war and then keeps images of what occurred from its own people. Ten years ago, I co-authored (with Robert Jay Lifton) the book Hiroshima in _America_, and new material has emerged since. On August 6, and on following days, the Sundance cable channel will air "Original Child Bomb," a prize-winning documentary on which I worked. The film includes some of the once-censored footage -- along with home movies filmed by McGovern in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. On August 6, 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb over Hiroshima, killing at least 70,000 instantly and perhaps 50,000 more in the days and months to follow. Three days later, it exploded another atomic bomb over Nagasaki, slightly off target, killing 40,000 immediately and dooming tens of thousands of others. Within days, Japan had surrendered, and the U.S. readied plans for occupying the defeated country -- and documenting the first atomic catastrophe. But the Japanese also wanted to study it. Within days of the second atomic attack, officials at the Tokyo-based newsreel company Nippon Eigasha discussed shooting film in the two stricken cities. In early September, just after the Japanese surrender, and as the American occupation began, director Sueo Ito set off for Nagasaki. There his crew filmed the utter destruction near ground zero and scenes in hospitals of the badly burned and those suffering from the lingering effects of radiation. On September 15, another crew headed for Hiroshima. When the first rushes came back to Toyko, Akira Iwasaki, the chief producer, felt "every frame burned into my brain," he later said. At this point, the American public knew little about conditions in the atomic cities beyond Japanese assertions that a mysterious affliction was attacking many of those who survived the initial blasts (claims that were largely taken to be propaganda). Newspaper photographs of victims were non-existent, or censored. _Life_ magazine would later observe that for years "the world ... knew only the physical facts of atomic destruction." Tens of thousands of American GIs occupied the two cities. Because of the alleged absence of residual radiation, no one was urged to take precautions. Then, on October 24, 1945, a Japanese cameraman in Nagasaki was ordered to stop shooting by an American military policeman. His film, and then the rest of the 26,000 feet of Nippon Eisasha footage, was confiscated by the U.S. General Headquarters (GHQ). An order soon arrived banning all further filming. It was at this point that Lt. Daniel McGovern took charge. In early September, 1945, less than a month after the two bombs fell, Lt. McGovern -- who as a member of Hollywood's famed First Motion Picture Unit shot some of the footage for William Wyler's "Memphis Belle" -- had become one of the first Americans to arrive in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He was a director with the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, organized by the Army the previous November to study the effects of the air campaign against Germany, and now Japan. As he made plans to shoot the official American record, McGovern learned about the seizure of the Japanese footage. He felt it wouldbe a waste to not take advantage of the newsreel footage, noting in a letter to his superiors that "the conditions under which it was taken will not be duplicated, until another atomic bomb is released under combat conditions." McGovern proposed hiring some of the Japanese crew to edit and "caption" the material, so it would have "scientific value." He took charge of this effort in early January 1946, even as the Japanese feared that, when they were done, they would never see even a scrap of their film again. At the same time, McGovern was ordered by General Douglas MacArthur on January 1, 1946 to document the results of the U.S. air campaign in more than 20 Japanese cities. His crew would shoot exclusively on color film, Kodachrome and Technicolor, rarely used at the time even in Hollywood. McGovern assembled a crew of eleven, including two civilians. Third in command was a young lieutenant from New York named Herbert Sussan. The unit left Tokyo in a specially outfitted train, and made it to Nagasaki. "Nothing and no one had prepared me for the devastation I met there," Sussan later told me. "We were the only people with adequate ability and equipment to make a record of this holocaust. ... I felt that if we did not capture this horror on film, no one would ever really understand the dimensions of what had happened. At that time people back home had not seen anything but black and white pictures of blasted buildings or a mushroom cloud." Along with the rest of McGovern's crew, Sussan documented the physical effects of the bomb, including the ghostly shadows of vaporized civilians burned into walls; and, most chillingly, dozens of people in hospitals who had survived (at least momentarily) and were asked to display their burns, scars, and other lingering effects for the camera as a warning to the world. At the Red Cross Hospital in Hiroshima, a Japanese physician traced the hideous, bright red scars that covered several of the patients --- and then took off his white doctor's shirt and displayed his own burns and cuts. After sticking a camera on a rail car and building their own tracks through the ruins, the Americans filmed hair-raising tracking shots that could have been lifted right from a Hollywood movie. Their chief cameramen was a Japanese man, Harry Mimura, who in 1943 had shot "Sanshiro Sugata," the first feature film by a then-unknown Japanese director named Akira Kurosawa. While all this was going on, the Japanese newsreel team was completing its work of editing and labeling all their black & white footage into a rough cut of just under three hours. At this point, several members of Japanese team took the courageous step of ordering from the lab a duplicate of the footage they had shot before the Americans took over the project. Director Ito later said: "The four of us agreed to be ready for ten years of hard labor in the case of being discovered." One incomplete, silent print would reside in a ceiling until the Occupation ended. The negative of the finished Japanese film, nearly 15,000 feet of footage on 19 reels, was sent off to the U.S. in early May 1946. The Japanese were also ordered to include in this shipment all photographs and related material. The footage would be labeled SECRET and not emerge from the shadows for more than 20 years. The following month, McGovern was abruptly ordered to return to the U.S. He hauled the 90,000 feet of color footage, on dozens of reels in huge footlockers, to the Pentagon and turned it over to General Orvil Anderson. Locked up and declared top secret, it did not see the light of day for more than 30 years. McGovern would be charged with watching over it. Sussan would become obsessed with finding it and getting it aired. Fearful that his film might get "buried," McGovern stayed on at the Pentagon as an aide to Gen. Anderson, who was fascinated by the footage and had no qualms about showing it to the American people. "He was that kind of man, he didn't give a damn what people thought," McGovern told me. "He just wanted the story told." In an article in his hometown Buffalo Evening News, McGovern said that he hoped that "this epic will be made available to the American public." He planned to call the edited movie "Japan in Defeat." Once they eyeballed the footage, however, most of the top brass didn't want it widely shown and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was also opposed, according to McGovern. It nixed a Warner Brothers feature film project based on the footage that Anderson had negotiated, while paying another studio about $80,000 to help make four training films. In a March 3, 1947 memo, Francis E. Rundell, a major in the Air Corps, explained that the film would be classified "secret." This was determined "after study of subject material, especially concerning footage taken at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is believed that the information contained in the films should be safeguarded until cleared by the Atomic Energy Commission." After the training films were completed, the status would be raised to "Top Secret" pending final classification by the AEC. The color footage was shipped to the Wright-Patterson base in Ohio. McGovern went along after being told to put an I.D. number on the film "and not let anyone touch it -- and that's the way it stayed," as he put it. After cataloging it, he placed it in a vault in the top-secret area. "Dan McGovern stayed with the film all the time," Sussan later said. "He told me they could not release the film [because] what it showed was too horrible." Sussan wrote a letter to President Truman, suggesting that a film based on the footage "would vividly and clearly reveal the implications and effects of the weapons that confront us at this serious moment in our history." A reply from a Truman aide threw cold water on that idea, saying such a film would lack "wide public appeal." McGovern, meanwhile, continued to "babysit" the film, now at Norton Air Force base in California. "It was never out of my control," he said later, but he couldn't make a film out of it any more than Sussan could (but unlike Herb, he at least knew where it was). At the same time, McGovern was looking after the Japanese footage. Fearful that it might get lost forever in the military/government bureaucracy, he secretly made a 16 mm print and deposited it in the U.S. Air Force Central Film Depository at Wright-Patterson. There it remained out of sight, and generally out of mind. (The original negative and production materials remain missing, according to Abe Mark Nornes, who teaches at the University of Michigan and has researched the Japanese footage more than anyone.) The Japanese government repeatedly asked the U.S. for the full footage of what was known in that country as "the film of illusion," to no avail. A rare article about what it called this "sensitive" dispute appeared in _The New York Times_ on May 18, 1967, declaring right in its headline that the film had been "Suppressed by U.S. for 22 Years." Surprisingly, it revealed that while some of the footage was already in Japan (likely a reference to the film hidden in the ceiling), the U.S. had put a "hold" on the Japanese using it -- even though the American control of that country had ceased many years earlier. Despite rising nuclear fears in the 1960s, before and after the Cuban Missile Crisis, few in the U.S. challenged the consensus view that dropping the bomb on two Japanese cities was necessary. The United States maintained its "first-use" nuclear policy: Under certain circumstances it would strike first with the bomb and ask questions later. In other words, there was no real taboo against using the bomb. This notion of acceptability had started with Hiroshima. A firm line against using nuclear weapons had been drawn -- in the sand. The U.S., in fact, had threatened to use nuclear weapons during the Cuban Missile Crisis and on other occasions. On Sept. 12, 1967, the Air Force transferred the Japanese footage to the National Archives Audio Visual Branch in Washington, with the film "not to be released without approval of DOD (Department of Defense)." Then, one morning in the summer of 1968, Erik Barnouw, author of landmark histories of film and broadcasting, opened his mail to discover a clipping from a Tokyo newspaper sent by a friend. It indicated that the United States had finally shipped to Japan a copy of black & white newsreel footage shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Japanese had negotiated with the State Department for its return. From the Pentagon, Barnouw learned in 1968 that the original nitrate film had been quietly turned over to the National Archives, so he went to take a look. Soon Barnouw realized that, despite its marginal film quality, "enough of the footage was unforgettable in its implications, and historic in its importance, to warrant duplicating all of it," he later wrote. Attempting to create a subtle, quiet, even poetic, black and white film, he and his associates cut it from 160 to 16 minutes, with a montage of human effects clustered near the end for impact. Barnouw arranged a screening at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, and invited the press. A throng turned out and sat in respectful silence at its finish. (One can only imagine what impact the color footage with many more human effects would have had.) "Hiroshima-Nagasaki 1945" proved to be a sketchy but quite moving document of the aftermath of the bombing, captured in grainy but often startling black and white images: shadows of objects or people burned into walls, ruins of schools, miles of razed landscape viewed from the roof of a building. In the weeks ahead, however, none of the (then) three TV networks expressed interest in airing it. "Only NBC thought it might use the film," Barnouw later wrote, "if it could find a 'news hook.' We dared not speculate what kind of event this might call for." But then an article appeared in _Parade_ magazine, and an editorial in the _Boston Globe_ blasted the networks, saying that everyone in the country should see this film: "Television has brought the sight of war into America's sitting rooms from Vietnam. Surely it can find 16 minutes of prime time to show Americans what the first A-bombs, puny by today's weapons, did to people and property 25 years ago." This at last pushed public television into the void. What was then called National Educational Television (NET) agreed to show the documentary on August 3, 1970, to coincide with the 25th anniversary of dropping the bomb. "I feel that classifying all of this filmed material was a misuse of the secrecy system since none of it had any military or national security aspect at all," Barnouw told me. "The reason must have been--that if the public had seen it and Congressmen had seen it -- it would have been much harder to appropriate money for more bombs." About a decade later, by pure chance, Herb Sussan would spark the emergence of the American footage, ending its decades in the dark. In the mid-1970s, Japanese antinuclear activists, led by a Tokyo teacher named Tsutomu Iwakura, discovered that few pictures of the aftermath of the atomic bombings existed in their country. Many had been seized by the U.S. military after the war, they learned, and taken out of Japan. The Japanese had as little visual exposure to the true effects of the bomb as most Americans. Activists managed to track down hundreds of pictures in archives and private collections and published them in a popular book. In 1979 they mounted an exhibit at the United Nations in New York. There, by chance, Iwakura met Sussan, who told him about the U.S. military footage. Iwakura made a few calls and found that the color footage, recently declassified, might be at the National Archives. A trip to Washington, D.C. verified this. He found eighty reels of film, labeled #342 USAF, with the reels numbered 11000 to 11079. About one-fifth of the footage covered the atomic cities. According to a shot list, reel #11010 included, for example: "School, deaf and dumb, blast effect, damaged ... Commercial school demolished ... School, engineering, demolished. ... School, Shirayama elementary, demolished, blast effect ... Tenements, demolished." The film had been quietly declassified a few years earlier, but no one in the outside world knew it. An archivist there told me at the time, "If no one knows about the film to ask forit, it's as closed as when it was classified." Eventually 200,000 Japanese citizens contributed half a million dollars and Iwakura was able to buy the film. He then traveled around Japan filming survivors who had posed for Sussan and McGovern in 1946. Iwakura quickly completed a documentary called "Prophecy" and in late spring 1982 arranged for a New York premiere. That fall a small part of the McGovern/Sussan footage turned up for the first time in an American film, one of the sensations of York Film Festival, called "Dark Circle." It's co-director, Chris Beaver, told me, "No wonder the government didn't want us to see it. I think they didn't want Americans to see themselves in that picture. It's one thing to know about that and another thing to see it." Despite this exposure, not a single story had yet appeared in an American newspaper about the shooting of the footage, its suppression or release. And Sussan was now ill with a form of lymphoma doctors had found in soldiers exposed to radiation in atomic tests during the 1950s -- or in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In late 1982, editing _Nuclear Times_, I met Sussan and Erik Barnouw -- and talked on several occasions with Daniel McGovern, out in Northridge, California. "It would make a fine documentary even today," McGovern said of the color footage. "Wouldn't it be wonderful to have a movie of the burning of Atlanta?" After he hauled the footage back to the Pentagon, McGovern said, he was told that under no circumstances would the footage be released for outside use. "They were fearful of it being circulated,"McGovern said. He confirmed that the color footage, like the black and white, had been declassified over time, taking it from top secret to "for public release" (but only if the public knew about it and asked for it). Still, the question of precisely why the footage remained secret for so long lingered. Here McGovern added his considerable voice. "The main reason it was classified was...because of the horror, the devastation," he said. "The medical effects were pretty gory. ... The attitude was: do not show any medical effects. Don't make people sick." But who was behind this? "I always had the sense," McGovern answered, "that people in the AEC were sorry they had dropped the bomb. The Air Force -- it was also sorry. I was told by people in the Pentagon that they didn't want those images out because they showed effects on man, woman and child. But the AEC, they were the ones that stopped it from coming out. They had power of God over everybody," he declared. "If it had anything to do with nukes, they had to see it. They were the ones who destroyed a lot of film and pictures of the first U.S. nuclear tests after the war." Even so, McGovern believed, his footage might have surfaced "if someone had grabbed the ball and run with it but the AEC did not want it released." As "Dark Circle" director Chris Beaver had said, "With the government trying to sell the public on a new civil defense program and Reagan arguing that a nuclear war is survivable, this footage could be awfully bad publicity." In the summer of 1984, I made my own pilgrimage to the atomic cities, to walk in the footsteps of Dan McGovern and Herb Sussan, and meet some of the people they filmed in 1946. By then, the McGovern/ Sussan footage had turned up in several new documentaries. On September 2, 1985, however, Herb Sussan passed away. His final request to his children: Would they scatter his ashes at ground zero in Hiroshima? In the mid-1990s, researching _Hiroshima in America_, a book I would write with Robert Jay Lifton, I discovered the deeper context for suppression of the U.S. Army film: it was part of a broad effort to suppress a wide range of material related to the atomic bombings, including photographs, newspaper reports on radiation effects, information about the decision to drop the bomb, even a Hollywood movie. The 50th anniversary of the bombing drew extensive print and television coverage -- and wide use of excerpts from the McGovern/Sussan footage -- but no strong shift in American attitudes on the use of the bomb. Then, in 2003, as adviser to a documentary film, "Original Child Bomb," I urged director Carey Schonegevel to draw on the atomic footage as much as possible. She not only did so but also obtained from McGovern's son copies of home movies he had shot in Japan while shooting the official film. "Original Child Bomb" went on to debut at the 2004 Tribeca Film Festival, win a major documentary award, and this week, on August 6 and 7, it will debut on the Sundance cable channel. After 60 years at least a small portion of that footage will finally reach part of the American public in the unflinching and powerful form its creators intended. Only then will the Americans who see it be able to fully judge for themselves what McGovern and Sussan were trying to accomplish in shooting the film, why the authorities felt they had to suppress it, and what impact their footage, if widely aired, might have had on the nuclear arms race -- and the nuclear proliferation that plagues, and endangers, us today. * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 18 [NYTr] The Bomb: Why "We" Did It (Newsweek, 1995) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 15:39:42 -0500 (CDT) WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Note that the article below from newsweek is ten years old.] Newsweek via Children of the Manhattan Project - July 24, 1995 http://www.childrenofthemanhattanproject.org/LC/I-002.htm "Why We Did It!" by Evan Thomas Newsweek Magazine - July 24, 1995 "The blast at Hiroshima echoes 56 years later. But what did the decision look like at the time, to the men who chose to drop the bomb, that summer of 1945". In August 1945, the GI's waiting to invade Japan had no doubt about the wisdom of obliterating Hiroshima and Nagasaki with nuclear weapons. Upon hearing the news, "we whooped and yelled like mad, we downed all the beer we'd been stashing away," one dogface later recalled. "We shot bullets in the air and danced between the tent rows." Paul Fussel, a 21-year-old second lieutenant leading a rifle platoon, remembered that "for all the fake manliness of our facades, we cried with relief and joy. We were actually going to live. We were going to grow up to adulthood after all." More than a half century later, relief has given way to uncertainty and regret. According to a recent Gallup poll, senior citizens and "baby-boomers" still approve of the bombing, but younger Americans, particularly those under the age of 30, believe that dropping the bomb on Japan was wrong. The Smithsonian Institution had to drastically scale down a 50th anniversary exhibit on the flight of the Enola Gay, the B-29 that dropped the first atomic bomb, because angry veterans protested that the museum's politically correct curators made the Japanese look like innocent victims. Some modern historians (revisionists) argue that dropping the bomb was not only immoral but unnecessary. They contend that Japan was beaten by the summer of 1945 and would have collapsed without an invasion. Indeed, a few argue that the bomb actually prolonged the war. The real reason we dropped the bomb, they say, was not to finish off Japan but to intimidate our next enemy - the Soviet Union. Such judgments have the quality of perfect hindsight, declaring not only what we should have done, but what we should have thought. /The more revealing question may be, what were decision makers saying and thinking at the time? /What pressures did they labor under? Through the diaries and contemporaneous accounts of President Truman and his top advisers, Newsweek has reconstructed a narrative of the decision to drop the bomb. What emerges most strikingly is the sense of urgency and anxiety - and the lack of a clear, cogent debate. The American public in the summer of 1945 was war-weary, far more disgruntled than we now remember. The scientists working on the bomb were not quite sure what they were making - or if it would even work. The top policymakers/ /were worried about trying to end the war quickly, not abstract notions of morality. The decision they made was understandable, even inevitable, under the circumstances. In a real sense, there was no decision, no careful weighing of the pros and cons. Like most acts of embattled governments in times of war, this one was driven by the interplay of temperament and personality and the sheer momentum of events. With each passing year, Harry Truman has become identified in the public mind with decisiveness and common sense. "the buck stops here" and "Give 'em hell Harry" have become comforting cliches. But when Truman succeeded Franklin Roosevelt on April 12, 1945, he was in a state of shock. "I'm not big enough. I'm not big enough for this job," he told a friend, Sen. George Aiken of Vermont. "Boys," he said tearfully to a group of reporters, "if you ever pray, pray for me now." Truman wasn't fully briefed on the atom bomb for another two weeks. Then he was lectured, somewhat impatiently, by General Leslie R. Groves, the man in charge of the Manhattan Project, the all-out top-secret effort to build the atom bomb. In Groves' mind, Truman's only job was to acquiesce. The new president went along for the ride, Groves later boasted, "like a little boy on a toboggan." Such hubris was characteristic of Groves, a three-star general who earlier had made his reputation building the Pentagon. Outwardly confident, somewhat overweight from compulsively munching chocolates, Groves would keep senior officials waiting outside his office for an hour. Then he would poke his head out and demand, "What are you doing here?" The so-called Atom General had almost 200,000 people working on the project at 37 secret plants and laboratories, and only a few knew what they were really working on. Groves prided himself on his ability to manipulate. Noticing that Truman had faithfully hung a portrait of FDR on his wall ("I'm trying to do what he would like," said Truman), Groves played on his insecurities. If the A-bomb project came to naught, Groves told Truman, it would "cast a lot of reflection on Mr. Roosevelt." For all his cockiness, Groves was worried that his bomb would be a dud. Others in the military were skeptical about a mystery weapon purported to unlock the power of the universe. "The damn thing" will never work, said Adm. William Leahy, the chief of staff at the White House and an old "ordnance man" in the navy. Groves had spent $2 billion ($26 billion in today's dollars) on the project. Failure, he knew, would not only make FDR look bad. It would result in "the greatest congressional investigation of all times" - with General Groves in the dock. The scientists working on the bomb at the Manhattan Project's top-secret laboratories in the New Mexico desert were confident that they could make a big bang - but they weren't sure how big. More cautious military planners argued that the bomb would have to be followed up by a raid of B-29's dropping incendiary bombs to guarantee a large conflagration. The planners did not think the bomb would be big enough to end the war in one blow. Groves was determined to demonstrate the power of what he called "the gadget." But by the late spring of 1945 he was running out of good targets. Gen. Curtis LeMay of the 20th Air Force was methodically destroying the cities of Japan with numerous firebombing raids. During 10 days in March, 11,600 B-29 sorties had wiped out 32 square miles of the four largest Japanese cities, killing more than 150,000 people. A raid on Tokyo on May 25 created a gigantic firestorm; bomber crews in the last waves could smell burning flesh thousands of feet below. Reading the bomb-damage assessments, Groves worried that he would not be able to find a city sufficiently unsullied to serve as a proper showcase for his new terror weapon. Hiroshima, a city of 280,000 people at the southern end of Honshu, the largest of the Japanese islands, was a possibility. According to a report prepared by Groves' staff, the city was surrounded by hills that would "produce a focusing effect which would considerably increase the blast damage." But, crisscrossed by rivers, Hiroshima was not the best candidate for a firestorm. A better target, Groves believed, was Kyoto. The ancient capital with its Buddhist and Shinto shrines, had been spared so far. Groves liked the fact that the city was an "intellectual center." The victims would be "more apt to appreciate the significance" of the bomb. Such thinking seems ghoulish now, but it was not out of the mainstream in the spring of 1945. Bombing civilian centers was anathema at the beginning of the war, but after the London blitz and the day-and-night raids against Germany in 1943-44, city-bashing had become routine, accepted by a war-weary public. In its March 19, 1945 issue, Newsweek celebrated the fact that "perhaps one million persons were made homeless" by LeMay's firebombing of Tokyo. It seemed clear, after the kamikaze attacks and fights to the death in Okinawa and Iwo Jima, that breaking Japan's will would take drastic measures. Still, the Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson, was disturbed by the firebombing of Japan. Stimson was an old-school gentleman, the unofficial chairman of the East Coast establishment. He was a warrior - at the age of 50, he had asked for a combat command in the first world war - but he believed in civilized war, with the rules of fair play. As secretary of state in the late 1920's, he had abolished America's code-breaking capability because "gentlemen do not open other gentlemen's mail." Now, as secretary of war, he thought that he had insisted on "precision" bombing, and he protested against the wholesale slaughter wreaked by General LeMay's bombing campaign. Stimson was still stewing over the May 25th firebombing of Tokyo several days later when he called General Groves and demanded to know the target list for the A-bomb. Groves was balky about telling him. "On this matter, I am the kingpin," insisted Stimson. Groves grudgingly replied that the target was Kyoto. Stimson, who had visited the shrines decades before, said no. Smashing Japan's cultural center was wrong. It was akin to the Japanese targeting the Lincoln Memorial. Stimson was haunted by the bomb, which in his diary he also called "the thing", "the dire", "the dreadful", "the terrible", and "the diabolical". The night after he ordered Groves not to bomb Kyoto, he was unable to sleep. In his diary, he wrote that the bomb "may destroy or perfect International Civilization." The weapon could be "a means for World Peace." Or, he wrote, it may be "Frankenstein". Stimson's ambivalence was the product of his background. As a Wall Street lawyer, he had tried to be ethical, refusing to represent seedy clients. But his real-world experience had also taught him that expediency was sometimes necessary. This mix of principle and calculation was blended into his strongly held view that the United States must be the single greatest power after the war, and that it was his job - his personal responsibility as an arbiter of the WASP upper class - to lay the groundwork. However frightening, the bomb could be a "mastercard" in the great game of diplomacy. "I called it a royal straight flush, and we mustn't be a fool about the way we play it," he wrote in his diary. Stimson's sense of duty weighed on him; at 77, he was physically spent. He still rode and played paddle tennis at his estate on Long Island. On one evening in June of 1945, he told his assistant, John McCloy, that he would probably have to skip an important meeting, scheduled at the White House the following day, to discuss plans for the invasion of Japan. The landings on Kyushu island, on beaches named after cars (Beach Buick, Beach Cadillac, etc.), were scheduled to begin November 1. Stimson was all done in, he told McCloy, he had to rest. That evening, at his mansion off Rock Creek Park, Stimson did sit and listen as McCloy, a fellow Wall Street lawyer, worried aloud about the cost of invading Japan. From Europe and all over the Pacific, 1 million men were being assembled for the final assault on the homeland. Pentagon planners were predicting that 20,000 American soldiers would die in the first month. In fact, the death toll might well have gone higher. Japanese draftees were being trained to strap on explosives and hurl themselves at tanks, while high-school girls were equipped with carpenter's awls to guard their honor. "We should have our heads examined if we don't consider a political solution," McCoy said. He had a carrot-and-stick proposal for coaxing the Japanese to lay down arms. Let them keep their emperor, he said; it will allow them to save face. And warn that if they don't surrender, the United States will use a terrible new weapon able to destroy cities in a single blow. Stimson seemed interested, but he was weary; he could feel a migraine coming on. The next afternoon, the aging statesman did drag himself to the White House, but he said little while the different service chiefs voiced their parochial concerns. The navy wanted to blockade Japan into submission, the air force to bomb, the army to invade. The Joint Chiefs were just getting up to leave when President Truman turned to McCloy and asked if he had something to say. McCloy looked at Stimson, who said, "Say what you feel about it." McCloy made his case for letting the emperor keep his throne, coupled with the threat of dropping the bomb. At the mention of it, McCloy felt a chill in the room. The bomb was too secret to be discussed, even at the highest levels. In any case, no one supported McCloy's idea. A warning was too risky. Why alert the Japanese Air Force that a surprise attack was on the way. And suppose the bomb fizzled? As for the terms of surrender, the Allies had long agreed that there would be none; nothing less than unconditional surrender would do. The meeting broke up without much discussion. There was no real debate. Yet McCloy's proposal was as close as the principal policymakers would ever come to formally considering an alternative to dropping the bomb. In the days that followed, Stimson did take up McCloy's idea and try to privately lobby Truman. On July 2 he wrote the president, urging "a carefully timed warning" to the Japanese before using the bomb. "I believe Japan is susceptible to reason," he wrote. "Japan is not a nation composed wholly of mad fanatics." But Truman wasn't listening. He respected Stimson, but he found him formidable, remote - not someone he could easily converse with, much less share any fears or doubts. Never one for idle theorizing, the president had no time for philosophical speculations about the true nature of the Japanese people. In the first week of July, he was preoccupied with the upcoming summit meeting, code named Terminal, in the Berlin suburb of Potsdam to settle postwar claims between the Allies. The United States was by far the strongest of the Big Three Allies, but Truman felt anxious about the reputations and experience of the war leaders with whom he was about to parley. On July 6, 1945 the president set sail aboard the battleship Augusta for Europe and his first meeting with Joseph Stalin and Winston Churchill. Truman's close companion on the voyage was his just-appointed secretary of state, Jimmy Byrnes. A South Carolina pol who practiced patronage the way Henry Stimson practiced his backhand. Byrnes had been a mentor to Truman in the U. S. Senate. He was cagey and tough-minded, a self-made man who trusted no one. A little sheepish that he, not his mentor, was in the White House, Truman deferred to Byrne's political judgment. The new secretary of state was dead set against making any kind of deal with Japan. The public mood, as the former senator knew, was not merciful. The Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor and the Bataan Death March were still fresh memories. A recent newspaper photo had shown a Japanese soldier raising his sword to behead an American POW, who was bent over, on his knees. A poll showed that a third of Americans wanted to execute the Japanese emperor. Only 7 percent thought Hirohito should keep his throne. Byrnes did not have to belabor the polling numbers as the two politicians played long hands of poker in their stateroom on the Augusta. During his first speech in Congress, Truman had received his most ardent ovation when he demanded unconditional surrender. The novice president did not want to look as though he were going soft now. Byrnes had another angle he wanted to pursue with Truman. The new secretary of state, who had little other foreign-policy experience, had been at the Big Three conference at Yalta the previous winter. He had watched as Stalin began to signal his postwar ambitions in Eastern Europe. He could see that the Soviet Union would pass quickly from ally to rival. If the Russians knew that the United States had an atom bomb - and the willingness to use it - they would be "more manageable," as Byrnes put it. Truman was equally determined to show that he could stand up to the Kremlin. Mocked as a "sissy" for his thick glasses and clumsiness as a little boy, Truman was never one to back off. In April, after his first meeting with Soviet Foreign Minister Molotov, a contentious affair, Truman had crowed, "I gave him the one-two, right to the jaw." Now, as Truman arrived in Potsdam, he was well aware that the atomic bomb was a diplomatic tool as well as a weapon of war. Stalin, Truman quickly determined, was "an S.O.B." who thought of himself as "The Big I Am." The Kremlin leader had some demands that were "dynamite," Truman wrote in his diary. "But I have some dynamite too which I am not exploding now." While the Allied chieftains were testing each other at Potsdam, the empire of Japan was collapsing. Through the code-breaking operation known as "Magic", U. S. intelligence learned in mid-July that the Japanese had begun to send peace feelers through Tokyo's ambassador to Moscow. Hirohito, it seemed, was not the butcher of the newsreels but rather shy and dutiful. "It is His Majesty's heart's desire to see the swift termination of the war," read one cable intercepted by Magic. Hirohito did have one unalterable condition: he wanted to keep his throne to avoid social chaos and military rule after the surrender. As McCloy had predicted to Stimson back in June, he wanted a way to save face. Revisionist historians have suggested that the Japanese peace feelers might have been an opening, an opportunity to end the war without using the bomb. From a military perspective, there was no particular urgency to end the war right away. The bloody campaign of "island hopping" was essentially over, and the invasion of Japan was not scheduled to begin for another three months. A strategic-bombing survey conducted by the War Department after the war concluded that Japan would have surrendered before Nov. 1 - even if the atom bomb had never been used. Why, the "revisionists" ask, were American policymakers in such a rush to drop the bomb? Why didn't they just wait for Japan to fall like a piece of rotten fruit? That is a much simpler question to ask in retrospect than it was for policymakers to focus on at the time. From Europe, military commanders were warning about the low morale of troops who had already fought their war against Germany and had no stomach to fight another one against Japan. They wanted to go home - right away; not next week or next month. Labor leaders at home were reporting restiveness against wartime wage controls, and American families everywhere were tired of sacrifice. They wanted the war over with as quickly as possible. After Pearl Harbor, few Americans were willing to trust the Japanese. They would have been very wary of negotiating with the enemy. And, in fact, diehards in the Japanese military did not want to deal. They wanted to commit national suicide. "Would not it be wondrous for this whole nation to be destroyed like a beautiful flower?" implored General Anami, the war minister. There were other complications as well: Japan had made its diplomatic overtures to Moscow, but Stalin had no interest in making peace. In late July the Kremlin dictator was pushing up Soviet plans to invade Manchuria, occupied by the Japanese army. To set up a back channel between Tokyo and Washington would have been difficult. If Truman had tried to make a separate peace with the Japanese - and the story leaked - he would have been pilloried from Moscow to Los Angeles. Indeed, under the circumstances, making peace with the Japanese was such a remote possibility that it does not appear to have been seriously discussed at Potsdam. The only voice agitating for a political solution belonged to Henry Stimson, and even his was edged with doubt. He was the one man who might have made a difference - who had both the standing and the breadth of vision to raise moral issues - and he was feeling cut out. Truman had not even invited him to come on the Augusta; the secretary of war had made his own way by army transport. Jimmy Byrnes, Stimson griped in his diary, was "hugging matters in this conference pretty close to his bosom." Stimson did, on several occasions, press Truman and Winston Churchill to back off from the demand for unconditional surrender and offer to allow the Japanese to keep their emperor. Still, he remained ambivalent about the bomb. It was a terrible and inhuman weapon. But he wanted the war over. If the United States did not use the bomb, he knew, it would continue to rain firebombs down on Japanese cities until Tokyo surrendered. If the bomb could end the war quickly, it might actually save lives. In the New Mexico desert, the scientists waiting anxiously for the first test of the atom bomb were laying bets. Enrico Fermi jokingly offered to wager anyone that the bomb would ignite the atmosphere or simply just incinerate New Mexico. Other scientists tried to guess at the bomb's "yield", with most betting on the low side, as low as 200 tons of TNT. In the cold predawn hours of July 16, the scientists put suntan lotion on their hands and faces and wore dark glasses. General Groves' only thoughts, he later recorded, were "what I would do if the countdown got to zero and nothing happened." At zero hour, a brilliant flash filled the sky. A column of fire, eerily colored green, red and blue scaled 10,000 feet straight up and billowed out, like a grotesque flower. Instrument needles jumped: the yield was between 15,000 and 20,000 tons of TNT. "The Little Boy", Groves cabled Stimson at Potsdam, is "husky." The news, Stimson wrote in his diary, produced a change "in my own psychology." The septuagenarian secretary of war "cut a gay caper", noted an aide. He was all relieved that he had something to show for the $2 billion the War Department had spent on the atomic project. "Well," he remarked, "I shall not be sent to prison in Fort Leavenworth." In his scratchy old-man's voice, buoyed for the first time in days, Stimson read Groves' account of the bomb to Truman and Byrnes. The test had been "successful beyond the most optimistic expectations of anyone," Groves wrote. The blinding light looked like "several suns at midday." The shock waves broke windows 125 miles away. The reports from Alamagordo described the bomb as "magnificent", "beautiful", "stupendous". Truman and Byrnes listened, transfixed. The president was "tremendously pepped up." Stimson noted in his diary. The other two leaders in the Big Three immediately noticed the American president's new confidence. Truman thereafter "bossed" the conference, observed Winston Churchill. Stalin greeted the news of the bomb coolly - while secretly ordering his minions to press harder on the Soviets' own atom-bomb project. On July 31, Truman gave the order to bomb Hiroshima as soon as weather permitted after August 2nd. "We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world," he wrote in his diary. "It may be the fire destruction prophesied in the Euphrates Valley Area, after Noah and his famous Ark." Having indulged in Biblical melodrama, he then engaged in some comforting psychological denial. He recorded that he had instructed Stimson to use the bomb "so that military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children... He and I are in accord. The target is a purely military one." In the moments after the bomb detonated over the target at 8:15 in the morning of August 6th, women ran shrieking into the rivers, with their skin hanging off them like shreds of their kimonos. Birds were ignited in midair. Perhaps 70,000 men, women and children, most of them nonmilitary, died instantly. An additional 50,000 died within months from radiation poisoning and burns. Looking down from the Enola Gay a few seconds after the blast, a crewman thought the city looked like "a pot of boiling black oil". Told of the successful attack as he sailed home from Europe aboard the Augusta, Truman announced to a group of sailors, "This is the greatest thing in history." He went off to see a comedy revue and laughed heartily at the entertainment. He was not being callous. The relief that the war might end made him giddy. Back in Washington, however, Stimson had a heart attack at 5 o'clock on the morning of August 8th. He wrote in his diary: "Tell H. T. I must resign." If there was little debate over the moral rights and wrongs of atomizing Hiroshima, there was even less over Nagasaki; indeed, no debate at all. The operation was left to Groves, who was eager to show that an "implosion" bomb, which had cost $400 million to develop, could work as well as the "gun-type" bomb that had destroyed Hiroshima. Exploding over the largest Roman Catholic cathedral in the Far East, the Nagasaki bomb killed an additional 70,000 people. The victims included as many Allied prisoners of war as Japanese soldiers - about 250. Emperor Hirohito had already decided to surrender before Nagasaki. After the second bomb (and the invasion of Japanese-occupied Manchuria the same day by Soviet troops), the diehard militarists accepted the emperor's wishes, even though they had been unwilling to use the words like surrender or defeat. After some semantic dithering over the meaning of unconditional surrender, the Allies agreed to allow Hirohito to keep his throne after all, in order to get the war over with. "Thank God for the Atomic Bomb," read the headline on an article in The New Republic. The American public strongly supported the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as they celebrated the end of the war. Truman's euphoria, however, quickly wore off. After Nagasaki he complained to a colleague of terrible headaches. Figurative or physical? he was asked. "Both", he replied. General Groves tried to put a benign face on the bomb. He told a congressional committee that he had been told by doctors that radiation poisoning did not cause undue suffering. In fact, he ventured, it was "a very pleasant way to die." Gradually, however, as the gruesome details emerged, the American public began to feel queasy. An article on Hiroshima by John Hersey, detailing the ordeal of six survivors, published in the New Yorker in August, 1946, had an enormous impact. A scientist who had worked on the Manhattan Project wrote the magazine that he was "filled with shame to recall the whoopee spirit" with which he and colleagues had first greeted the news of the bombing. Disturbed by the reaction, Stimson answered with a long, sober - and somewhat misleading - account in Harper's. (It made no mention of the Japanese peace feelers or the debate over whether the emperor could keep his throne.) Stimson had been asked to write the piece by James B. Conant, the president of Harvard, and one of the organizers of the Manhattan Project. Stimson was privately troubled by the task. "I have rarely been connected with a paper about which I have so much doubt at the last moment," he told a friend. He feared that the article would "excite horror among friends who heretofore thought me a kindly-minded Christian gentleman." Harry Truman, on the other hand, buried any qualms he might have had. At a press conference in 1947 he told reporters, "I didn't have any doubts at the time." He said the decision had saved 250,000 American lives. In later years Truman would raise the number of lives saved to half a million or a million. "I'd do it again," Truman said in 1956. In 1965, seven years before he died, he repeated that he "would not hesitate" to drop the A-bomb. Perhaps he should have hesitated. But his decision, however unconsidered and event-driven, did end the war quickly. For all its terrible cost, it probably saved lives. It also allowed the world to see how truly awful the bomb was - one reason, perhaps, that it has not been used since. END * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 19 [toeslist] HIROSHIMA COVER-UP EXPOSED Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 11:28:08 -0500 (CDT) UNDISC_RECIPS,WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com *HIROSHIMA* *COVER-UP EXPOSED* *GREG MITCHELL* */_Editor & Publisher_/* *August 5, 2005* In the weeks following the atomic attacks on Japan almost 60 years ago, and then for decades afterward, the United States engaged in airtight suppression of all film shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the bombings. This included footage shot by U.S. military crews and Japanese newsreel teams. In addition, for many years all but a handful of newspaper photographs were seized or prohibited. The public did not see any of the newsreel footage for 25 years, and the U.S. military film remained hidden for nearly four decades. The full story of this atomic cover-up is told fully for the first time at _Editor & Publisher_, as the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombings approaches later this week. Some of the long-suppressed footage will be aired on television this Saturday. Six weeks ago,_ E&P_ broke the story that articles written by famed _Chicago Daily News_ war correspondent George Weller about the effects of the atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki were finally published, in Japan, almost six decades after they had been spiked by U.S. officials. This drew national attention, but suppressing film footage shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was even more significant, as this country rushed into the nuclear age with its citizens having neither a true understanding of the effects of the bomb on human beings, nor why the atomic attacks drew condemnation around the world. As editor of _Nuclear Times_ magazine in the 1980s, I met Herbert Sussan, one of the members of the U.S. military film crew, and Erik Barnouw, the famed documentarian who first showed some of the Japanese footage on American TV in 1970. In fact, that newsreel footage might have disappeared forever if the Japanese filmmakers had not hidden one print from the Americans in a ceiling. The color U.S. military footage would remain hidden until the early 1980s, and has never been fully aired. It rests today at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland, in the form of 90,000 feet of raw footage labeled #342 USAF. When that footage finally emerged, I corresponded and spoke with the man at the center of this drama: Lt. Col. (Ret.) Daniel A. McGovern, who directed the U.S. military filmmakers in 1945-1946, managed the Japanese footage, and then kept watch on all of the top-secret material for decades. "I always had the sense," McGovern told me, "that people in the Atomic Energy Commission were sorry we had dropped the bomb. The Air Force --- it was also sorry. I was told by people in the Pentagon that they didn't want those [film] images out because they showed effects on man, woman and child. ... They didn't want the general public to know what their weapons had done --- at a time they were planning on more bomb tests. We didn't want the material out because ... we were sorry for our sins." Sussan, meanwhile, struggled for years to get some of the American footage aired on national TV, taking his request as high as President Truman, Robert F. Kennedy and Edward R. Murrow, to no avail. More recently, McGovern declared that Americans should have seen the damage wrought by the bomb. "The main reason it was classified was ... because of the horror, the devastation," he said. Because the footage shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was hidden for so long, the atomic bombings quickly sank, unconfronted and unresolved, into the deeper recesses of American awareness, as a costly nuclear arms race, and nuclear proliferation, accelerated. The atomic cover-up also reveals what can happen in any country that carries out deadly attacks on civilians in any war and then keeps images of what occurred from its own people. Ten years ago, I co-authored (with Robert Jay Lifton) the book _Hiroshima in America_, and new material has emerged since. On August 6, and on following days, the Sundance cable channel will air "Original Child Bomb," a prize-winning documentary on which I worked. The film includes some of the once-censored footage --- along with home movies filmed by McGovern in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. On August 6, 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb over Hiroshima, killing at least 70,000 instantly and perhaps 50,000 more in the days and months to follow. Three days later, it exploded another atomic bomb over Nagasaki, slightly off target, killing 40,000 immediately and dooming tens of thousands of others. Within days, Japan had surrendered, and the U.S. readied plans for occupying the defeated country --- and documenting the first atomic catastrophe. But the Japanese also wanted to study it. Within days of the second atomic attack, officials at the Tokyo-based newsreel company Nippon Eigasha discussed shooting film in the two stricken cities. In early September, just after the Japanese surrender, and as the American occupation began, director Sueo Ito set off for Nagasaki. There his crew filmed the utter destruction near ground zero and scenes in hospitals of the badly burned and those suffering from the lingering effects of radiation. On September 15, another crew headed for Hiroshima. When the first rushes came back to Toyko, Akira Iwasaki, the chief producer, felt "every frame burned into my brain," he later said. At this point, the American public knew little about conditions in the atomic cities beyond Japanese assertions that a mysterious affliction was attacking many of those who survived the initial blasts (claims that were largely taken to be propaganda). Newspaper photographs of victims were non-existent, or censored. _Life_ magazine would later observe that for years "the world ... knew only the physical facts of atomic destruction." Tens of thousands of American GIs occupied the two cities. Because of the alleged absence of residual radiation, no one was urged to take precautions. Then, on October 24, 1945, a Japanese cameraman in Nagasaki was ordered to stop shooting by an American military policeman. His film, and then the rest of the 26,000 feet of Nippon Eisasha footage, was confiscated by the U.S. General Headquarters (GHQ). An order soon arrived banning all further filming. It was at this point that Lt. Daniel McGovern took charge. In early September, 1945, less than a month after the two bombs fell, Lt. McGovern -- who as a member of Hollywood's famed First Motion Picture Unit shot some of the footage for William Wyler's "Memphis Belle" --- had become one of the first Americans to arrive in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He was a director with the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey, organized by the Army the previous November to study the effects of the air campaign against Germany, and now Japan. As he made plans to shoot the official American record, McGovern learned about the seizure of the Japanese footage. He felt it wouldbe a waste to not take advantage of the newsreel footage, noting in a letter to his superiors that "the conditions under which it was taken will not be duplicated, until another atomic bomb is released under combat conditions." McGovern proposed hiring some of the Japanese crew to edit and "caption" the material, so it would have "scientific value." He took charge of this effort in early January 1946, even as the Japanese feared that, when they were done, they would never see even a scrap of their film again. At the same time, McGovern was ordered by General Douglas MacArthur on January 1, 1946 to document the results of the U.S. air campaign in more than 20 Japanese cities. His crew would shoot exclusively on color film, Kodachrome and Technicolor, rarely used at the time even in Hollywood. McGovern assembled a crew of eleven, including two civilians. Third in command was a young lieutenant from New York named Herbert Sussan. The unit left Tokyo in a specially outfitted train, and made it to Nagasaki. "Nothing and no one had prepared me for the devastation I met there," Sussan later told me. "We were the only people with adequate ability and equipment to make a record of this holocaust. ... I felt that if we did not capture this horror on film, no one would ever really understand the dimensions of what had happened. At that time people back home had not seen anything but black and white pictures of blasted buildings or a mushroom cloud." Along with the rest of McGovern's crew, Sussan documented the physical effects of the bomb, including the ghostly shadows of vaporized civilians burned into walls; and, most chillingly, dozens of people in hospitals who had survived (at least momentarily) and were asked to display their burns, scars, and other lingering effects for the camera as a warning to the world. At the Red Cross Hospital in Hiroshima, a Japanese physician traced the hideous, bright red scars that covered several of the patients ---- and then took off his white doctor's shirt and displayed his own burns and cuts. After sticking a camera on a rail car and building their own tracks through the ruins, the Americans filmed hair-raising tracking shots that could have been lifted right from a Hollywood movie. Their chief cameramen was a Japanese man, Harry Mimura, who in 1943 had shot "Sanshiro Sugata," the first feature film by a then-unknown Japanese director named Akira Kurosawa. While all this was going on, the Japanese newsreel team was completing its work of editing and labeling all their black & white footage into a rough cut of just under three hours. At this point, several members of Japanese team took the courageous step of ordering from the lab a duplicate of the footage they had shot before the Americans took over the project. Director Ito later said: "The four of us agreed to be ready for ten years of hard labor in the case of being discovered." One incomplete, silent print would reside in a ceiling until the Occupation ended. The negative of the finished Japanese film, nearly 15,000 feet of footage on 19 reels, was sent off to the U.S. in early May 1946. The Japanese were also ordered to include in this shipment all photographs and related material. The footage would be labeled SECRET and not emerge from the shadows for more than 20 years. The following month, McGovern was abruptly ordered to return to the U.S. He hauled the 90,000 feet of color footage, on dozens of reels in huge footlockers, to the Pentagon and turned it over to General Orvil Anderson. Locked up and declared top secret, it did not see the light of day for more than 30 years. McGovern would be charged with watching over it. Sussan would become obsessed with finding it and getting it aired. Fearful that his film might get "buried," McGovern stayed on at the Pentagon as an aide to Gen. Anderson, who was fascinated by the footage and had no qualms about showing it to the American people. "He was that kind of man, he didn't give a damn what people thought," McGovern told me. "He just wanted the story told." In an article in his hometown Buffalo Evening News, McGovern said that he hoped that "this epic will be made available to the American public." He planned to call the edited movie "Japan in Defeat." Once they eyeballed the footage, however, most of the top brass didn't want it widely shown and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was also opposed, according to McGovern. It nixed a Warner Brothers feature film project based on the footage that Anderson had negotiated, while paying another studio about $80,000 to help make four training films. In a March 3, 1947 memo, Francis E. Rundell, a major in the Air Corps, explained that the film would be classified "secret." This was determined "after study of subject material, especially concerning footage taken at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is believed that the information contained in the films should be safeguarded until cleared by the Atomic Energy Commission." After the training films were completed, the status would be raised to "Top Secret" pending final classification by the AEC. The color footage was shipped to the Wright-Patterson base in Ohio. McGovern went along after being told to put an I.D. number on the film "and not let anyone touch it --- and that's the way it stayed," as he put it. After cataloging it, he placed it in a vault in the top-secret area. "Dan McGovern stayed with the film all the time," Sussan later said. "He told me they could not release the film [because] what it showed was too horrible." Sussan wrote a letter to President Truman, suggesting that a film based on the footage "would vividly and clearly reveal the implications and effects of the weapons that confront us at this serious moment in our history." A reply from a Truman aide threw cold water on that idea, saying such a film would lack "wide public appeal." McGovern, meanwhile, continued to "babysit" the film, now at Norton Air Force base in California. "It was never out of my control," he said later, but he couldn't make a film out of it any more than Sussan could (but unlike Herb, he at least knew where it was). At the same time, McGovern was looking after the Japanese footage. Fearful that it might get lost forever in the military/government bureaucracy, he secretly made a 16 mm print and deposited it in the U.S. Air Force Central Film Depository at Wright-Patterson. There it remained out of sight, and generally out of mind. (The original negative and production materials remain missing, according to Abe Mark Nornes, who teaches at the University of Michigan and has researched the Japanese footage more than anyone.) The Japanese government repeatedly asked the U.S. for the full footage of what was known in that country as "the film of illusion," to no avail. A rare article about what it called this "sensitive" dispute appeared in _The New York Times_ on May 18, 1967, declaring right in its headline that the film had been "Suppressed by U.S. for 22 Years." Surprisingly, it revealed that while some of the footage was already in Japan (likely a reference to the film hidden in the ceiling), the U.S. had put a "hold" on the Japanese using it --- even though the American control of that country had ceased many years earlier. Despite rising nuclear fears in the 1960s, before and after the Cuban Missile Crisis, few in the U.S. challenged the consensus view that dropping the bomb on two Japanese cities was necessary. The United States maintained its "first-use" nuclear policy: Under certain circumstances it would strike first with the bomb and ask questions later. In other words, there was no real taboo against using the bomb. This notion of acceptability had started with Hiroshima. A firm line against using nuclear weapons had been drawn --- in the sand. The U.S., in fact, had threatened to use nuclear weapons during the Cuban Missile Crisis and on other occasions. On Sept. 12, 1967, the Air Force transferred the Japanese footage to the National Archives Audio Visual Branch in Washington, with the film "not to be released without approval of DOD (Department of Defense)." Then, one morning in the summer of 1968, Erik Barnouw, author of landmark histories of film and broadcasting, opened his mail to discover a clipping from a Tokyo newspaper sent by a friend. It indicated that the United States had finally shipped to Japan a copy of black & white newsreel footage shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Japanese had negotiated with the State Department for its return. From the Pentagon, Barnouw learned in 1968 that the original nitrate film had been quietly turned over to the National Archives, so he went to take a look. Soon Barnouw realized that, despite its marginal film quality, "enough of the footage was unforgettable in its implications, and historic in its importance, to warrant duplicating all of it," he later wrote. Attempting to create a subtle, quiet, even poetic, black and white film, he and his associates cut it from 160 to 16 minutes, with a montage of human effects clustered near the end for impact. Barnouw arranged a screening at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, and invited the press. A throng turned out and sat in respectful silence at its finish. (One can only imagine what impact the color footage with many more human effects would have had.) "Hiroshima-Nagasaki 1945" proved to be a sketchy but quite moving document of the aftermath of the bombing, captured in grainy but often startling black and white images: shadows of objects or people burned into walls, ruins of schools, miles of razed landscape viewed from the roof of a building. In the weeks ahead, however, none of the (then) three TV networks expressed interest in airing it. "Only NBC thought it might use the film," Barnouw later wrote, "if it could find a 'news hook.' We dared not speculate what kind of event this might call for." But then an article appeared in _Parade_ magazine, and an editorial in the _Boston Globe_ blasted the networks, saying that everyone in the country should see this film: "Television has brought the sight of war into America's sitting rooms from Vietnam. Surely it can find 16 minutes of prime time to show Americans what the first A-bombs, puny by today's weapons, did to people and property 25 years ago." This at last pushed public television into the void. What was then called National Educational Television (NET) agreed to show the documentary on August 3, 1970, to coincide with the 25th anniversary of dropping the bomb. "I feel that classifying all of this filmed material was a misuse of the secrecy system since none of it had any military or national security aspect at all," Barnouw told me. "The reason must have been--that if the public had seen it and Congressmen had seen it --- it would have been much harder to appropriate money for more bombs." About a decade later, by pure chance, Herb Sussan would spark the emergence of the American footage, ending its decades in the dark. In the mid-1970s, Japanese antinuclear activists, led by a Tokyo teacher named Tsutomu Iwakura, discovered that few pictures of the aftermath of the atomic bombings existed in their country. Many had been seized by the U.S. military after the war, they learned, and taken out of Japan. The Japanese had as little visual exposure to the true effects of the bomb as most Americans. Activists managed to track down hundreds of pictures in archives and private collections and published them in a popular book. In 1979 they mounted an exhibit at the United Nations in New York. There, by chance, Iwakura met Sussan, who told him about the U.S. military footage. Iwakura made a few calls and found that the color footage, recently declassified, might be at the National Archives. A trip to Washington, D.C. verified this. He found eighty reels of film, labeled #342 USAF, with the reels numbered 11000 to 11079. About one-fifth of the footage covered the atomic cities. According to a shot list, reel #11010 included, for example: "School, deaf and dumb, blast effect, damaged ... Commercial school demolished ... School, engineering, demolished. ... School, Shirayama elementary, demolished, blast effect ... Tenements, demolished." The film had been quietly declassified a few years earlier, but no one in the outside world knew it. An archivist there told me at the time, "If no one knows about the film to ask forit, it's as closed as when it was classified." Eventually 200,000 Japanese citizens contributed half a million dollars and Iwakura was able to buy the film. He then traveled around Japan filming survivors who had posed for Sussan and McGovern in 1946. Iwakura quickly completed a documentary called "Prophecy" and in late spring 1982 arranged for a New York premiere. That fall a small part of the McGovern/Sussan footage turned up for the first time in an American film, one of the sensations of York Film Festival, called "Dark Circle." It's co-director, Chris Beaver, told me, "No wonder the government didn't want us to see it. I think they didn't want Americans to see themselves in that picture. It's one thing to know about that and another thing to see it." Despite this exposure, not a single story had yet appeared in an American newspaper about the shooting of the footage, its suppression or release. And Sussan was now ill with a form of lymphoma doctors had found in soldiers exposed to radiation in atomic tests during the 1950s --- or in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In late 1982, editing _Nuclear Times_, I met Sussan and Erik Barnouw --- and talked on several occasions with Daniel McGovern, out in Northridge, California. "It would make a fine documentary even today," McGovern said of the color footage. "Wouldn't it be wonderful to have a movie of the burning of Atlanta?" After he hauled the footage back to the Pentagon, McGovern said, he was told that under no circumstances would the footage be released for outside use. "They were fearful of it being circulated,"McGovern said. He confirmed that the color footage, like the black and white, had been declassified over time, taking it from top secret to "for public release" (but only if the public knew about it and asked for it). Still, the question of precisely why the footage remained secret for so long lingered. Here McGovern added his considerable voice. "The main reason it was classified was...because of the horror, the devastation," he said. "The medical effects were pretty gory. ... The attitude was: do not show any medical effects. Don't make people sick." But who was behind this? "I always had the sense," McGovern answered, "that people in the AEC were sorry they had dropped the bomb. The Air Force --- it was also sorry. I was told by people in the Pentagon that they didn't want those images out because they showed effects on man, woman and child. But the AEC, they were the ones that stopped it from coming out. They had power of God over everybody," he declared. "If it had anything to do with nukes, they had to see it. They were the ones who destroyed a lot of film and pictures of the first U.S. nuclear tests after the war." Even so, McGovern believed, his footage might have surfaced "if someone had grabbed the ball and run with it but the AEC did not want it released." As "Dark Circle" director Chris Beaver had said, "With the government trying to sell the public on a new civil defense program and Reagan arguing that a nuclear war is survivable, this footage could be awfully bad publicity." In the summer of 1984, I made my own pilgrimage to the atomic cities, to walk in the footsteps of Dan McGovern and Herb Sussan, and meet some of the people they filmed in 1946. By then, the McGovern/ Sussan footage had turned up in several new documentaries. On September 2, 1985, however, Herb Sussan passed away. His final request to his children: Would they scatter his ashes at ground zero in Hiroshima? In the mid-1990s, researching _Hiroshima in America_, a book I would write with Robert Jay Lifton, I discovered the deeper context for suppression of the U.S. Army film: it was part of a broad effort to suppress a wide range of material related to the atomic bombings, including photographs, newspaper reports on radiation effects, information about the decision to drop the bomb, even a Hollywood movie. The 50th anniversary of the bombing drew extensive print and television coverage --- and wide use of excerpts from the McGovern/Sussan footage --- but no strong shift in American attitudes on the use of the bomb. Then, in 2003, as adviser to a documentary film, "Original Child Bomb," I urged director Carey Schonegevel to draw on the atomic footage as much as possible. She not only did so but also obtained from McGovern's son copies of home movies he had shot in Japan while shooting the official film. "Original Child Bomb" went on to debut at the 2004 Tribeca Film Festival, win a major documentary award, and this week, on August 6 and 7, it will debut on the Sundance cable channel. After 60 years at least a small portion of that footage will finally reach part of the American public in the unflinching and powerful form its creators intended. Only then will the Americans who see it be able to fully judge for themselves what McGovern and Sussan were trying to accomplish in shooting the film, why the authorities felt they had to suppress it, and what impact their footage, if widely aired, might have had on the nuclear arms race --- and the nuclear proliferation that plagues, and endangers, us today. ***************************************************************** 20 Guardian Unlimited: We miscalculated and now history has us by the throat Politics | Comment | The west profoundly misunderstood how the Middle East works Martin Woollacott Wednesday August 10, 2005 The Guardian Nobody now disputes that misunderstanding has paved every step of the way in Iraq. The misunderstanding, or the lie, about Saddam's weapons continues to be central to western arguments about the war. But, important as that issue remains, there was a more profound set of misunderstandings of the social, political and religious processes at work within the Middle East. They included especially the tense balance between Sunni and Shia, a loss of diversity and tolerance in the Sunni lands, the real impact of Sharon's long reign in Israel, and the effect of demographic changes altering the politics of many countries in the region. It was not that these things were not seen by experts, governments or even journalists, but that they were not added up, or were added up in the wrong way. Some, such as the Shia majority in Iraq, were seen by many only as an asset for an invader. Others, such as the collapsing peace process, were categorised as requiring remedy but not, in spite of much rhetoric, urgency. Above all, the interaction between these processes, still continuing, was only partially foreseen. For example, Iran's resumption of its nuclear programme this week is the act of a government that, although it has serious internal weaknesses, is in a position of strength in its international dealings. The argument going on next door in Iraq over the constitution is also one in which Shia Muslims are in a strong position. In Lebanon, Syrian withdrawal may ultimately benefit an already strong Shia community. In the Gulf and in Saudi Arabia, suppressed Shia aspirations may not remain so for ever. These are all aspects of a shift in power between Sunnis and Shias that always had some potential for violence. But the way in which the Iraqi intervention triggered a violent Sunni reaction - at least as much among Sunnis outside Iraq as among those inside - to a potential Shia gain may come to be seen as its most important, and its most tragic, effect. To gloss this only as "terrorism", and to see it mainly in terms of a conflict between terrorists and the west, is to miss a large part of its meaning. The Iranian revolution had given the region a new kind of state, specifically religious and specifically Shia in a way that the Shah's regime had never been. Much of what Saddam did during his years in power was aimed at staving off a Shia succession, but, especially with Iran's weight on the scales, change in Iraq could not be delayed for ever. That such a succession would have come anyway in Iraq, and would undoubtedly have been accompanied by violence, is not a defence of the war. It could well have been much less violent, and it might well also have taken place - notwithstanding the existence of significant jihadist groups - without inducing such an angry Sunni reaction, for the American intervention gave an inevitable change: the aspect of a western-assisted Shia seizure of power from Sunnis in the best-endowed of all Arab states. Jihad groups, initially more interested in expelling Americans from Saudi Arabia, could also increasingly point to the deterioration in Palestine as proof of encirclement and encroachment on the Sunni world. They can still do so: Netanyahu's resignation this week portends a political contest in Israel, making it even less likely that Gaza withdrawal will be followed by genuine negotiations about the West Bank. The failure of the peace process took place in a region that had lost some of its old diversity and tolerance, because of the migration of minorities to the west, and because of the emergence of more schematic forms of Islam. And it took place in a world in which Europe had, as the American academic Robert S Leiken recently wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine, "in a fit of absent-mindedness ... acquired not a colonial empire but something of an internal colony, whose numbers are roughly equivalent to the population of Syria." The limbo in which some of Europe's Muslims live has suddenly become an object of intense interest, for obvious reasons, again a case of something often seen in the past, and indeed sometimes intensely discussed, but rarely put into the larger context. The reaction of some Sunnis - not just jihadists but people of all classes, in Muslim lands and in the diaspora - has been to see mainly and sometimes only that in Iraq a Sunni place is under siege. It is a view that blanks out the fact that Iraqi Shias and Kurds are Muslims, and that a majority of Iraqi Sunnis want to see the back of the insurgency, although of course they want to see the back of the Americans too. And it also blanks out the democratic argument, which suggests another western misunderstanding. The Americans in particular are wont to see nothing underneath a bad government except a people yearning to be free, and to regard the secular middle classes of countries such as Iraq or Iran as the authentic representatives of everybody else. Like it or not, this is not always the case. In Iraq's war conditions, apart from Kurdistan, these classes have been brutally targeted in Sunni areas and may well end up being outflanked by clerics in the Shia south. In Iran the recent election was a reminder that there is a third party in what from the outside is often seen as a conflict between authoritarian rulers and a liberal middle class. This third party may find itself deceived in its choice in Iran, but it is a constituency of more ordinary folk, with conservative Islamic leanings, a desire for clean government and not much interest in issues of cultural freedom. It is a constituency visible everywhere in the Middle East, in countries that have democracy, such as Turkey, where it sustains the ruling party, and in those that have little. The historian David Fromkin has recorded that he set out to write an account of how Europe changed the Middle East in the early decades of the last century and ended up writing just as much about how the Middle East changed Europe, mainly by wearing it down. Among the things seen but not understood before Iraq were how our own societies would react, mainstream as well as minority. The majority have shown a surprising willingness to operate on the basis of what's done is done. They even seem resigned to the fact that, as Ayman al-Zawahiri's words made clear last week, our freedom from terrorist attack is now specifically dependent on events in Palestine as well as in Iraq. But the readiness of Americans and British to invest more in the enterprise is diminishing almost by the week, and the otherwise incomprehensible plans for partial military withdrawal by both nations are a reaction to that. As the American Iraqi expert Phebe Marr says: "If you can't garner adequate resources - and public opinion at home and abroad - to rebuild a nation, do not start." But we did start, and now history has us by the throat. martin.woollacott@guardian.co.uk A chronology of events in the Middle East Media Ha'aretz (Israel) Israel Insider (Israel) Jerusalem Post (Israel) Maariv (Israel) Arabic Media Internet Network (Palestinian) Palestine Chronicle (Palestinian) Electronic Intifada (Palestinian) Bitter Lemons (Israeli-Palestinian) [UP] Guardian Unlimited ¿ Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 21 Tri-City Herald: 60 years after the secret This story was published Tuesday, August 9th, 2005 By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer Sixty years ago today, a B-29 bomber took off from the Pacific island of Tinian toward Japan, armed with a 10,000-pound bomb holding Hanford plutonium at its heart. By the end of the day, 40,000 residents of Nagasaki would be dead, and within five days Japan would surrender, ending a horrific war that had claimed more than 40 million lives. In the streets of Richland, horns honked, church bells rang and sirens blared. World War II was over, and the mysterious Hanford project had played a major role. Sons, husbands and sweethearts -- at least those who had survived the battlefields of Europe and the Pacific -- would be coming home. There would be no bloody land invasion of Japan to end the war. Watson Warriner remembers his wife, who had been listening to the radio, telling him she thought she knew what he had been working on at Hanford. A huge bomb had been dropped on Japan that had wiped a city out, she said. "The first thing I said was, 'Thank God. The damned thing worked,' " Warriner remembered. "From day one, the whole thing was so damn complicated. So many things could go wrong." Hanford workers had been in a race to create the plutonium needed to cause an atomic explosion. The United States also was making a bomb armed with uranium 235, which was used in the first atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, three days before the plutonium bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. But fissionable uranium is rare and difficult to separate from nonfissionable isotopes of uranium. It would be more practical to bombard the uranium 238 with neutrons to produce manmade plutonium. But could it be done? When Hanford was picked as the site of a huge weapons project, cyclotrons had produced only enough plutonium to form the head of a pin. The technology to separate plutonium from other isotopes had been done on only a microscopic scale. Construction on the B Reactor to make plutonium at the production scale began in August 1943. Thirteen months later, the reactor began producing plutonium, and by the summer of 1945, enough had been produced for three bombs, including the one used over Nagasaki. Richland had changed from a tiny farm village to the third-largest city in Washington to house the workers on the largest construction project of World War II. Workers remember secrecy Some 150,000 workers would take part in the effort, with the peak work force reaching about 50,000 in 1944. Over 30 months, workers built 554 buildings, 386 miles of road, 158 miles of railroad, three massive plutonium extraction plants and the world's first three production-scale nuclear reactors. "On my first trip to B Reactor, both sides of the road as far as you could see were filled with construction equipment," said Dee McCullough, an instrument supervisor at Hanford during the war. "Both sides had piles of piping and material." Conditions were so primitive that many workers stayed only a day or two. "God, it was practically a wilderness," said Warriner, now 88 and living in Wilmington, Del., back where his career started. He came to Hanford in 1944 as a system division engineer in charge of construction of B Plant, which would separate plutonium from irradiated uranium. He got off the train in Pasco at 12:30 a.m. and walked down the platform with tumbleweeds rolling up behind him and past him. "What are those?" asked a friend who had traveled out on the same train. A normal work week was 10 hours a day, six days a week. But there was a sense of urgency, as the United States raced to develop an atomic bomb before Germany. "When you would get in a jam, you would work seven days a week," Warriner said. The worst for many workers were the winds that roared across the desert, picking up sand that had little to hold it to the ground. Workers called them the termination winds because so many workers would line up for what would be their final paychecks the day after a bad storm. Lawrence Denton, at 18 and used to the West from living in northern Idaho, adjusted better than most. He lived in tents, Quonset huts and barracks as a worker in charge of issuing welding gases for construction of the reactors and processing plants starting in September 1943. While the rest of the nation was on wartime rations, the food was plentiful and good, he said. But "the winds bothered everyone," he said. "I would watch outdoor movies with safety goggles on." The project was top secret. Facilities were spread over an area half the size of Rhode Island and workers were not allowed to move from one work area to another. Only a couple dozen top scientists and engineers were told what was being made. Warriner remembers witnesses watching as he signed an oath that he would not talk about what he saw at Hanford under punishment of death. But he suspected that Hanford was working toward an atomic explosion, he said. He'd previously worked on a project to build a heavy water plant because Nazis were known to be working toward a heavy water design to moderate the neutron reaction in a reactor, he said. Ultimately, B reactor used carbon blocks to slow down neutrons in the reactor so they would not bounce off the Uranium 238 atoms without producing plutonium. "This is no chemical plant," Roger Rohrbacher, 85, of Kennewick, remembers thinking. He had worked in the Metallurgical Laboratory at the University of Chicago where the chemistry was developed to separate plutonium from the irradiated fuel rods before he was assigned to Hanford to work in the instrument department. Every once in a while, some information would slip out. He remembers someone directing that a "neutron monitor" be moved under the reactor. In addition, he wore a device to detect radiation and was required to give regular blood and urine samples. Denton, of Kennewick, hadn't a clue until he heard news reports. "I was in awe that we had made such a terrible weapon," Denton said. "I felt sorry for the Japanese, but I was hoping there was not going to be any more killing." Nagasaki not the first choice It was partly by chance that the bomb with Hanford plutonium was dropped on Nagasaki. It was the second target picked that day. Kokura, with one of Japan's largest munitions plants, was the assigned target on Aug. 9, 1945. But the skies were cloudy and filled with billowing smoke from a bombing raid on a nearby city. Bock's Car, the B-29 that carried the Fat Man plutonium bomb, made three bombing runs at 30,000 feet over Kokura but could not see through the haze. Running short of fuel, the Bock's Car crew decided to head to Nagasaki, where the Japanese had the massive Mitsubishi shipyards, a steel works and two arms factories, including one that made some of the torpedoes used on Pearl Harbor. Sumiteru Taniguchi, then 16, was riding his bicycle through the streets of Nagasaki at 11:02 a.m. that morning. He was catapulted, bicycle and all, a dozen feet and slapped against the road by a blast the color of rainbows. "The ground seemed to quake, and I clung to it for dear life," he said in a Herald interview on the 50th anniversary of the bombing. When he raised his head, "bodies of children who had been playing at the roadside were scattered around me like clumps of garbage," he said. He would spend three years and seven months in the hospital. About 40,000 people died immediately and 35,000 more Japanese were dead within months. The Japanese government now attributes 237,062 deaths through the years to the bomb dropped over Nagasaki. But there also were those who lived because the bomb was dropped. Millard Hileman, an American prisoner of war being held at Kokura, heard the motors of a B-29 approaching three times on Aug. 9. In 1942, he'd escaped from the Bataan death march and been hidden by Filipino villagers before surrendering to the Japanese for fear that those who helped him would be tortured and killed. He'd been a prisoner of war at Kokura for a year when he heard the drone of Bock's Car overhead. The Japanese were prepared to kill prisoners of war if there was a land invasion, which the United States planned for late summer. Instead, Japan surrendered Aug. 14. Hileman would return to the United States to settle in Prosser, raise a family and late in life write 1051-- An American POW's Remarkable Journey Through World War II. Veterans believe bomb saved lives Over the last decade, there's been renewed debate over whether the United States was right to use nuclear weapons and cause such unfathomable suffering and death to civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But many in the Greatest Generation, either those who were veterans or helped build the bomb at Hanford, believe it was a necessary evil to end the war. "We were real relieved that what we did all this time was beneficial," said McCullough, of Richland. "It killed a lot of Japanese at the time, but it saved a lot of Americans and other Japanese." Rohrbacher's brother was in Europe in the 101st Airborne. Without the atomic bombs, Rohrbacher believes his brother would have been headed to Japan where casualties would have been heavy. Michele Gerber, Hanford historian and president of the B Reactor Museum Association, agrees with the veterans. She discounts the argument that a bomb should have been dropped first in the ocean or a sparsely populated area of Japan as a demonstration. Who would be there to see it, she asked. And with the poor communications in Japan during World War II, would people believe reports of a demonstration bomb? "We didn't have a lot of bomb material to spare," she said. "We had to be sure not to make some statement and then not follow through." Others have argued that Japan was close to defeat in 1945 and its people were starving. "But that does not mean they wanted to give up," Gerber said. An imperialistic code had been imposed on the Japanese people, and military leaders had vowed to fight to the death of every man, woman and child. "I think they wouldn't give up" without the atomic bomb, Gerber said. Some workers did have the devastation the bomb would wreak on their minds as they raced to produce plutonium. Gerber remembers Bill McCue, a young scientist on the Hanford project, telling her before his death in 2001 that he and his roommate were taken to a secret location during World War II and told what was being built at Hanford. He and his roommate talked all night, asking "Should be we doing this? Isn't this God's work?" They concluded, "If God didn't want us to do it, it will fail," Gerber said. "Someone helped us out in this," Warriner said, a belief he holds to even though he does not participate in organized religion. The B-29 was developed just in time for the atomic bombs. The weather was clear enough to drop the bombs in an age long before weather satellites. And every part of such a complicated and fledgling technology worked to develop the bombs, he said. "The U.S. had its back against the wall," he said. The Nazis had killed an estimated 5 million to 6 million Jews, and the "Japanese were the biggest butchers in Asia," Warriner said. He remembers accounts of Japanese soldiers walking through hospitals, sticking bayonets into patients, adults and babies alike. The veterans of World War II do have regrets, Gerber said. They regret that Pearl Harbor was bombed. That an entire generation all over the world was plunged into war. That families endured the horrible anxiety that they would never see their loved ones again. "But they don't regret the ending," she said. "The bomb made it possible for peace and to spend 60 years as friends and trading partners (with Japan)." © 2005 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services ***************************************************************** 22 SF Chronicle: HIROSHIMA AND THE BIRTH OF NUCLEAR WARFARE / Survivors of bombings telling their stories now / They kept silent for years, wanting to forget their grief Kathleen E. McLaughlin, Chronicle Foreign Service Tuesday, August 9, 2005 Hiroshima Anniversary Hiroshima -- For many years after the atomic bomb fell in this river city, estimated to have instantly killed 80,000 residents and leaving hardly a building standing, few witnesses would talk about the nightmarish destruction. Survivors wanted to forget losing their children, their homes, their health. Not until the 1970s did the hibakusha, as Japanese call bomb survivors, realize they needed to start talking, says Keiko Ogura, who was 8 years old when the bomb hit her hometown Aug. 6, 1945, and then Nagasaki 60 years ago today. It might be the only way to keep such a thing from happening again. The average survivor is now 72 years old, and survivors and their relatives are recording for the world all they remember of their harrowing stories. "Every month, we see another famous survivor peace activist pass away," said Ogura. Those hibakusha still healthy enough to do so spend countless hours guiding visitors through the city, teaching schoolchildren and making sure they leave a historical legacy. "This is the last moment," said Ogura, a dynamo who runs information services for international visitors to Hiroshima. "They are so eager, writing their stories and making movies and teaching the children not to forget." In Nagasaki, the stories are pouring forth as well. At the city's Museum of the Atomic Bomb, visitors can sit before a computer touch-screen and hear survivors recount their stories. Nagasaki's younger residents sit rapt before the screens, hearing the sorrowful talk of many who have since died. About 300,000 survivors of the two attacks are still alive in Japan, and increasing attention is being paid to their personal needs, as well as to preserving their stories. Hiroshima Prefecture is building a third nursing home for hibakusha. There is reportedly at least a 3-year wait for the 400 spaces at the two existing hibakusha nursing homes. Hiroshima is the only city with homes set aside specifically for aging bomb survivors. City resident Kojiro Mitsue, who pushed her 14-month-old daughter, Natsuki, in a stroller around the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park on Friday, is saddened that the world is losing treasures as the survivors pass on. Preserving their recollections is "our opportunity to protect peace for our world and our babies," she said. The park, a lush garden at the A-Bomb Dome, the skeletal remains of a steel-framed public building, has many fountains and waterways, in respect for the desperate thirst of the bomb's burn victims. Mitsue's grandmother rushed to Hiroshima from their rural home after the bomb hit to look for her mother. She could not find her, and Mitsue suffered from radiation sickness most of her life, dying a decade ago of stomach cancer, although doctors never established a direct link to radiation exposure. Throngs of schoolchildren flooded into the park, college students braved the sweltering heat for mini-peace marches, and Buddhists drummed and chanted for peace. A sculpture in the Hiroshima Peace Museum carried a quote from Pope John Paul II that encapsulated the spirit of the city this month. "To remember Hiroshima is to abhor nuclear war," the pontiff said in Hiroshima in 1981. "To remember Hiroshima is to commit oneself to peace." A 30-ish man on a hot and crowded streetcar -- one of the trolleys donated from around the world after Hiroshima was leveled -- cooled himself with a fan decorated with painted doves and the words "Peace, 60." Page A - 9 San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 23 SF Chronicle: HIROSHIMA AND THE BIRTH OF NUCLEAR WARFARE / Healing blast survivors' bodies and souls / Japan sends doctors every two years -- to test, to talk Cicero A. Estrella, Chronicle Staff Writer Tuesday, August 9, 2005 Seiko Fujimoto won't touch watermelons. They only remind her that she failed nearly six decades ago to satisfy her little brother's final craving, for watermelon, as he lay dying of leukemia in a Tokyo hospital. "My father and I looked all over (the city) but couldn't find any watermelons," said Fujimoto, who was 7 when her brother died in 1949, a casualty of fallout from the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945. One of the estimated 1,200 hibakusha -- survivors of the devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- who now live in the United States, Fujimoto, 63, sees her emotional scars finally healing. She can finally talk about her brother in spite of tears that still well up. The hibakusha's physical problems continue, however. Every two years since 1977, Japanese doctors have visited San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle and Honolulu to conduct physical examinations along with American doctors. More than 400 survivors, including about 140 each in San Francisco and Los Angeles, participated in this year's tests in May and June at a cost to the Japanese government of about $400,000, said Makoto Matsumara, leader of the Japanese medical team that visited Los Angeles and Honolulu in June. By 7:30 a.m. on the final day of examinations at the Japanese Community Health Clinic in Los Angeles' Little Tokyo District, 20 people were waiting in the hall outside. The Japanese team of six doctors and four administrators took the survivors' histories before sending them for blood and urine tests, breast and pelvic examinations, electrocardiograms and other tests. "They try to discuss their problems with their American doctors, but it's harder for them to explain in English," said Kaz Suyeishi, whose American Society of Hiroshima-Nagasaki A-Bomb Survivors organized the Los Angeles examinations. "The big vocabulary, the medical terms are very difficult for them to understand." Familiar with the drill from past exams, the patients went through their physicals in a business-like manner. They kept their conversations, mostly in Japanese, near a hush as they awaited their turns in the hall outside the clinic. "The (Japanese) doctors know about the A-bomb," said Taizo Honda, a retired electrician from Monterey Park (Los Angeles County). "It's easier for them to explain our problems with us." Honda, whose dark hair and slight frame make him appear at least a decade younger than his 64 years, was returning home from a swimming hole with four siblings when the bomb fell on Nagasaki Aug. 9, 1945. He hasn't had any ailments linked to radiation. 'I was burned all over' Jennie Masae Okamura, 76, traveled more than 200 miles with her husband and sister-in-law from their home in San Luis Obispo for their exams. Okamura, a third-generation American, was studying in Hiroshima when the bomb was dropped there. "I was burned all over. I don't know how I survived," said Okamura, whose arms still itch where they were burned. Okamura, who has survived breast cancer, has come four times for tests by the Japanese team. The doctors provided each patient with a health analysis. They will keep records of the physicals in case the hibakusha ever develop problems and, by early next year, they'll release a bi-annual report on their findings. Their 2003 report revealed that hypertension was the American hibakusha's most prevalent health problem, affecting 45.4 percent. The report didn't compare disease rates among American survivors and their Japanese counterparts. The Japanese government offers survivors living in Japan free medical care, monetary compensation for diseases and injuries that are results from the blast and radiation, senior housing and funeral services. Hibakusha in the United States receive only the bi-annual exams, although they can be treated free in Japan if the exams reveal serious illness Three California hibakusha won a court ruling in May requiring the Japanese government to allow them and other survivors living outside of Japan to apply for medical stipends and funeral expenses. But the city of Hiroshima appealed, arguing it would be too difficult to validate overseas applications. Fujimoto, who has survived three bouts with cancer, including breast cancer found by Japanese doctors during a 1993 examination, said she had been taught to keep her past secret while growing up in Japan. "We weren't allowed to say we were there, especially the women," said Fujimoto, who married a Japanese American and moved to San Francisco in 1970. "Nobody knew what the atomic bomb did. Were we contagious? Were our children going to be retarded? It was never mentioned." 'You don't talk openly' Takeshi Matsumoto, a Japanese American doctor who helps the Japanese team in Los Angeles every two years, called it "cultural neglect." "With the Japanese culture, you don't talk openly about personal issues," he said. "It's not a culture that's expressive about personal pain, no matter how painful." Geri Handa, co-founder of the Friends of Hibakusha in San Francisco, said the number of hibakusha in America is probably underreported. "A lot of them still don't want to be recognized as survivors," she said. Jack Dairiki, a 74-year-old survivor who lives in San Francisco, had prostate cancer diagnosed during the 1999 examinations. More recent tests revealed he might develop liver and thyroid problems. He often speaks about his Hiroshima experience at high schools and special events such as Saturday's Coming Home to Peace interfaith service at Japantown Peace Plaza. Dairiki was born on Dec. 25, 1931, in Sacramento, and accompanied his immigrant father to Japan in August 1941 to visit his ailing grandfather. The following month, they couldn't book passage home because American civil service workers got priority. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, stranded them indefinitely and cut them off from Dairiki's mother and siblings in Sacramento. He learned his family had been interned at Tule Lake (Siskiyou County) only when the Red Cross sent a telegram in 1942 relating that his younger brother had died. Dairiki enrolled in school in Japan and by 1945 was forced to work assembling rifle parts in a factory in Kure. "It was a war effort," said the retired architect. "You do whatever you're told. At age 14, you don't have much voice in the matter." Dairiki was waiting to travel the three miles to Hiroshima to help tear down some houses when he heard the familiar sound of B-29s overhead. Moments later, a blinding flash cut across the sky. Then, a white mushroom cloud formed, its base full of smaller explosions that reminded him of fireworks. "People have only seen the black-and-white footage," he said. "They don't realize how colorful it was." Dairiki, his classmates and teachers ran to a cave that served as a bomb shelter. When they emerged a few hours later, a woman walked past like a zombie, arms extended forward. As she came closer, they saw the tattered clothing that seemed to be hanging loosely from her arms actually was her skin. As he walked to his village, Okugaitanura, about 10 miles from Hiroshima, Dairiki saw hundreds of dead bodies by the roadside, most of them burned beyond recognition. "I try to relate my story so that we'll never have this type of tragedy happen again to any human being," he said. The second generation The government medical team on its last few visits has tested the children of survivors. Noriko Ninomiya, 43, participated in the Los Angeles exams for the first time in June. "My parents (in Japan) have lived well so far, but they're worried about the second generation," she said as she waited to take her blood test. "They urged me to be tested, to get a record (with the Japanese medical team)." Yoko Asano, 46, also being tested for the first time in Los Angeles, wished the Japanese government also provided counseling. She just recently learned that her father drove himself to the hospital after sustaining serious cuts to his face and neck during the Hiroshima bombing. "My generation grew up not knowing," Asano said. "Our parents just wanted to move on. They didn't want their children to suffer, too." The hibakusha who have shared their stories find the process therapeutic. Takahashi Tanemori, 67 -- who has been a field worker, Baptist minister, restaurateur and poultry exporter since he came to Central California in 1956 -- sends a message of forgiveness when he speaks to high school students, church groups and peace organizations. The Hiroshima native emigrated as a brash 18-year-old intent on revenge against Americans. He said he once had delusions of killing "all American adults." "I realized I had to let go of my own pain," said Tanemori, who now lives in Lafayette. "Whatever happened in the past needs to stay in the past." Tanemori's mother, baby sister and paternal grandparents were never found after the blast. His father took Tanemori's surviving siblings to Kotachi, a village about 60 miles from Hiroshima. But he returned to the bombed city to look for missing family members and soon succumbed to the radiation. The 7- year-old Tanemori took out his frustrations on village elders, spiritual leaders and especially his older sister, Satsuko, who became head of their household. Tanemori left for Japan last month to spend the 60th anniversary in his hometown. He also wanted to make amends with his sister and village members. "It's a spiritual journey," Tanemori said. "Part of it is to reconnect. Part of it is to reconcile." E-mail Cicero A. Estrella at cestrella@sfchronicle.com. Page A - 1 The San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 24 Xinhua: Australia seeks nuke co-op with China www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-08-10 08:22:00 BEIJING, Aug. 10 -- The Australian Government announced yesterday it is to start talks with China on a bilateral nuclear co-operation agreement. "I am pleased to announce Australia will formally commence negotiations on a nuclear co-operation agreement with China," Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said in a statement. "The deal will establish safeguard arrangements to ensure Australian uranium supplied to China is used exclusively for peaceful purposes," he said. The two countries have already held exploratory talks on the proposed agreement, according to Downer. Australia has an estimated 40 per cent of the world's low-cost uranium resources, while China has great energy needs to fuel its rapid economic development. "Opening up this export opportunity with China is consistent with the growing trade and economic relationship between our two countries, and Australia's position as a secure supplier of energy resources," he said. Australia has signed 19 nuclear agreements with 36 countries. (Source: China Daily) Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 25 AFP: With tears and prayer, Nagasaki marks 60 years after 09/08/2005 11h25 Believers pray for the victims of the atomic bombing of Nagazaki ©AFP - Toshifumi Kitamura NAGASAKI, Japan (AFP) - With a minute of silent prayer, Nagasaki marked 60 years since it was levelled by a US atomic bomb, in an attack that brought Japan to its knees and signalled the end of World War II. Survivors, many unable to contain their emotion, broke down in tears and clung to each other, as the city pleaded with the world to disarm and ensure that Nagasaki remains the last place ever to suffer nuclear attack. Three days after the world's first atomic bomb reduced the city of Hiroshima to ruins, a second bomb, code-named "Fat Man" after Winston Churchill, hit the hilly southern port of Nagasaki, killing more than 70,000 people. Six days later, the costliest conflict in human history was over. To mark 60 years to the moment since the plutonium bomb was dropped, some 6,000 people including Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi observed a minute of silent prayer at 11:02 am (0202 GMT). Fumie Sakamoto, a 74-year-old woman injured in the attack, said, "I don't want anyone to suffer the same pain." "I swear in the presence of the souls of the victims of the atomic bombing to continue tirelessly to demand that Nagasaki be the last A-bomb site as long as I live," she told the ceremony. "This promise is my pledge for peace." Sakamoto said she had trodden a "long, difficult path" to recover over the past 60 years. "I remember people whose chests burst open, and I could see their hearts pumping right in front of me. There were people who were so badly burned I couldn't tell which side was which," she said. Doves fly over the Peace Monument during the 60th Nagasaki Peace Ceremony ©AFP/Jiji Press Nagasaki Mayor Iccho Ito, who was born two weeks after the attack, made a direct appeal to the United States, whose pilots had dropped the 10,000 pound (4.5 tonne) bomb over the city six decades ago. "To the citizens of America: we understand your anger and anxiety over the memories of horror of the 9/11 terrorist attacks," the mayor told the ceremony in the city's peace park. "Yet, is your security actually enhanced by your government's policies of maintaining 10,000 nuclear weapons, of carrying out repeated sub-critical nuclear tests, and of pursuing the development of new 'mini' nuclear weapons?" Ito asked. "We are confident that the vast majority of you desire in your hearts the elimination of nuclear arms. May you join hands with the people of the world who share that same desire, and work together for a peaceful planet free from nuclear weapons," he said. Among the people who bowed in tribute at the ceremony was Douglas Lentz, a representative of the USS Arizona memorial at Pearl Harbor, where a surprise Japanese attack in 1941 brought the United States into the war. Koizumi, who flew to Nagasaki despite a political crisis in Tokyo where he has called early elections, made nearly identical remarks to his statements Saturday in Hiroshima, where more than 140,000 died in the world's first nuclear bombing. "I give all my heart to the victims," Koizumi said. "Japan will make an effort to keep world peace and maintain the three non-nuclear principles and a peaceful constitution," Koizumi said. He was referring to Japan's 1967 commitment not to produce, possess or allow the entry into its territory of nuclear weapons. Koizumi, who faces a new election on September 11, has favored revisions to the US-imposed 1947 pacifist constitution to recognize that Japan has a military. Speaking to reporters after the ceremony Tuesday, Koizumi said Japan had made a strategic decision against nuclear weapons. "Japan has the ability to have nuclear weapons but doesn't have them," he said. But Japan has expressed mounting concern over how to preserve the legacy of the bombings as the generation that suffered the atomic attack passes away. About 2,000 survivors of the Nagasaki attack died in the past year and the average age of witnesses to the nuclear bomb is 73. Fewer than 50,000 are still alive. Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005 ***************************************************************** 26 NRC: RIN 3150-AH44 FR Doc 05-15688 [Federal Register: August 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 152)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 46066] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09au05-3] Export and Import of Radioactive Materials: Security Policies; Correction AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Final rule: correction. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------ SUMMARY: This document corrects a final rule appearing in the Federal Register on July 1, 2005 (70 FR 37985) amending the NRC's regulations pertaining to the export and import of radioactive materials. This action is necessary to correct typographical errors and to revise four amendatory changes. DATES: Effective December 28, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne Schuyler-Hayes, Office of International Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-2333, e-mail: ssh@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 05-12985 published July 1, 2005 (70 FR 37985), make the following corrections: PART 110--[AMENDED] 0 1. Amendatory instruction 3 is corrected to read as follows: Sec. 110.21 [Amended] 0 3. In Sec. 110.21, paragraph (a)(4) is amended by removing ``100 millicuries'' and adding in its place ``3.7 x 10-3 TBq (100 millicuries).'' 0 2. Amendatory instruction 4 is corrected to read as follows: Sec. 110.22 [Amended] 0 4. In Sec. 110.22, paragraph (a)(3) is amended by removing ``100 millicuries'' and adding in its place ``3.7 x 10-3 TBq (100 millicuries).'' 0 3. In Sec. 110.23, paragraph (a)(2) is corrected to read as follows: Sec. 110.23 General license for the export of byproduct material. (a) * * * (2) Actinium-225 and -227, americium-241 and -242m, californium- 248, -249, -250, -251, -252, -253, and -254, curium-240, -241, -242, - 243, -244, -245, -246 and -247, einsteinium-252, -253, -254 and -255, fermium-257, gadolinium-148, mendelevium-258, neptunium-235 and -237, polonium-210, and radium-223 must be contained in a device, or a source for use in a device, in quantities of less than 3.7 x 10-3 TBq (100 millicuries) of alpha activity per device or source, unless the export is to a country listed in Sec. 110.30. Individual shipments must be less than the TBq values specified in Category 2 of Table 1 of Appendix P to this Part. Exports of americium and neptunium are subject to the reporting requirements listed in paragraph (b) of this section. * * * * * 0 4. Amendatory instruction 8 is corrected to read as follows: Sec. 110.40 [Amended] 0 8. In Sec. 110.40, paragraph (b)(7)(iv) is amended by removing ``1,000 curies of tritium'' and adding in its place ``37 TBq (1,000 curies) of tritium.'' 0 5. Amendatory instruction 9 is corrected to read as follows: Sec. 110.41 [Amended] 0 9. In Sec. 110.41, paragraph (a)(4) is amended by removing ``100 curies of tritium'' and adding in its place ``3.7 TBq (100 curies) of tritium.'' 0 6. In Sec. 110.42, paragraph (e)(1) is corrected to read as follows: Sec. 110.42 Export licensing criteria. * * * * * (e) * * * (1) Whether the foreign recipient is authorized based on the authorization or confirmation required by Sec. 110.32(h) to receive and possess the material under the laws and regulations of the importing country; * * * * * Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of August, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Michael T. Lesar, Federal Register Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. 05-15688 Filed 8-8-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 27 APP.COM: No need for reports on drywell corrosion to be submitted to NRC Published in the Asbury Park Press 08/9/05 In response to the July 30 article "Missing reports worry watchdog" regarding the license renewal application for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, I would like to offer information to correct certain insinuations by a plant opponent, and a factual error. The anti-nuclear activist expressed concern about the integrity of the plant's drywell, one of five engineered layers of protection in or around the reactor. His statements are not based on actual data, but on the fact that he has not seen the results of inspections performed periodically by AmerGen and previous plant owners to ensure the steel liner of the drywell continues to meet its designed safety function. Since 1986, Oyster Creek personnel have inspected and confirmed the safety and functionality of the steel drywell vessel about every four years. This is an important aspect of the station's aging management program, which is a key part of the license renewal application. In 1986, previous plant owner GPU identified corrosion on some areas of the drywell. The issue was corrected, the drywell was inspected and found to be fully functional. As part of the corrective actions, GPU agreed to conduct drywell monitoring, ultrasonic inspections and analysis during every other refueling outage to ensure the issue is properly managed and conservative safety margins are maintained through the life of the plant. The plant operator is required to report to the NRC any significant adverse conditions discovered through the monitoring and inspection of equipment, along with corrective actions. The inspection and analysis continue to confirm that corrosion is controlled and the drywell is fully able to perform its safety function; therefore, no formal reports have been issued to the NRC. As with all operational and testing data, the results are available to the regulator for review at any time. Additionally, the NRC did officially accept the Oyster Creek license renewal application submittal on Friday, July 22. The Press has repeatedly reported that the NRC did not accept the application until Monday, July 25, due to minor technical issues with the electronic submission. Senior officials in the NRC office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, which administers the license renewal process, confirmed that the application was accepted July 22. AmerGen corrected the minor electronic issues as requested, and provided a new electronic version of the application, as well as a paper copy, to the NRC on Tuesday, July 26. Oyster Creek continues to meet all NRC safety standards and has submitted a thorough, high-quality license renewal application that will demonstrate that the station is prepared and committed to meet those standards through 2029. We will work directly with the NRC to provide any additional information or clarification it requires through the application review and public comment process. Peter C. Resler COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER EXELON NUCLEAR Copyright © 2005 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 28 NRC: Sunshine Act Meetings FR Doc 05-15776 [Federal Register: August 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 152)] [Notices] [Page 46195-46196] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr09au05-109] date: Weeks of August 8, 15, 22, 29, and September 5, 12, 2005. place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. status: Public and closed. matters to be considered: Week of August 8, 2005 There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 8, 2005. [[Page 46196]] Week of August 15, 2005--Tentative Tuesday, August 16, 2005 10 a.m. Meeting with the Organization of Agreement States (OAS) and the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors (CRCPD) (Public Meeting). (Contact: Shawn Smith, (303) 415-2620.) This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address, http://www.nrc.gov . 1 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (closed--ex. 3 & 9). Week of August 22, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 22, 2005. Week of August 29, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of August 29, 2005. Week of September 5, 2005--Tentative Wednesday, September 7, 2005 9 a.m. Discussion of Security Issues (closed--ex. 1). 1:30 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (closed--ex. 3). Week of September 12, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of September 12, 2005. * The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings call (recording)--(301) 415-1292. Contact person for more information: David Gamberoni, (301) 415-1651. * * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html. * * * * * The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, August Spector, at (301) 415-7080, TDD: (301) 415- 2100, or by e-mail at aks@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. * * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers: If you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301) 415-1969. In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: August 4, 2005. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 05-15776 Filed 8-5-05; 10:06 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M ***************************************************************** 29 Corvallis Gazette-Times: Arguments raised for, against atomic energy [gazettetimes.com] Last modified Monday, August 8, 2005 1:53 AM PDT By Stan Choe Knight Ridder Newspapers The case for Cost: Nuclear fuel is now as cheap as coal, and its price hasn't wildly fluctuated like natural gas. Environment: Nuclear, unlike coal plants, doesn't emit any gases linked to global warming. Need: The United States is looking at a power crunch in the next decade, without enough supply to meet the growing demand, the industry says. Safety: A new generation of nuclear-plant designs feature increased security to allay fears of terrorism. With 40,000 to 60,000 people moving into its service territory each year, Charlotte, N.C.-based Duke Power says it would not have enough electricity to cover demand during peak periods as early as 2012 without any new plants. Duke, the Carolinas largest utility, is considering building up to three new power plants, looking at a combination of coal, natural gas, oil and nuclear plants. It says it will decide whether to move on the nuclear track later this year. Duke met with Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff in March, but officials declined to say where a plant could go, what design it could have or even whether Duke planned to build one. Duke is also a member of NuStart Energy Development, a consortium of nuclear-power companies that expects to file two applications for construction of new plants. The consortium wants to test the new streamlined application process to win a license to construct and operate a nuclear plant. NuStart has identified six finalist sites for the two applications, including the Savannah River Site near Aiken, S.C. (This is in addition to the possible plant Duke Power is contemplating.) NuStart is composed of Duke, Progress Energy of Raleigh, Constellation Energy, EDF International North America, Energy Nuclear, Exelon Generation, Florida Power &Light Co., Southern Co., Tennessee Valley Authority, GE Energy and Westinghouse Electric Co. The case against Cost: Nuclear opponents decry the billions in "corporate welfare'' contemplated in the energy bill for the nuclear industry. Environment: Nuclear plants produce nuclear waste that has to be stored somewhere. Need: Americans may be able to avoid a forecast demand crunch by embracing conservation, say nuclear opponents. Safety: Images of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island still stoke fears of a possible meltdown at any nuclear plant. Framatome ANP made its bet on a nuclear revival at the beginning of this year, when it created a new unit to market and design the next generation of U.S. nuclear plants. The key for Framatome was how much additional electricity utilities are projecting they'll need during the next decade, said Ray Ganthner, the head of the 50-person new nuclear-plant team that does engineering work in Charlotte. Framatome, as it competes against powerhouses Westinghouse and General Electric, is making the pitch that its new generation of nuclear plants will be safer and easier to maintain. The changes range from the big — building a second wall strong enough to protect against a plane crash — to the small — equipping monitoring stations with digital displays. The new design can't be compared with the old Three Mile Island or Chernobyl, said Ganthner. The Framatome architecture uses a different technology for nuclear fuel to boil water into steam to spin generators and create electricity. Another selling point is the cost. Nuclear power has become the cheapest to make, costing 1.68 cents per kilowatt-hour, compared with 5.87 for natural gas and 1.92 for coal. One kilowatt-hour is enough juice to power 10 100-watt bulbs for an hour. The price of nuclear fuel has stayed relatively constant, unlike the wildly swinging price of natural gas. And it doesn't emit carbon dioxide, which is linked to global warming. The nuclear industry has undergone such an image overhaul that Tom Weir no longer hears jokes at cocktail parties about his first job at Three Mile Island. "I hear big executives saying how nuclear plants are making money,'' said Weir, a Framatome ANP senior vice president. And if a utility wants to build a nuclear plant, it will have to start now. The licensing and construction processes can take up to a decade. "The whole idea of a nuclear resurgence is completely absurd,'' said Michele Boyd, the legislative director for the energy program of Public Citizen, one of 300 lobbying groups that has banded in opposition to nuclear subsidies. "You've got a couple of consortiums of wealthy companies looking for help to pay for the applications. It's a push and a shove by the administration and Congress.'' The groups are lobbying on Capitol Hill to strip all the nuclear incentives from the energy bill, though they admit they face a steep hill. Public Citizen says the Senate's version will give $10 billion in subsidies and tax breaks to the nuclear industry. The better alternative, they argue, is to pursue conservation. Utilities could upgrade transmission lines to lose less electricity along their paths. The government could require more energy-efficient appliances, they argue. By using less electricity, Americans can make the existing supply last longer. Nuclear reactors also produce nuclear waste, which currently has no place to go. Nuclear plants have been storing their radioactive waste themselves as political leaders argue whether Yucca Mountain in Nevada should be the federal holding place for all the country's waste. When Donna Lisenby first heard Duke Power was considering building a new nuclear plant, she was lunching with utility officials. She said she choked on a piece of the chicken pesto wrap. She doesn't think the Catawba River, already stretched by about two dozen power plants, could handle another. A nuclear plant would create so much heat in the river that it would likely damage the environment and kill fish, she said. If Duke is going to do it, she told the utility officials, "the George Bush administration is the right time to try.'' Copyright © 2005 • ***************************************************************** 30 Fort St. John: N.B. nuclear plant angers wind developer - canada.com network Canadian Press August 9, 2005 FREDERICTON -- The New Brunswick government's decision to overhaul its aging nuclear power plant has angered at least one alternative energy provider in the Maritimes. Officials with Black River Wind Ltd. of Nova Scotia have decided to boycott the province of New Brunswick for wind energy development. The company says it is calling on other wind developers to do the same to protest the decision to spend $1.4 billion to refurbish the Point Lepreau nuclear plant near Saint John, N.B. But at least one other wind energy developer says the Lepreau refurbishment won't interfere with alternative energy projects. John Douglas of the Canadian firm, Ventus Energy Inc., says wind power needs to be supplemented by other forms of energy. NB Power has announced plans to develop 400 megawatts of wind energy in the province by 2016.   © Canadian Press 2005 Copyright © CanWest Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 31 NRC: Energy Bill Provides for Enhanced Security at Commercial Nuclear Facilities News Release - 2005-10 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: No. 05-109 August 8, 2005 The energy bill signed today by President Bush contains provisions long sought by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to enhance security at nuclear power plants and other facilities, including authorization for licensee security guards to use more powerful weaponry and more extensive background checks for personnel with access to nuclear materials or safeguards information. “This wide-ranging legislation enhances our ability to ensure the protection of public health, safety and the common defense,” said NRC Chairman Nils J. Diaz. “These provisions will make an industry that is already well protected even safer from the threats of terrorism and radiological sabotage.” Under this legislation, the NRC will for the first time have regulatory authority over additional radioactive materials, including certain sources of radium-226 and materials produced in accelerators rather than in reactors. The energy bill also contains specific security-related requirements that in large degree address measures already initiated by the NRC. These include revisions to the agency’s design basis threat through rulemaking and establishment of a national tracking system for radioactive sources in the United States. The act also expands criminal penalties for anyone bringing in unauthorized weapons or explosives or committing sabotage at nuclear power plants and other licensee facilities designated by the NRC. Other provisions in the bill will facilitate NRC’s recruitment of engineers, scientists, security experts and other professionals at a time when the agency anticipates a greatly increased workload due to potential applications for new commercial power reactors and the proposed Yucca Mountain waste repository. The NRC is now authorized to support university programs for academic fields critical to the agency’s regulatory activities and to establish partnership programs with minority institutions of higher learning. NRC may also award financial assistance to undergraduate and graduate students in return for subsequent employment with the NRC. Last revised Tuesday, August 09, 2005 ***************************************************************** 32 [du-list] Iraq and Afghanistan death toll: another take Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:02:39 -0700 OPT_IN,SP_HAM_SUPER,SUBJ_GROUP,SUBJ_WHITELIST autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com Harring Report another ‘Deep Throat’ - Official DoD Iraq War US Military over 8 Times More Dead than Reported ‘DoD Deliberately Reducing The Numbers,’ States Brian Harring, Domestic Intelligence Reporter TEMPE, AZ, August 6, 2005, Dandelion Books [www.dandelionbooks.net] . . . Actual death toll of US Military in Iraq is in excess of 8,000, “far more realistic than the government’s current official number of 1,800-plus,” according to ‘Deep Throat’ data researcher Brian Harring. Dandelion Books has just signed a contract with TBR News www.tbrnews.org to publish Prelude to Disaster: The Harring Report - Complete Official DoD Iraq & Afghanistan US Military Casualty List, by TBR News (www.tbrnews.org). It will be available in September at www.dandelionbooks.net , www.amazon.com and other participating websites. According to Brian Harring, a computer data specialist who obtained this report for tbrnews.org, a popular Internet news website, of the 158,000 US Military shipped to Iraq, 34,000 have either deserted, were killed or seriously wounded. DoD lists currently being quietly circulated indicate almost 9,000 dead, over 23,000 seriously wounded and a large number of suicides, forced hospitalization for ongoing drug usage and sales, murder of Iraqi civilians and fellow soldiers, rapes and courts martial. Prelude to Disaster also includes Russian daily military intelligence reports of the Iraqi War from March 17 ­ April 8, 2003. “These reports are certainly far more informative and accurate than the heavily edited and controlled material now appearing in the various branches of the American media,” states TBR News. “We’ve also included Russian intelligence analysis of ‘two enormous mistakes made by the U.S. command during the planning stages of this war that resulted in obvious strategic failure.’” “President Bush personally ordered that no pictures be taken of the coffined and flag-draped dead under any circumstances,” says Harring. “He claims this is to comfort the bereaved relatives, but is designed to keep the huge number of arriving bodies secret. “Bush has never attended any kind of a memorial service for his dead soldiers,” states Harring. “He never will because he is terrified some parent might curse him in front of the press, or, worse, attack him.” All Dandelion Books are for sale at www.dandelionbooks.net [Toll-free orders: 1-800-861-7899]. For author interviews and more information, contact: Carol Adler 1-800-861-7899 5250 South Hardy Drive - #3067, Tempe, Arizona 85283 Fax ­ 480-452-1580 info@dandelionbooks.net This is an announcement from Dandelion Books, LLC. If you are not one of our opt-in newsletter subscribers and wish to have your name removed from this list, please send an email to info@dandelionbooks.net with the “remove” in the subject box. Thank you. To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/du-list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 33 Marshall Islands - Impact of US Nuclear Testing Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2005 11:21:48 -0500 (CDT) X-Spam-filter-host: pascal.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com --- In GreenLeft_discussion@yahoogroups.com, Raulmax@a... wrote: Tony deBrum describes Impact of US Nuclear Testing in Marshall Islands "While thousands of miles and the Pacific's great ocean separate us from Hiroshima, we do have something in common: we have been witnesses to the horrors of nuclear weapons, As victims and survivors, we will do our part to eradicate this evil from the earth," says Tony deBrum, of the Lolelaplap Trust, Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI). Mr. deBrum, a former senator in the RMI parliament, lived in the Northern Marshalls for the entire 12 years of the U.S. atomic and thermonuclear testing program there. At 9 years old, he witnessed the BRAVO shot that terrorized his country. During "Many Stories, One Vision for a Nuclear Free World", a conference sponsored by Pax Christi USA, held last week at the University of Nevada in Las Vegas, deBrum told the story of the on-going struggle and suffering of the Marshallese people, the aftermath of US Cold War nuclear testing. "Hearing about the Marshall Islands is just extremely unsettling," said attendee Jada Jackson of Willingboro, N.J. Mr. deBrum's remarks, delivered at the convention on Friday, August 5, follow: REMARKS BY TONY DEBRUM UNLV Pax Christi Convention Las Vegas, Nevada Ladies and gentlemen, I am honored to be here today. I thank Pax Christi USA for inviting me to this conference to add some of my own stories to your many stories as a contribution of the Marshallese people to the vision of a world free of the evil weapons of destruction. I bring you greetings of peace from Iroijlaplap Imata Kabua and Iroijlaplap Anjua Loeak, whose domains have borne the brunt of US Nuclear experiments and missile testing. It is with their patronage and support than I am able to carry on this work. On the morning of March 1, 1954, I , like many other youngsters my age, was a fish basket carrier, following my grandfather as he netted mackerel and shad which usually school along our beaches at dawn. Suddenly a tremendous flash like lightening you could touch went off and turned the night to day. Before we could compose ourselves, a shock, and then the loudest blast ever heard hit our small island. As the following thunder rumbled without stopping, the sky in the West first turned red. It was as if we had been placed under a glass bowl, and someone was pouring blood over it. The sky above us from horizon to horizon turned colors as if sunrise and sunset had decided to occur at the same time in the North and the South, the East and the West. I can still hear the men shouting "run, run", but I could not move. I wanted to say something to my grandfather, but I could not speak. Just a few days later, I walked into the Camp in Kwajalein set up to house the people of Rongelap Atoll, who were evacuated after the detonation. We were greeted by the leader of the Rongelap people, John Anjain, who protested to my grandfather, "Do not bring your grandson into the tent. We do not want him to catch our disease." In that camp, 67 evacuated natives from Rongelap had been assigned a number from one to sixty seven, which was assigned to them as subjects of project 4.1, the study of human beings exposed to high levels of gamma radiation. Two more numbers, 68 and 69 were assigned to fetuses still in their mothers' wombs. Ironically, as the people sufering severe radiation burns and infections were being treated /studied in Kwajalein, the chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was telling reporters at a news conference in Oakland, California that all was well in the Marshall Islands. I lived on the island of Likiep in the northern Marshalls for the entire twelve years of the U.S. atomic and thermonuclear testing program. Most of the detonations were either seen or heard from Likiep, and I was just nine years old when BRAVO, which I have just tried to describe to you, was detonated taking its 15 megaton of poisonous radiation miles into the sky and around the world. While BRAVO was by far the most dramatic of the tests, all 67 shots detonated in the Marshalls contibuted one way or another to the nuclear legacy which haunts us to this day. As has been described by Jonathan Weisgall, legal advisor to the Bikini people, and a good friend, if one were to take the total yield of the nuclear weapons tested in the Marshalls from 1946 to 1958, we would have the equivalent of 1.6 hiroshima shots per day, everyday, for twelve years. A frightening thought indeed. But our encounter with the bombs only began with tests themselves. Recently declassified documents released under the Clinton administration have uncovered even more horrific aspects of the Marshallese nuclear burden. These documents demonstrate that scientists conducted human radiation experiments with Marshallese citizens. Other experimentation involved the purposeful premature resettlement of people on highly contaminated islands to study how human beings absorb radiation from their foods and their environment. Much of this experimentation occurred in populations either exposed to near lethal amounts of radiation, or to "control" populations who were told they were receiving medical care as compensation for their participation. The people of Rongelap, the inhabited island closest to ground zero were not evacuated prior to Bravo, designed to be the mother of all explosions, although for smaller shots they had been taken out of harm's way. They had no way of knowing nor were they warned about the shot. They were unable and totally unprepared to take care of themselves. The U.S. tested 67 nuclear and thermonuclear devices in the islands. More than half of which took place after the Rongelap people were resettled on their still contaminated homeland. Until high levels of plutonium were discovered within their atoll, they lived there as subjects of the 4.1 human radiation studies. They were once again, sadly removed and now live in exile on the island of Mejatto just barely out of the missile testing target currently in use. Throughout the years, America's nuclear history in the Marshall Islands has been colored with official denial, extraordinary control of information, and abrogation of commitment to redress the shameful wrongs done to the marhallese people. Scientists and military officials involved in the testing program picked and chose their study subjects, recognized certain communities as exposed when it served scientific interest, and denied monitoring or medical attention to subgroups determined to be non essential or of little interest to the studies. I remember well their visits to Likiep and their invasive physical examinations which, as late as 1978, they denied ever carrying out. I recall with deep sense of sadness their killing of my pet dogs, which had been gifts from the Navy commander on Kwajalein to my grandfather. So American were these dogs, they were named Pal and Bowser. But they told us the dogs were sick. We have recently discovered they were taken for scientific study. The pulling of teeth, both healthy and cavitied, from many of us who thought we were receiving dental care, is remarkable even for the most callous of scientists. But it has now turned out that examination of dental enamel is a good way to trace strontium and cesium deposits in human beings. What people laughed about at the time is now repugnant to me: AEC dentists, coercing youngsters, "olani monki, olani," which translates ,"open wide, monkey, open wide." Even with recently released documents, officials still deny the existence of these studies claiming our recollections are juvenile, and do not take into account the public health missions of the times. For decades, scientists in U.S. agencies utilized slick mathematical and statistical representations to dismiss and marginalize the occurrence of exotic anomolies, including malformed fetuses as unrelated to radiation exposure. We have been told that birthing anomolies in our islands are the result of incestious relationships or that our gene pool is too small. Where numbers cannot be disputed, they claim `statistical insignificance." I served as interpreter for the American authorities who proclaimed Bikini safe for resettlement and commenced a program to repatriate the Bikinians. I accompanied the U.S.. High Commissioner of the Trust Territory just a few years later to once again remove the Bikinians from their home because they began to show extraordinarily high levels of cesium and strontium in their urine. Documents related to the safe resettlement of Enewetak were witheld from us because, as the memo stated, `If the Marshallese negotiators have access to these documents, they may make overreaching demands on the United States.' Let me take you back for a moment to 1946. U.S. Military authorities were quite congizant of the special role of faith and religion among the Marshalese people. In their efforts to convince the people of Bikini to peacefully and quietly leave their home and make way for the tests, they declared the experiments themselves and the destruction of Bikini to be " the will of God." In carefully rehearsed navy propoganda films of the displacement of the Bikini people, the Navy commander is heard proclaiming to the frightened islanders, "as everything is in God's hand, it must be good." The Marshall Islands agreed to a settlement of matters nuclear with the United States in 1982. This agreement was based on assurances contained in the Compact of Free Association treaty that a 1978 study of radiological conditions in the Marshalls was the most accurate and comprehensive representation the United States could present. We have now discovered that even that covenant was false and the official position as enunciated by the current administration in Washington is to flee its repsonsibilities to the Marshall Islands for the severe nuclear injuries and damages perpetrated upon them. People who counted on U.S. guaranteed medical and environmental monitoring are now being deprived of those essential services. As if testing bombs was not enough, ICBM testing also took place in the Marshalls and today the Ronald Reagan Missile defense test site is testing interceptor missiles to search and destroy incoming ICBMs. This testing affects our lives the same way the bomb testing did. People are displaced and forced to live in conditions most Americans would find appalling. Relationships between the military base and the indigenious community which provides its basic labor force is sadly akin to pre-democratic South Africa. People die for lack of medical attention when the hospital at the test site has all the conveniences of modern medicine. Contamination of the environment continues in the form of fuel additives such as perchlorate and depleted uranium but our calls for meaningful and independent examination have not been heeded. We meet today to bring together our stories to form one vision of a nuclear free universe. We are here to remind ourselves and the world of the evils of nuclear weapons and the permanent and immeasurable harm it brings to human beings and their fragile societies. This threat to human life, begins in the maverick use of nuclear power, as well as in its testing and development. We must not succumb to the nuclear propaganda that has kept its ugly head invisible to too many people. With all the people of the world who have survived the force of nuclear weapons, who weep to see their lands destroyed and turned into storages for nuclear waste, to all who have seen the threat this menace holds for human life as we know it, the people of the Marshall Islands nurture a deep sense of brotherhood and unity. We wish to extricate ourselves from the legacy of the nuclear age. Many people say why don't you guys just move away? For indigenous people, it is not that simple. Our lands and waters are sacred to us. Our lands and waters embody our culture, our traditions, our kinship ties, our social structures, and our ability to take care of ourselves. Our lands are irreplaceable. Destruction of our lands and waters is no different from destroying our souls. Our land does not belong to us, we belong to our land. We believe that no nation, no matter how powerful, has the right to destroy the well being and livelihood of any society large or small, in the name of security, even if disguised as the will of God. Security for us means healthy land, resources and body, and harmony with nature. Nuclear weapons are a threat to all of these. We call upon our friends in America and the world to join with us and declare our islands a memorial to world peace free of nuclear arms and all weapons of mass destruction. Then from there let peace spread everywhere on earth, in space, and in the universe. Jeraaman im ainemman nan komuij aolep. Peace be with you. --- End forwarded message --- ____________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos: Now with unlimited storage http://au.photos.yahoo.com ***************************************************************** 34 Guardian Unlimited: EPA Proposing Radiation Exposure Limits [UP] Tuesday August 9, 2005 8:31 PM By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The Environmental Protection Agency, trying to overcome a court ruling that threatens a proposed nuclear waste dump in Nevada, proposed new radiation exposure limits for the project Tuesday aimed at protecting the public for up to 1 million years. Under the proposal, people living near the Yucca Mountain waste site 10,000 years from now could be exposed to as much as 350 additional millirems of radiation annually, more than three times what is allowed from nuclear facilities today by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The maximum levels of exposure before 10,000 years would be 15 millirems per year, a little more than a standard chest X-ray. The new EPA standard is intended to satisfy a court decision a year ago that said the EPA's initial requirements were inadequate because they didn't address exposure limits after 10,000 years, when the site is expected to contain its highest radiation levels. The ruling threatened to cripple the project at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, unless the EPA developed new rules. Yucca Mountain is planned as a national repository for spent commercial reactor fuel and high-level defense waste. The opening date has been repeatedly delayed and is now expected in 2012 or later. The EPA proposal, which would become final after a public comment period, will establish a two-tier standard that limits the level of radiation exposure to the public from the waste dump - one for a period of up to 10,000 years and another for after that point to 1 million years. A federal appeals court in July, 2004, said that the EPA had violated the direction from Congress when it had earlier limited its exposure standards to 10,000 years. A National Academy of Sciences report had said such a standard should target the periods of greatest radiation levels from the waste, a period well beyond 10,000 years. Under the revised standard, a person near the site must be exposed to no more than an additional 15 millirems of radiation over a year up until 10,000 years as a result of radiation leaking from the buried waste through groundwater or other sources. After 10,000 years the exposure limit from the waste site is increased to 350 millirem per year. ``In short they've decided to kill a few people,'' said Joe Egan, an attorney who represented Nevada in the court fight over the project. ``This is an obvious effort to give the project a pass'' after the 10,000 year period Egan said the standard would allow as much as 700 millirem of radiation exposure a year, when added to the 350 millirem of natural background radiation in the Yucca area. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which must still approve a permit for the Yucca waste site, limits public radiation exposure from nuclear facilities it licenses to no more than 100 millirems per year. Jeffrey Holmstead, the EPA's head of air and radiation office, said people living near the site wouldn't be subject to ``any more radiation than millions of people routinely are exposed to from natural radiation'' in cities such as Denver where natural background radiation is high because of their elevation. Annual radiation from natural sources varies widely depending on elevation and other factors, but averages about 300 millirems a year, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It can be as high as 700 millirems in some areas such as Denver, said Holmstead. The Yucca Mountain waste site is being designed to accept highly radioactive used reactor fuel from commercial nuclear power plants around the country as well as some defense waste. The government had hoped to open the underground site by 2010, but that timetable has slipped to 2012 or possibly later. Craig Stevens, a spokesman for the Energy Department, said the administration is firmly committed to pushing ahead with the Yucca project. ``This is a standard that we can certainly meet,'' said Stevens, when told of the EPA's two-tier approach. The Energy Department hopes to submit a formal application for a license for Yucca Mountain with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission early next year, although Stevens said the department was not setting a date. Opponents of the site said it fell short of what is needed. ``It's not a protective standard,'' said Judy Treichel, director of the Las Vegas-based Nuclear Waste Task Force, which opposes the Yucca project. ``It's a way, I guess, for the EPA to help the Department of Energy build its dump.'' --- On the Net Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov Environmental Protection Agency www.doe.gov Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 35 Bellona: Nuclear icebreaker burns again A nuclear-powered icebreaker 50 Let Pobedy, or 50th anniversary of Victory, under construction at St. Petersburg Baltiysky shipyard caught fire on August 5. 2005-08-09 19:07 There was no danger of a radiation leak because the fuel for the reactor has not yet been loaded, St. Petersburg Times reported. “The vessel is still under construction, and therefore there was no nuclear fuel on it,” said Igor Savelyev, head of the plant’s PR department. “Nuclear-powered ships get fueled only just before they begin to work,” Savelyev said. The fire was small and damaged about 40 meters of cable. The reason for the fire was not clear yet, Savelyev said to St. Petersburg Times. The icebreaker had already been on fire in November 2004 when a room of 9 square meters burnt down. At that time one worker on board the ship inhaled fumes from the fire and was hospitalized. Savelyev said little fires on ships under construction are not unusual in any country because “such construction works are often accompanied with fire sources.” “In such conditions the main thing is to stop the fire on time, before it becomes uncontrolled. Therefore our plant even has its own fire station.” The keel of the icebreaker was laid in 1989 and it was put into the water at the end of 1993. But due to the lack of financing, construction was suspended. Partial financing was renewed in the late 1990s. A contract for completing the ship was signed by Baltiysky shipyard and the government in February 2003. It will join the other nuclear icebreakers run by the Murmansk Shipping Company in Murmansk. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 36 Las Vegas SUN: New EPA radiation standard is called outrageous Today: August 09, 2005 at 11:20:7 PDT EPA says revised limits would protect public for 1 million years By Suzanne Struglinski SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Environmental Protection Agency's change in its radiation protection standard, announced this morning, is shocking and outrageous, members of Nevada's team opposing the Yucca Mountain nuclear dump said. The EPA is keeping the 10,000-year radiation protection standard for the proposed dump at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, while creating a different exposure limit after 10,000 years, for up to 1 million years. One part of the new proposed standard has a 15 millirem radiation exposure for up to 10,000 years, the same limit a federal court threw out last year. Another part of the standard limits exposure to 350 millirem per year for 10,000 to 1 million years, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The proposed standards "limit the maximum radiation from the facility so that people living close to Yucca Mountain for a lifetime during the 1 million-year time frame will not receive total radiation any higher than natural levels people currently live with in other areas of the country." Joe Egan, a lawyer who represents Nevada on Yucca issues, said he was shocked by the new numbers. "That is far more outrageous than anything we even expected," Egan said. "If more than 15 millirems is harmful now, it is going to be equally harmful 50,000 years from now. People aren't just going to develop an immunity to radiation." Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency Director Bob Loux said the new standard was "outrageous" because 350 millirem is so high. EPA spokesman John Millett said the 350 millirem standard was an appropriate number given the uncertainties of calculating radiation standards so far into the future. Other Nevada officials initially withheld comments. They said they wanted a chance to examine the EPA's proposal. Attorney General Brian Sandoval said the state must "have the opportunity to review" the proposed standard to see "if it meets scientific muster." He noted the EPA originally said the 10,000 years was a safe standard, but a federal appeals court found it violated the law. Gov. Kenny Guinn is expected to issue a statement later today about the EPA announcement. Egan said it will be up to Sandoval to decide what legal option to pursue, but he would not be suprised if more litigation came out of this. Egan said the proposed standards are worse than those suggested in a study done by the Electric Power Research Institute earlier this year. The state strongly objected to the study. EPRI is an energy and environmental research group that promotes the benefits of nuclear power. Its study advocated that the federal government keep the 10,000-year standard as it stands now and consider the uncertainties that exist when trying to measure things out beyond that time frame. It recommended a "two-tiered dose limit," which means one level for the first 10,000 years and a higher one for after that time consistent with "the increased uncertainty." It did not recommend a specific dose beyond the 15-millirem per year limit now, a little more than a chest X-ray, but the report says a 100-millirem per year dose would be "considered protective under all potential exposure situations." Egan said the 100-millirem recommendation was bad enough. The proposed standard announced today is a "lawyer's dream." "This is a total abdication of science and the law," Egan said. A federal appeals court said last year that the 10,000-year time period previously established by the agency did not follow the law. That ruling threw the proposed nuclear waste dump off schedule until a new standard could be established. The court said the earlier standard was not "based upon and consistent with" a National Academy of Sciences recommendation. Congress wanted the standard to follow what a panel of the academy's experts wanted. The EPA originally set a 10,000-year radiation standard for Yucca in 2001. Under that standard, the department would have to prove people would not be exposed to more than 15 millirems of radiation, a little more than a chest X-ray, each year for 10,000 years. The National Academy of Sciences said it would be better to go to "peak dose" when the radiation levels would be at their highest. This could come 100,000 years into the future or more. Now that the proposed standard is complete, it will have to go through a public comment period before becoming final. EPA will have to evaluate the comments and can make changes before implementing the final standard. Rod McCullum, senior project manager for waste at the Nuclear Energy Institute, could not comment specifically on what EPA proposed, but said he had always believed a two-tiered standard was a "sound, scientific approach." Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., sent a letter to EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson Monday reminding him of a promised public hearing in Las Vegas once the agency issues the rule. The senators also want the agency to hold hearings in Reno and Amargosa Valley and want a public comment period of no less than 180 days. "Because of the enormity, time span and risk of the proposed project, any standard must err on the side of caution in order to guarantee the protection of public health and the environment for hundreds of thousands of years," the senators wrote. Reid spokeswoman Tessa Hafen said the senators got EPA to agree to hearings during talks on Deputy Energy Secretary Clay Sell's confirmation hearing. She said the office had heard the proposal would be coming out in the next two weeks, so they wanted to make sure a formal request for the meetings had been sent. In May, the agency said it would put finish the proposed new standard by September. Peggy Maze Johnson, director of Nevada-based Citizen Alert, and Judy Treichel of the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force met with EPA officials a few weeks ago to discuss how to inform the public about the new standard, they said. Johnson said she asked for details about public protection and the compliance period as they relate to the new proposed standard, but the EPA people she met with "sidestepped" her questions. The new EPA standard is what Johnson feared, she said. She and many other Yucca critics objected to a two-tiered standard. "We don't believe that it's safe,' she said. Treichel said that last time opponents gave comments on a radiation standard, they wanted to see "zero exposure forever" but instead saw 15 millirem for 10,000 years. "I am not sure if this would be any different now," Triechel said. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 37 Battle Creek Enquirer: Depleted uranium is WMD Columnists - Opinion - www.battlecreekenquirer.com Tuesday, August 9, 2005 Leuren Moret My grandfather, U.S. Army Col. Edwin Joseph McAllister, was born in Battle Creek in 1895. He does not know that his first grandchild is an international expert on depleted uranium. I have worked in two U.S. nuclear weapons laboratories, and in 1991 I became a whistleblower at the Livermore lab. Depleted uranium is very, very, very nasty stuff: + Depleted uranium (DU) weaponry meets the definition of weapon of mass destruction in two out of three categories under U.S. Federal Code Title 50 Chapter 40 Section 2302. + DU weaponry violates all international treaties and agreements, Hague and Geneva war conventions, the 1925 Geneva gas protocol, U.S. laws and U.S. military law. + Since 1991, the U.S. has released the radioactive atomicity equivalent of at least 400,000 Nagasaki bombs into the global atmosphere. That is 10 times the amount released during atmospheric testing which was the equivalent of 40,000 Hiroshima bombs. The U.S. has permanently contaminated the global atmosphere with radioactive pollution having a half-life of 2.5 billion years. + The U.S. has illegally conducted four nuclear wars in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and twice in Iraq since 1991, calling DU "conventional" weapons when in fact they are nuclear weapons. + DU on the battlefield has three effects on living systems: it is a heavy metal "chemical" poison, a "radioactive" poison and has a "particulate" effect due to the very tiny size of the particles that are 0.1 microns and smaller. + The blueprint for DU weaponry is a 1943 Manhattan Project memo to Gen. L. Groves that recommended development of radioactive materials as poison gas weapons - dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets. + DU weapons are very effective kinetic energy penetrators, but even more effective bioweapons since uranium has a strong chemical affinity for phosphate structures concentrated in DNA. + DU is the Trojan Horse of nuclear war - it keeps giving and keeps killing. There is no way to clean it up, and no way to turn it off because it continues to decay into other radioactive isotopes in over 20 steps. + Terry Jemison at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs stated in August 2004 that over 518,000 Gulf-era veterans (14-year period) are now on medical disability, and that 7,039 were wounded on the battlefield in that same period. Over 500,000 U.S. veterans are homeless. + In some studies of soldiers who had normal babies before the war, 67 percent of the post-war babies are born with severe birth defects - missing brains, eyes, organs, legs and arms, and blood diseases. + In southern Iraq, scientists are reporting five times higher levels of gamma radiation in the air, which increases the radioactive body burden daily of inhabitants. In fact, Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan are uninhabitable. + Cancer starts with one alpha particle under the right conditions. One gram of DU is the size of a period in this sentence and releases 12,000 alpha particles per second. Before my grandfather died, he told me that his generation had made a mess of this planet. I wonder what he would say to me now I would tell him to see "Beyond Treason" (www.beyondtreason.com), a new documentary about the history of treason by the U.S. government against our own troops: Atomic veterans, MK-Ultra, Agent Orange and DU. After Vietnam, Henry Kissinger said, "Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy. . ." (from Chapter 5 in the "Final Days" by Woodward and Bernstein). Leuren Moret is an international radiation specialist, with a B.S. degree in geology from University of California at Davis, a M.A. degree in Near Eastern studies from University of California at Berkeley and has done post-graduate work in the geosciences at UC-Davis. She is environmental commissioner for the City of Berkeley, Calif. Originally published August 9, 2005 ***************************************************************** 38 Proposed Federal Rule on Radioactive Waste Repository Would Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 20:00:38 -0700 version=3.0.4 X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com IEER Press Release For Immediate Release, 9 August 2005 For further information contact: Arjun Makhijani 301-270-5500 or 301-509-6843 Environmental Protection Agency's Proposed Rule on Repository for High-Level Radioactive Waste Would Seriously Undermine Public Health Rule Seems Designed to Fit Yucca Mountain Proposed Standard Would Allow Largest Radiation to Future Generations in the Western World Takoma Park, Maryland, 9 August 2005: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed rule for radiation doses to future generations would overturn all established principles of public health protection, according to the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER). The dose limit of 350 millirem per year beyond 10,000 years is three-and-a-half times the maximum limit allowed to the public from any human activity (other than medical radiation) according to current limits established in the United States and all western countries. The new rule is being proposed in response to a federal court decision that required the EPA to limit radiation doses to future generations at the time of maximum radioactivity releases from the deep geologic repository being proposed for Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The most highly radioactive and dangerous waste from nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons production is proposed to be buried there. "The EPA now has the dubious distinction of proposing a standard that would be the worst in the Western world, by far," said Dr. Arjun Makhijani, president of IEER. "No Western programs, explicitly allows as large as 350 millirem per year at the time of peak dose." The goal of the French repository program, for instance, is to limit maximum doses, estimated to occur hundreds of thousands of years in the future, to 25 millirem per year. This proposed EPA limit beyond 10,000 years is more than ten times the French goal. The Canadian program limits doses to about 10 millirem per year for 10,000 years but does not allow a sudden increase after that. The EPA proposal would allow a sudden jump from 15 millirem per year to 350 millirem per year at 10,000 years. IEER charged that the rule seems tailored to fit Yucca Mountain so that it could be licensed. According to estimates made by the U.S. Department of Energy, which DOE presented to the Congressionally-mandated Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board in 1999, the maximum dose from Yucca Mountain would be expected to be 200 to 300 millirem per year several hundred thousand years from the present. This is just under the proposed limit. The DOE charts can be seen at http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/vol_7/7-3/yucca.html "The dose limit seems designed to protect the industry's interest in a bad site, rather than public health," said Dr. Makhijani. "This is one more example of what I have called the 'double-standard standard.' When Yucca Mountain cannot meet the rules, the federal agencies change the rules to fit Yucca Mountain." Congress asked the National Academy of Sciences to advise the EPA on setting standards especially for Yucca Mountain in the early 1990s, when it appeared that the site could not meet one of the limits set for nuclear waste repositories set by the EPA in 1989. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has also changed its rules for licensing since Yucca Mountain became the only site under investigation in 1987. The 350 millirem limit proposed by the EPA is, according to its press release, supposed to be "based on natural background radiation levels that people currently live with in the United States." IEER noted that besides natural radiation from cosmic rays and other sources that people get when they are outdoors, the 350 millirem per year number includes exposure to radon inside houses, which constitutes about two-thirds of the total. "It is wrong to consider indoor radon, which is an artifact of construction, as part of 'natural background'" said Dr. Makhijani. "Only doses that are truly natural, that cannot be controlled, should be regarded as natural." "The EPA is misleading the public when it says that this rule is based on natural background radiation levels," said Lisa Ledwidge, IEER's Outreach Director. "The dose limit that EPA is proposing is in addition to, not in place of, the amount of radiation exposure people will already be getting. If the EPA had a number to present they should have presented it without trying to deceptively downplay the risks." It is especially regrettable that the EPA has proposed such a lax rule just on the heels of a National Academy of Sciences report that showed that children are far more susceptible to radiation than adults, and that women and considerably more at risk than men. If a person is exposed to 350 millirem per year every year for 70 years, the lifetime risk of getting cancer due to the exposure would be about 1 in 40. For women it would be about 1 in 30. The risk of dying from that cancer would be about half the risk of contracting it. "A lifetime risk of getting cancer of 1 in 30 violates every risk-based health standard the EPA has ever set for the public even if it far into the future -- it opens the door to a wholesale relaxation on other fronts, such as cleanup of contaminated sites, said Dr. Makhijani. "I consider this the worst single action that the EPA has taken on radiation issues ever since I began analyzing them almost 25 years ago." --30-- To discontinue receiving periodic updates and releases from IEER, reply to this message with REMOVE in the subject line, with message intact. dist Lisa Ledwidge Outreach Director, United States, and Editor of Science for Democratic Action Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) PO Box 6674 | Minneapolis, MN 55406 USA tel. 1-612-722-9700 | fax: please call first | ieer@ieer.org | http://www.ieer.org IEER's main office: 6935 Laurel Ave. Suite 201 | Takoma Park, MD 20912 USA | tel. 1-301-270-5500 | fax 1-301-270-3029 ***************************************************************** 39 NEWS.com.au: China seeks nuclear material (09-08-2005) By Paul Colgan and wires August 09, 2005 [Uranium / File] On sale ... a man works with uranium at the Beverly mine in SA. THE Federal Government is in talks aimed at selling nuclear material to China. Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said the Government was opening talks "on a nuclear co-operation agreement" that would allow China to buy Australian uranium. He said the deal would "establish safeguards ... to ensure Australian uranium supplied to China is used exclusively for peaceful purposes". Leading US think-tank Stratfor has warned the plan is likely to face stiff opposition from several quarters. "Australia is headed for a heated debate pitting an unlikely alliance of anti-nuclear greens and China-phobic nationalists against the Government's desire to assert itself in Asia and to boost its revenue stream in the process," Stratfor said in an analysis today. "The future of Australia as an Asian nation and the direction of massive Chinese energy consumption hang in the balance." Australia controls 40 per cent of the world's uranium resources, while China is the world's second-largest consumer of energy after the US. China is already struggling to meet energy demands in its rapidly growing economy, and it urgently needs new sources of power to maintain that growth. The Federal Government currently has 19 nuclear agreements covering 36 countries, but a deal with China, which has an unknown nuclear capability and a highly secretive nuclear weapons program, may prove the most controversial yet. Opposition resources spokesman Martin Ferguson and trade spokesman Kevin Rudd said today that Labor could not support uranium exports to a country that did not support nuclear safeguards. "Labor has never, and will never, support the export of Australian uranium to countries that do not adhere to strict, internationally recognised nuclear safeguards," they said in a statement. "If the Federal Government is serious in its desire to export uranium to China, then a nuclear co-operation agreement is a critical first step. "Labor urges the Federal Government to adopt an open and consultative approach in the development of this co-operation agreement." The Government argues that uranium exports help to reduce carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming. "Australian uranium exports account for around 2 per cent of total world electricity production," Mr Downer said today. "Countries using Australian uranium avoid carbon dioxide emissions roughly equivalent to Australia's entire annual CO2 emissions." Australia prohibits the sale of uranium for military purposes. A talks timetable has yet to be scheduled but exploratory discussions have already taken place. Australia currently has just three working uranium mine, but last week declared the resource-rich Northern Territory "open for business on uranium mining" after taking control of the deposits from the NT Government. The takeover came after a tussle between the Federal Government and the NT Government, which had pledged to ban new uranium mines. The NT stance threatened to undermine hopes of expanding Australian uranium exports to fuel the growing nuclear power industry around the world, notably in China and India. The only operating mine in the Territory is run by Rio Tinto's Energy Resources of Australia at Ranger, which is surrounded by Kakadu National Park. But Resources Minister Ian MacFarlane said last week that around a dozen companies were exploring for uranium in the Territory, home to some $12 billion worth of known uranium deposits. French nuclear power company Cogema is lobbying traditional land owners in a bid to mine its multi-million-dollar, 14,000-tonne Koongarra deposit in the World Heritage-listed Kakadu park. Uranium prices have been rising steadily in recent years, to around $29 per pound from nearly $10 a pound four years ago, fueled by growing acceptance of nuclear power as an alternative to greenhouse gas producing fossil fuels such as coal and oil. A large number of countries, including China, India, the US, Britain, South Korea and Russia are looking at major expansions of their nuclear power programs. Australia's two other operating uranium mines are BHP Billiton's Olympic Dam and Heathgate Resources' Beverley mine in South Australia. With AAP and Agence France-Presse Search for more ***************************************************************** 40 NEWS.com.au: Uranium deal 'must have safeguards' (09-08-2005) From: AAP ANY deal to send Australian uranium to China must ensure it was only used for peaceful purposes, Labor said today. Opposition resources spokesman Martin Ferguson and Labor's trade spokesman Kevin Rudd said the ALP could not support uranium exports to a country which did not support nuclear safeguards. "Labor has never, and will never, support the export of Australian uranium to countries that do not adhere to strict, internationally recognised nuclear safeguards," they said in a statement. "If the Federal Government is serious in its desire to export uranium to China, then a nuclear co-operation agreement is a critical first step. "Labor urges the Federal Government to adopt an open and consultative approach in the development of this co-operation agreement." It follows a decision by the Government to start formal negotiations with China that would allow the export of Australian uranium. The Government said the agreement would establish safeguards to ensure Australian uranium was only used for peaceful purposes. ***************************************************************** 41 NEWS.com.au: Yellowcake all the buzz at forum (09-08-2005) By Kevin Andrusiak August 09, 2005 WHILE the movers and shakers represent the beating heart of the Diggers and Dealers conference, it is the juniors who mine uranium who ooze the most soul. Uranium stocks are booming as the world searches for alternatives to fossil fuels for a cleaner energy mix. Prices for uranium, which is used to generate 16 per cent of the world's electricity, have risen sharply this year. Since January, the uranium spot price has shot up from $US20 per pound towards $US30 per pound. It was just $US8 per pound 4 1/2 years ago. While stockpiles of the nuclear fuel have decreased, demand is set to rise from reactors being built in China and India. And junior miners are plunging into yellowcake mining. Take NSW explorer Drake Resources. It couldn't have timed yesterday's decision to reveal plans to explore for uranium any better. "You probably get a better longer term future with uranium," Drake managing director Bob Beeson said. "There seems to be a change in sentiment towards uranium in many circles. There has been some interest from the brokers at Diggers." To say uranium will be a hot topic at this year's forum is an understatement. Drake's announcement that it had applied for two uranium exploration licences covering 115 kilometres in Western Australia's northeastern goldfields sent its stock price soaring more than 20 per cent. Chaired by former broker and media owner Brett Fraser, Drake is living the junior resources dream of trying to cash in on booming prices. But it still needs a change of heart from the West Australian Government, which has refused to allow uranium mining in the state. Mr Beeson said the annual Diggers and Dealers conference was the best chance of capturing the mood of the resources industry. Although it will not be presenting at the forum, by paying big bucks for a ticket both Mr Beeson and Mr Fraser get good access to some of the biggest names in the mining industry merely by turning up. Other juniors to make waves yesterday include Troy Resources, Aztec Resources and Kagara Zinc, which announced record profits. Kagara technical director Joe Treacy said the zinc miner had forecast continued earnings growth this financial year, as it boosts copper output from its Mt Garnet zinc operations in North Queensland. Yesterday, it announced a fourfold increase in net annual unaudited profit after tax to a record $14.4 million. "The increased copper production will generate further earnings per share growth for Kagara over the next 12 months and further enhance the foundations for the company's next stage of growth and development," Mr Treacy said. | | | Copyright 2005 News Limited. All times AEST (GMT + 10). ***************************************************************** 42 Guardian Unlimited: Australia Announces China Uranium Talks From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday August 9, 2005 4:01 AM CANBERRA, Australia (AP) - Australia and China are negotiating an agreement to allow Australia to export uranium to China for peaceful purposes, the foreign minister said Tuesday. Preliminary talks are already under way to secure a Chinese commitment that the uranium would be used only for electricity generation, said Foreign Minister Alexander Downer. Australia prohibits the sale of uranium for nuclear weapons, nuclear-powered warships or other military uses. Australia also insists that uranium customers abide by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and prevent radioactive products from being passed to a third country. ``The agreement will establish safeguards arrangements to ensure Australian uranium supplied to China is used exclusively for peaceful purposes,'' Downer said in a statement. Downer said China is the world's second largest energy consumer and plans to meet its growing demands with a fourfold increase in nuclear energy production by 2020. China expects the share of its power supplied by nuclear generation to grow to 4 percent by 2020 from 2.3 percent today. To meet that goal, it must build about two new facilities every year. China will also need to import most of the uranium it needs as its nuclear program expands. Australia has uranium trade agreements with 36 countries, he said. China is already a confirmed nuclear power, along with Russia, Britain, France, India and Pakistan. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 43 Deseret News: Homeland Security to look at Utah site [deseretnews.com] Tuesday, August 9, 2005 By Kersten Swinyard Deseret Morning News The Department of Homeland Security will look early next week at a proposed site for storing spent nuclear fuel rods in the western desert. Officials from the department will tour the area in Skull Valley that is part of the Goshute Reservation, approximately 50 miles west of Salt Lake City. The department had been considering a visit since April and comes to Utah at the request of Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. Private Fuel Storage wants to store approximately 44,000 tons of nuclear waste on 820 acres it would lease from the Goshute Indian tribe in Skull Valley. The visitors will spend about a week looking at the security risks posed by the facility and how well state and local officials could respond in an emergency, said Michelle Petrovich, a spokeswoman for the department. Investigators will then report back to Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff. Hatch, who repeatedly has sought scrutiny for the PFS proposal, tried to require that the department study whether PFS adequately has considered the threat of terrorist attacks, said Adam Elggren, a spokesman for the senator. That failed attempt would have been part of the energy bill, which President Bush signed Monday. This visit by Homeland Security specialists is a long-planned tour of an area Hatch said is dangerously close to airports and major cities. "It's difficult for me to understand how anybody in their right mind in this day of suicide bombers would place 4,000 casks of nuclear waste above ground within 10 minutes of the Salt Lake municipal airport, where thousands of private planes fly in and out," Hatch said. The proposed site also is on the tip of the Utah Test and Training Range, where "F-16s fly with live ordnance and where 70 crashes have taken place," Hatch said. "It's a very unfortunate program to saddle the people of Utah with." Sue Martin, a PFS spokeswoman, said the company is aware of the Homeland Security visit and said "this is just part of their overall effort to look at spent nuclear fuel storage operations all across the country." The tour may not include much sightseeing — the proposed site is mostly desert, Martin said. PFS is awaiting approval from the nuclear Regulatory Commission for its license. The site would hold casks of waste on 100 acres, but access would be controlled to a total of 820 acres PFS wants to lease from the Goshute tribe. The commission may rule on the PFS license at any time, said Victor Dricks, a commission spokesman. Utah politicians have generally opposed the proposal, and Huntsman had sought $10 million to study storing nuclear waste where it is produced. That $10 million has not materialized. E-mail: kswinyard@desnews.comContributing: The Associated Press. © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 44 Las Vegas RJ: Senators ask EPA for public hearings Tuesday, August 09, 2005 Government must revise radiation standards By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada's senators Monday urged the Environmental Protection Agency to hold public hearings in the state after it announces new radiation safety standards for the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. Agency administrator Stephen Johnson promised the EPA would gather comments in Las Vegas, Sens. Harry Reid and John Ensign said. The senators asked Johnson in a letter to add public hearings in Reno and in Amargosa Valley, the community closest to the Yucca site. "It is important that those members of the public potentially most affected by the radiation standard be given the opportunity to meaningfully participate in the decision-making process," the letter said. EPA spokesman Dale Kemery said the agency was reviewing the letter. The EPA has said it plans to disclose revised radiation safety standards by the end of the summer. Its previous standards were declared invalid in July 2004 by a federal appeals court panel. The standards set limits for radiation exposures from waste-containing canisters that are expected to decay over time within Yucca Mountain. Contents of the rusted containers are expected to filter through the mountain and into groundwater over thousands of years. The agency had set a dose limit of 15 millirem per year -- roughly the dose from three chest X-rays -- for individuals living in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain for up to 10,000 years after the repository is filled with nuclear waste and closed. The EPA set a separate standard of 4 millirem per year for groundwater. Judges said the 10,000-year time period was inconsistent with the findings of a National Academies of Science panel that suggested the safety standards should cover a much longer time frame. Copyright Las Vegas Review-Journal ***************************************************************** 45 Interfax: Radioactive wastes won't leave Lithuania - PM Interfax.com Text version Site map Aug 9 2005 9:24PM VILNIUS. Aug 9 (Interfax) - Radioactive wastes from the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania will not be taken out of the country, Prime Minister Algirdas Brazauskas said while visiting the plant on Tuesday. "The Lithuanian state is responsible for the storage and disposal of the radioactive wastes, and therefore it must think where they will be buried," the government press service quoted Brazauskas as saying. A site for burying the wastes has not yet been designated and this problem should be resolved within the next few years, the premier said. © 1991-2005 Interfax All rights reserved News and other data on this web site are provided for information purposes only, and are not intended for republication or redistribution. Republication or redistribution of Interfax content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Interfax. ***************************************************************** 46 Salt Lake Tribune: Feds to check out proposed PFS site Article Last Updated: 08/09/2005 01:08:48 AM Next week: They will look at infrastructure, but Utah seeks answers about its terror attack risk By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune WASHINGTON - The Department of Homeland Security will dispatch a team to Utah next week to assess the security and emergency response measures that would be needed if a nuclear dump is built in Utah's west desert. It is a step that Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch and Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. had been seeking for months, hoping to create new barriers for the nuclear storage facility proposed by Private Fuel Storage, a group of electric utilities. However, the assessment is meant to gather information on the infrastructure needed at the proposed site, rather than to try to measure the threat of a terrorist attack, as Hatch and others wanted. "We'll meet with appropriate representatives from state and local government and the tribe to take a look at the local infrastructures, protective measures, what the local response capabilities are . . . and what the proper site tie-in to other federal security measures might be," said Bill Flynn, director of Homeland Security's Protective Security Division. The Homeland Security team plans to arrive next week at the Skull Valley Goshute Indian reservation, some 50 miles west of Salt Lake City, where PFS proposes storing 44,000 tons of the nuclear waste. They will submit their findings to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff in a report expected to be classified as "secret," and it will be up to the secretary to decide what action or additional studies might be needed. Similar analyses have been done on the infrastructure near commercial nuclear power plants, chemical plants and other facilities around the country. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the final stages of considering the PFS license application and could reach its decision by the end of the summer. It has consistently ruled against the Utah's challenges, including the state's argument that the terrorist threat to the site should preclude it from being licensed. The state has vowed to go to court to try to block the facility if the NRC approves it. Last month, Hatch tried to add language to the Energy Bill that would have required the Department of Homeland Security to study the terrorist vulnerability of the PFS plan before the NRC could license the facility, but Nevada Sen. Harry Reid blocked the effort. The department's analysis won't go as far as Hatch wanted, at least initially, but he called the announcement "a step in the right direction." He said the site - adjacent to the Air Force's Utah Test and Training Range, minutes from Salt Lake International Airport and near a fast-growing population - warrants scrutiny. PFS spokeswoman Sue Martin said the consortium's chairman, John Parkyn, has spoken with the department about its plans to visit the reservation. "His understanding is that this is part of their taking a look at all of the nuclear storage facilities around the country and we're just a piece of that effort, so the fact that they're coming is fine with us," she said. Huntsman's spokeswoman, Tammy Kikuchi, said the governor is pleased with the department's announcement. "The original plans to build the above-ground casks was pre-9/11," she said. "There has always been the danger of the fighter jets that fly at low altitude directly over the casks. Now you have these other considerations that these would invite mischief and . . . are a visible target for terrorists." After meeting with Chertoff in April, Huntsman said the secretary had committed to study the risks associated with the facility, but the department downplayed the commitment. The Homeland Security team will be accompanied by at least one representative of the NRC. © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 47 PBP: Nuclear waste from 1970s, '80s recovered, FPL says By Kristi E. Swartz Palm Beach Post Staff Writer Tuesday, August 09, 2005 The procedures Florida Power & Light Co. and other utilities follow for handling nuclear waste are strict, officials say. Even the most innocuous object that could have been contaminated is carefully checked. "Even if it's a piece of notebook paper, it has to be surveyed," said Roger Hannah, a spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Region II office in Atlanta. Those procedures have been further strengthened by heightened security and improved technology, company officials said Monday, a day after revelations that in the late 1970s and early 1980s, workers at the St. Lucie Nuclear Plant shipped radioactive waste to ordinary landfills, municipal sewage treatment plants and some unknown locations. Internal documents and government records cited by The New York Times on Sunday showed plant workers used a sink to wash mops, rags and other heavily contaminated materials, believing that the drain was connected to the plant's radioactive waste system. Instead, it drained into a sanitary sewage system, according to the documents. The contaminants then were hauled away with sludge. "It was taken out to a field. All of it was recovered and brought back in," Al Gould, waste manager at FPL's St. Lucie plant, said Monday. Company spokeswoman Rachel Scott said the contaminated materials were sent to a farm field that was licensed by the state for nonradioactive sludge disposal. "It was contaminated with extremely low radiation levels," she said. "It was comparable to a normal background radiation level. We were told by regulatory agencies that it was not an issue." The level of contamination is a point of contention between the company and the parents of two children afflicted with cancer who have sued FPL. Zachary Finestone, an 11-year-old who grew up in the area, was diagnosed with cancer in March 2000. Ashton Lowe had brain cancer when he died at age 13 in May 2001. The parents of both children filed suit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in 2003. Finestone's case is scheduled to go to trial in January; Lowe's trial also is scheduled for early 2006. On Monday, FPL officials explained some of the procedures to which the company adheres at its nuclear plants. Employees who work in areas where they may pick up contaminated material change into special clothes before entering those sites, Scott said. All of the laundry is done at the plant, and the water is processed and discarded as low-level waste. "There's federal limits on the levels of radioactivity and how things can be disposed of," Scott said. The NRC monitors how nuclear waste is handled and classifies it into two categories: high-level and low-level. High-level waste is fuel. One-third of the fuel at nuclear plants must be removed every 18 to 24 months, said Mitch Singer, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade association based in Washington, D.C. During this routine maintenance time, known as a "refueling outage," the rods that contain nuclear fuel are removed and placed into a contained area for spent fuel, where they remain for at least five to seven years, Singer said. It's the low-level waste that is more common, yet it is handled on a daily basis with the same scrutiny, officials say. Low-level waste includes anything that was used inside a radiation-control area and may have had a chance to be contaminated. That could mean protective clothing, glass and plastic laboratory supplies, machine parts and tools. "Every time you walk out of that area if you were going to go on a tour of that plant, and you had a camera, they would survey the camera," said the NRC's Hannah. Sometimes an object can be decontaminated by being washed or wiped down. Otherwise, it's waste, Gould said. At that point it would be either incinerated or compacted to reduce its volume to a tenth of the original size, and then shipped to waste sites in Salt Lake City or Barnwell, S.C. "Years ago, you used to ship the waste directly," Gould said. "There have been enhancements in processing, so now 500 cubic feet becomes 50 cubic feet." Sometimes the waste goes through additional security measures called "transportation security claims," Gould said, adding that he could not discuss that in detail. A federal law passed in 1980 made low-level nuclear waste disposal a state responsibility. After that, most of the states banded together in one of 10 disposal compacts. Some states, however, are not affiliated with a compact. "There are only a few low-level waste sites in the country," said David McIntyre, a spokesman for the NRC. "There are others that are licensed to contain or hold or dispose of radiological materials." Most of the low-level waste is shipped to Salt Lake City, though the Barnwell site and another one in Richland, Wash., also take low-level waste. A new site is being developed near Andrews, Texas, and nuclear plant officials are hoping to be able to ship high-level waste to a massive disposal site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada in the near future. FPL, owned by FPL Group Inc. of Juno Beach, operates two nuclear reactors at its St. Lucie plant on Hutchinson Island as well as two nuclear reactors at its Turkey Point plant in Miami-Dade County. FPL Energy, FPL Group's nonregulated subsidiary, operates a nuclear plant in Seabrook, N.H., and holds a majority interest in a 598-megawatt nuclear power plant just north of Cedar Rapids, Iowa. In addition, FPL has joined with eight other utilities to hire two companies that will design two new nuclear-power reactors. NuStart Energy Development LLC, which includes the two nuclear suppliers as well as the nine power companies, is not considering any sites in Florida, FPL has said. Copyright © 2005, The Palm Beach Post. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 48 Paducah Sun: Papers to be signed to clean up tainted groundwater - Papers to be signed to clean up tainted groundwater Regulatory agencies will heat the ground near the cleaning building far below the surface and vacuum out vaporized contamination. By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com 270.575.8656 Tuesday, August 09, 2005 Regulatory agencies will sign a document today for a $40 million project to clean up an area of the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant that is the leading cause of billions of gallons of contaminated groundwater. The document, called a record of decision, is scheduled to be signed at 11:30 a.m. by Bill Murphie, manager of the Department of Energy's Portsmouth (Ohio)/Paducah Project Office, and Kenneth LaPierre, Federal Facilities Branch chief for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The signing is planned for the DOE Site Office in front of the plant. Also on hand will be Lloyd Cress, commissioner of the Kentucky Environmental Protection Cabinet, which has issued a letter agreeing with the decision. The agencies have agreed to heat the ground far below the surface and vacuum out vaporized contamination for carbon-filter treatment. Construction will begin next year, with heating targeted to start in 2007. During testing over several months in 2003, electrodes were buried 100 feet deep near the southwest corner of a cleaning building, called C-400, where the now-banned hazardous degreaser trichloroethylene (TCE) was used extensively for decades to clean uranium-enrichment machinery. The 2003 test proved that 98 percent of the TCE could be removed, said Greg Cook, spokesman for DOE cleanup contractor Bechtel Jacobs. "That was very, very successful, much more than we ever expected it would be," he said. "Now we're applying the same basic technology to the broader area south of the C-400 building, the area that all our measurements show is the area of highest concentration." Cook said it will take several years to clean up the area. Testing removed some virtually pure TCE from the ground, he said. "This is unquestionably the main source of groundwater contamination at the site," Cook said. "It's probably not the only one, but certainly is the main one." Historic spills have left almost 180,000 gallons of TCE beneath the building, some at concentrations more than 20,000 times greater than the federal safe drinking water standard of five parts per billion. That level, at which municipal water systems must treat to remove TCE, is equivalent to five kernels of corn in a silo 45 feet high and 15 feet wide. Molasses-like globs of the hidden, heavier-than-water chemical have lodged in underground rock fissures, feeding traces of TCE into the aquifer almost indefinitely. Cook said two pump-and-treat systems on the northeastern and northwestern plant boundaries continue to remove about 16 million gallons a month, and have cleaned up more than a billion gallons. But the systems only remove the highest concentrations of the contamination, which covers much of the area from the plant to the Ohio River. "We've never actually seen TCE in the river at our monitoring points downstream" of the plant, Cook said, noting that if TCE actually is in the river, it is being diluted below detectable levels. "We have picked it up upstream, but that's not coming from the plant." Used in many industries, TCE is a common groundwater contaminant with various sources, Cook said. The chemical solvent is deemed to be the main public health risk near the plant. The Energy Department spends about $70,000 a year providing free municipal water to 120 properties around the plant that either have contaminated well water or are threatened by it. Those wells have been capped. ***************************************************************** 49 AU ABC: Senate to debate China uranium sales. 10/08/2005. ABC News Online Last Update: Wednesday, August 10, 2005. 0:14am (AEST) The Federal Government's plan for an agreement that would allow Australia to sell uranium to China will be debated in the Senate. The Government has announced that Australia will formally commence negotiations on a nuclear co-operation agreement with China. It insists any deal would include safeguards to ensure Australian uranium is used exclusively for peaceful purposes. Democrats Senator Lyn Allison thinks the Government should insist on disarmament. "I think it's time for our Government to withdraw uranium export agreements with nuclear weapons states and China is one of those," she said. Greens Senator Christine Milne does not trust Beijing. "There can be no guarantee in a dictatorship like China, where corruption is also rife, that that nuclear product won't be used for weapons," she said. She thinks the Government is being hypocritical. "On one hand they're saying that they're concerned about global security and the war on terrorism and on the other they are saying they want to expand uranium exports to China, where there can be no guarantee that that nuclear product won't be used for weapons," she said. ***************************************************************** 50 AU ABC: Darwin Port likely to handle returned nuclear waste. 10/08/2005. ABC News Online The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) says it is likely nuclear waste currently stored overseas will be shipped through Darwin to the waste dump planned for the Northern Territory. The Federal Government is assessing three sites in the Northern Territory where it can construct a national nuclear waste facility. ANSTO chief of operations Ron Cameron says 53 drums of material will be brought in by boat from the United Kingdom within the next eight years, followed by two containers of material from France in 2015. He says no decision has been made on which Australian port would be used but the Port of Darwin will be assessed. Dr Cameron says it would be most likely be brought through Darwin. "The Port of Darwin would be assessed as a possible way of bringing in the overseas material back to Australia," he said. "At this stage no particular decision's been made on which port but the actual process of bringing it back is fairly straightforward." ***************************************************************** 51 AU ABC:P Debate begins on Australia's plans for a uranium agreement with China Last Updated 10/08/2005, 13:40:47 Select text size: The Australian government's plan to negotiate an agreement that will allow it to sell uranium to China is to be debated in the senate. The government insists any deal will include safeguards to ensure Australian uranium is used exclusively for peaceful purposes. But leader of the minor Democrats party, Lyn Allison, says Australia should be more forceful and use its uranium as leverage against those countries that haven't made any commitments to disarmament. "We should certainly be asking China to fulfil it's obligations internationally to disarmament and non proliferation - and the test ban treaty is a part of that," she said. "You don't need to test uranium, rather you don't need to test nuclear weapons. "If you're not developing them, why do you need to test them, why not sign on." Meanwhile, Senator Christine Milne, of the minor Greens party, says she doesn't trust Beijing. "There can be no guarantee in a dictatorship like China, where corruption is also rife, that that nuclear product won't be used for weapons." Sources© ABC 2005 ***************************************************************** 52 Las Vegas SUN: EPA proposing 1 million year radiation rule for Yucca Mountain Today: August 09, 2005 at 17:48:37 PDT By H. JOSEF HEBERT ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON (AP) - Conceding there's no way to know what life will be like in a million years, the Environmental Protection Agency nevertheless proposed limits Tuesday on how much radiation a person should be exposed to from a nuclear waste dump in that distant time. The proposal would limit exposure near the proposed Yucca Mountain facility in Nevada to 15 millirems a year for 10,000 years into the future, but then increase the allowable level to 350 millirems for up to 1 million years. That higher level is more than three times what is allowed from nuclear facilities today by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A standard chest X-ray is about 10 millirems. Asked if there was any way to assure such a standard would be relevant or be met that far in the future, the EPA's Jeffrey Holmstead replied, "That's a pretty darn good question. ... We do the best job given all the science we have." The radiation exposure issue has threatened to cripple the government's plans to bury 77,000 tons of highly radioactive waste - mostly used reactor fuel rods now at commercial power plants - beneath a volcanic ridge at Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert 90 miles from Las Vegas. A year ago a federal court said the EPA standard, which is supposed to ensure nearby residents won't be harmed by leaking radioactivity from the dump, was inadequate because it didn't establish exposure limits beyond 10,000 years. On Tuesday, the EPA announced a revised standard that reaches out to a million years. "That's longer, many times longer than human history," said Holmstead, adding that he's certain the rule will be protective of the public. Once the standard is made final after a comment period, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will decide whether the Yucca facility's design is adequate to meet it. "We're setting a standard that not only protects our children, our grandchildren ... it will protect the next 25,000 generations," said Holmstead. But opponents of the Yucca waste project, including state officials in Nevada, saw it differently. "In short they've decided to kill a few people," said Joe Egan, an attorney who represented Nevada in the court fight over the project. "This is an obvious effort to give the project a pass" after the 10,000 year period. Egan said the standard would allow as much as 700 millirem of radiation exposure a year, when added to the 350 millirem of natural background radiation in the Yucca area. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which must still approve a permit for the Yucca waste site, limits public radiation exposure from nuclear facilities it licenses to no more than 100 millirems per year. Holmstead, who is the EPA's head of air and radiation office, said a person living near the Yucca site will not be subjected to radiation "higher than people are routinely exposed to throughout the country" from natural background sources. He noted that background radiation in Denver is 700 millirems, partly because of its high elevation. The EPA in its document cited natural background radiation levels in Colorado, North and South Dakota and Iowa in some cases was well over 700 millirems a year because of elevation and geology. But Arjun Makhijani, a nuclear physicist who has been critical of the Yucca project and other government nuclear programs, called the standard "lax" and too vague and said to link Yucca Mountain exposure standards to background radiation is misleading if - as the EPA does - you include radiation from naturally occurring radon. Radiation from radon, which occurs naturally in some rocks, can be extremely high in some areas. The NRC says 55 percent of human exposure to ionized radiation comes from radon. The average background radiation from natural sources including radon is about 300 millirem nationwide, according to the NRC. Craig Stevens, a spokesman for the Energy Department, said the administration is firmly committed to pushing ahead with the Yucca project. It plans to submit a formal application for a license to the NRC next year. "This is a standard that we can certainly meet," said Stevens, when told of the EPA's two-tier approach. Reaction to the standard in Nevada was mixed. "It's not a protective standard," said Judy Treichel, director of the Las Vegas-based Nuclear Waste Task Force, which opposes the Yucca project. "It's a way, I guess, for the EPA to help the Department of Energy build its dump." David Swanson, chief of the nuclear repository oversight office in rural Nye County, called it "probably appropriate" "You take your best shot with what you have predicting what will happen in the future, and then you monitor it," he said, adding he feels "comfortable" with the requirements out to 10,000 years. "It's just ridiculous to attempt to project farther than that." --- Associated Press writer Ken Ritter contributed to this story from Las Vegas. --- On the Net Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov Environmental Protection Agency http://www.doe.gov All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 53 Las Vegas SUN: Reaction to proposed EPA radiation standard for Yucca Mountain Today: August 09, 2005 at 17:48:38 PDT ASSOCIATED PRESS LAS VEGAS (AP) - Reaction to a proposed Environmental Protection Agency radiation safety standard for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository: --- "What the agency released today is nothing more than voodoo science and arbitrary numbers," said U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev. "At the time when the public faces the highest risk of radiation exposure, EPA proposes easing the overall public health standard, including throwing out the groundwater standard." Reid, the Senate minority leader, accused the EPA of "trying to silence voices of opposition" by limiting a comment period to 60 days. "This is the latest attempt by the Bush Administration to ignore sound science and disregard the health and safety of Nevadans." --- "It's a positive step forward and we can meet the standard," said Allen Benson, spokesman for the Energy Department and the Yucca Mountain project in Las Vegas. --- "I guess Nevadans are expendable," said Bob Loux, director of Nevada's Nuclear Projects Office and Gov. Kenny Guinn's chief anti-dump spokesman. Loux called the standard "100 times more lenient than for people living next to the 103 (commercial nuclear) reactors around the country, and three and a half times more lenient than even the nuclear power industry was asking for." --- "The standard is probably appropriate," said David Swanson, chief of the nuclear repository oversight office in rural Nye County, which hopes for jobs and other economic benefits as host of the Yucca Mountain project. Swanson said he expected officials would strictly oversee safety and operating rules at the dump. "You take your best shot with what you have predicting what will happen in the future, and then you monitor it," he said. "I feel comfortable with the standard up to 10,000 years. We're dealing with such an incredibly long time period here that, to me, it's just ridiculous to attempt to project farther than that." --- "They said it was their intention to provide protection to the environment and to the people," said Judy Treichel, director of the Las Vegas-based Nuclear Waste Task Force. "They have not done that." Treichel said she and other anti-Yucca advocates met recently with EPA officials who toured southern Nevada to collect opinion about the standard. She said she intends to marshal opposition to the standard during the 60-day comment period. --- "I think it's probably safe," said Jan Cameron, chairwoman of the five-member town advisory board in Amargosa Valley, about 15 miles from Yucca Mountain. "We're talking about projected science. That's a very difficult area." Cameron said many of the farm community's 1,200 residents lived through decades of nuclear weapons testing at the nearby Nevada Test Site, and most were more concerned about jobs than radioactivity from Yucca Mountain. The federal government and the EPA "have to look at ways not only to protect us from possible dangers, but to make sure that if we are going to have it in our backyard that we get some 'plus' stuff," Cameron said. --- The EPA rule represents "a sound scientific approach that employs common sense," said Steve Kerekes, spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry lobbying group in Washington, D.C. "It's going to provide ample protection for public health and safety," he said. --- "This is obviously another example of the Bush administration trying to ram through another environmental policy that threatens the health and safety of not only everyone in Nevada but everyone in the United States," said Sierra Club of Nevada spokeswoman Tara Smith. "If this standard is OK for Nevada, then pretty soon it's going to be OK anywhere they want to store nuclear waste temporarily or permanently." --- "The standard released by the EPA today is arbitrary and grossly misguided," said Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev. "EPA has an obligation to protect public safety today, tomorrow, and in a million years." Gibbons said the EPA had no scientific evidence that increasing its radiation standard from 15 millirem to 350 millirem after 10,000 years was "warranted or safe." "The EPA should not speculate that a standard which is not deemed safe today could miraculously become a safe standard in the future," he said. "Public health and safety standards should not be based on speculation and supposition." --- "This proposal is but the latest in a long line of attempts by the Bush administration to jump-start stalled efforts to bury the nation's nuclear waste in Nevada," Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said in a statement. "The EPA can propose any number it wants, but the real trick will be proving this new standard can be met, and it remains to be proven that can be done." --- "The EPA's so-called 'health standard' projections for determining what is a safe level of radiation exposure for Nevadans are irrational and misguided," said Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev. "Where's the proof that an additional 350 millirem per year of radiation won't have a negative impact on a human being?" Porter said the only way to protect the health and safety of Nevadans was "to make sure Yucca Mountain never becomes a repository for the nation's nuclear waste." --- "I am appalled at the complete arrogance of the EPA in announcing these standards," said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. He called the standard "a blatant disregard for science, the law and the health of Nevadans." "We've been down this road before," Ensign said. "The federal appeals court already determined that the 10,000-year standard violated the law. This new standard is no better, and the EPA has provided no scientific basis for the 350 millirem figure." Ensign also called a 60-day comment period too short. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 54 Hundreds turn out to protest nuclear weapons in Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 15:02:37 -0700 X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com With thanks to all who participated... --Marylia http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/ Hundreds turn out to protest nuclear weapons in Livermore Anniversary of Hiroshima bombing prompts activist rallies at sites across nation By Paul Burgarino, STAFF WRITER LIVERMORE - Hundreds of protesters took part in a rally and processions outside of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Saturday to protest the use of nuclear weapons. The Livermore event was one of four nationally coordinated major rallies at active nuclear weapon sites on the 60th anniversary of the American bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Other protest sites were in Las Vegas, near the Nevada Test Site; Y-12 Production Plant in Oak Ridge, Tenn.; and Los Alamos Lab in New Mexico. At the site many consider the brain of the nuclear weapons complex in the United States, the Seeds of Change: No Nukes! No Wars! rally began with a pot-luck family picnic, where organizers used sharing and coming together to show their aspirations for a nuclear-free world. It is important for us to be here to keep the memories of the horror of Hiroshima alive, said Jeffrey Schurtleff of the Sam Mateo County Green Party. There is a need for activism. If everyone just says no and does not act, then nothing happens. The theme of the event called for protesters to celebrate resistance to nuclear weapons and solidarity. It is wonderful to get everyone together on such a solemn anniversary, said Marylia Kelly of Tri-Valley CARES. We have to promise the victims that this will never happen again and that it is time for [the U.S.] government to stop the further development [of nuclear weapons]. The event culminated with a half-mile peaceful walk to the lab from William Payne Park. At the gates of the weapons site, members of the Buddhist Peace Fellowship conducted a peace meditation. The ceremony concluded with members being able to symbolically plant the seeds of change, by putting sunflower seeds in the earth along the fenceline of the lab. Sunflowers are the international symbol for nuclear disarmament. The goal of the event was to demand an end to nuclear arms development in Livermore and plant the seeds of a more peaceful future for the next generation. It is our hope that our voice helps stop the dangerous design of nuclear weapons, said Tara Dorabjl of Tri-Valley CARES. We are trying to send a clear message that having nuclear weapons anywhere makes us less secure. The Livermore Lab is one of the primary nuclear weapons design labs in the world, and has been named as the sole site to develop the Robust Nuclear Earth Penerator, or RNEP, a new high-yield bomb. Lawrence Livermore was founded in September 1952 as a second nuclear weapons design laboratory to promote innovation in the design of the nations nuclear stockpile through creative science and engineering. The protest was about something that happened seven years before the lab even opened, said David Schwoegler, spokesman for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. What they are protesting now is a question of national security policy and something we can't control here in Livermore. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are the only uses of nuclear weapons in the history of warfare. The two bombs caused approximately 210,000 deaths by the end of 1945. We are gathered in part to honor the victims that suffered from the horror of 60 years ago, and to show that we are a growing non-violent community and celebrate our resistance, said Dorabjl.

In Japan, Hiroshima marked the anniversary with prayers and water for the dead, and a call by the mayor for nuclear powers to abandon their arsenals and stop jeopardizing human survival. At 8:15 a.m., the time of the blast, the citys trolleys stopped and more than 55,000 people at Peace Memorial Park observed a moment of silence that was broken by the ringing of a bronze bell. More than 500 people gathered at a Los Alamos park where research laboratories stood during the Manhattan Project, which developed the worlds first atomic bomb, Near Oak Ridge, some 1,100 demonstrators carrying signs and beating drums marched to the gates of the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant, where the uranium for the original bomb was supplied and warhead parts are still manufactured. Fifteen people were arrested at Oak Ridge for blocking a road outside the heavily guarded weapons factory that helped fuel the bomb during World War II. University of Nevada, Las Vegas, students and peace activists in Las Vegas gathered for seminars and speeches on eliminating nuclear weapons. The stance of protest organizers in Livermore is that the U.S. continues to ramp up its nuclear arsenal as the death toll in Iraq mounts. The government chose Lawrence Livermore to develop the RNEP and plans to double the plutonium supply at the lab, Kelly said. We feel that that a total security of peace comes from getting rid of nuclear weapons, not the creation of more of them. Kelly mentioned that another demonstration outside the lab is being planned for Aug. 9 to commemorate the Nagasaki bombing. The Associated Press contributed to this story. ends Marylia Kelley Executive Director Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) 2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA USA 94551 - is our web site address. Please visit us there! (925) 443-7148 - is our phone (925) 443-0177 - is our fax ***************************************************************** 55 Albuquerque Tribune: Package from LANL contaminates lab By ASSOCIATED PRESS August 9, 2005 LOS ALAMOS - A package sent from Los Alamos National Laboratory contaminated a Pennsylvania lab with a tiny amount of radioactive material, according to a report. A Los Alamos lab worker sent the package on July 20, before he knew he had been contaminated with americium 241, according to a Los Alamos lab incident report made public Monday by the Project on Government Oversight, a lab watchdog based in Washington, D.C. Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory spokeswoman Cindy Clark confirmed that the West Mifflin, Pa., Department of Energy lab received the contaminated package. Eleven workers who handled the shipment did not suffer any adverse effects, but medical tests on them continued, she said. "We don't expect to find anything," she said. The amount of radioactive material found at Bettis was one-one-thousandth of the amount of americium that is typically found in a household smoke detector. Los Alamos lab spokeswoman Kathy DeLucas said Monday that officials also surveyed a private vehicle that was used to transport the package to the lab's warehouse in Los Alamos, where it was picked up by FedEx. A contaminated towel in the car was removed. The warehouse and the workers there were also checked, but DeLucas said nothing turned up. The incident began July 14 when a Los Alamos researcher opened a separate package that contained slightly enriched uranium nitride pellets. That package was contaminated with americium 241, a radioactive decay product of plutonium. The lab said the researcher failed to follow lab procedures by unloading the pellets without the help of a radiological control technician. He spread the contamination to his home and locations he visited in Colorado and Kansas. The contamination was discovered July 25 when a technician noticed a radiological material tag in a trash can in a nonradiological area. It wasn't until two days later that the lab learned of all the possible pathways of contamination, including the package sent to Bettis. DeLucas said once an investigation into the incident is finished, the lab will issue a report on how to prevent such contamination in the future. ***************************************************************** 56 Courier Journal: Agreement reached to cleanup water table around Paducah plant Posted on Tue, Aug. 09, 2005 Associated Press FRANKFORT, Ky. - The U.S. Department of Energy on Tuesday agreed to spend nearly $41 million to help clean up contaminated groundwater around the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. The agreement signed between the state and two federal agencies requires the installation of a system to remove contamination caused by a cleaning solvent long used at the plant, where uranium has been enriched for atomic energy plants. Design of the system will take 15 months. The system is expected to become operational in the fall of 2006 and will be active for several years. Federal authorities learned in 1988 that pollution from the plant had leaked into aquifers and residential wells. The pollution included the degreaser trichloroethylene and technetium 99, a water-soluble radioactive contaminant. The degreaser was used in the C-400 maintenance shop at the plant, which is about 10 miles west of Paducah and employs about 1,500 people. The Energy Department has provided free water since the early 1990s to about 100 residents affected by the plume of polluted water under their homes. The plan basically calls for the installation of an underground system of electrical wires to heat up and vaporize the solvent. The resulting fumes and steam will be vacuumed out of the ground and filtered and contained. Some residents are skeptical about the new plan. But Ronald Lamb, a mechanic who lives near the plant and has been a critic of the slow pace of the cleanup, said, "Anything they can do to slow it down has got to be good." Lamb noted the government has been studying the plume for 16 years and has touted other cleanup technologies that did not work. Lamb believes the underground water pollution has devalued his property, but the government has opposed neighbors' claims in several property damage lawsuits that have been dismissed. Congress recently asked the Energy Department to study the feasibility of buying the approximately 10,000 acres of private property and homes over the polluted groundwater. --- Information from: The Courier-Journal, http://www.courier-journal.com The Paducah Sun, http://www.paducahsun.com ***************************************************************** 57 SF Chronicle: Error at lab spreads nuclear material / Contamination from Los Alamos found in 4 states Keay Davidson, Chronicle Science Writer Tuesday, August 9, 2005 The apparent mishandling of a potentially hazardous radioactive substance by an employee of the University of California-run Los Alamos National Laboratory has resulted in contamination of sites in four states, according to a report released Monday. Traces of the substance have been found in homes in Colorado and Kansas that the Los Alamos employee visited, his own home in New Mexico, and also at the Pennsylvania laboratory where the employee apparently shipped a contaminated package via FedEx. Los Alamos doctors are monitoring the health of the employee and five lab colleagues who might have been contaminated by the substance, radioactive americium-241. So far, none show ill effects, lab officials said Monday. Los Alamos investigators uncovered the incident and reported it in a July 27 press release, but a more extensive internal report by lab officials, obtained by the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), a Washington-based watchdog group, was released Monday. "The package could have contaminated Federal Express workers and other packages," Beth Daley, a POGO spokeswoman, told The Chronicle. "Surprisingly, it took Los Alamos two full days after it discovered the initial contamination incident to notify (the Pennsylvania laboratory) that it was in possession of an unmarked radioactive package." It shows "there's a complete lack of accountability when it comes to health and environmental protection at the lab," Daley added. "It's a sign that the DOE needs to rein UC in. One way to do that is to start fining the university when it violates its regulations and laws." Los Alamos spokeswoman Kathy DeLucas said the lab's investigation of the incident is still under way. She declined to identify any of the people who are being monitored medically, to protect their privacy. The Los Alamos employee normally worked in Los Alamos' Building 66 and studied ways to weld together nuclear fuel pellets for production of fuel for nuclear reactors, DeLucas said. She said a radiological control technician discovered the contamination July 25 while monitoring the building lab for unusual levels of radiation. The lab reported July 27 that it had found contamination of the employee's work space, car and in several locations inside his home. It also found radiological contamination to the employee's skin and clothing. Subsequently, lab investigators have found traces of the radioactive substance at the West Mifflin, Pa., lab of Bettis Laboratory, which had received a FedEx package from the employee, and at homes in Colorado and Kansas that he had visited. The FedEx package was shipped on July 20 as a nonhazardous, domestic unclassified shipment from Los Alamos to Bettis Laboratory, which according to its Web site, "plays a key role in all aspects of the (U.S.) Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program." DeLucas declined to identify where in Colorado or Kansas the contamination occurred. Authorities are still trying to determine how the contamination occurred. There is disagreement over the potential health risks of the contamination. July 27, lab officials said the amount of radioactivity that traveled away from Los Alamos "is a fraction of the radioactivity contained in a typical residential smoke detector ... (The) extremely low levels of radioactive material found at the employee's home do not pose a credible risk to the general public." But POGO officials said they were disturbed by news of the contamination. "The nuclear contaminant involved, americium-241, is far more deadly than 'normal' plutonium if inhaled, despite rosy depictions by the laboratory's public relations office. One speck of the material inhaled can cause cancer," Daley said. According to a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Web site, "americium poses a significant risk if enough is swallowed or inhaled ... It generally stays in the body for decades and continues to expose the surrounding tissues to radiation. This may eventually increase a person's chance of developing cancer, but such cancer effects may not become apparent for several years." UC manages the lab under contract to the U.S. Department of Energy. At present, UC and a few industrial partners, including Bechtel National, are competing for the next Los Alamos management contract with another team led by aerospace giant Lockheed Martin and the University of Texas. DOE is expected to announce the winner by Dec. 1. UC spokesperson Chris Harrington declined Monday to comment on the americium-241 contamination. Americium-241 What is it? A man-made radioactive metal discovered by nuclear chemist Glenn Seaborg. The most important isotope of americium is americium-241. Where does it come from? Americium is produced when plutonium atoms absorb neutrons in nuclear reactors and in nuclear weapons explosions. What is it used for? It is the radiation source for medical diagnostic devices, gauges and distance-sensing devices. Source: Environmental Protection Agency E-mail Keay Davidson at kdavidson@sfchronicle.com. Page A - 1 The San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 58 TheNewMexicoChannel.com: LANL Sends Contaminated Package To Pennsylvania UPDATED: 7:40 pm MDT August 8, 2005 LOS ALAMOS, N.M. -- A report shows a package sent from Los Alamos National Laboratory contaminated a Pennsylvania lab with a tiny amount of radioactive material. A Los Alamos lab worker sent the package July 20, before realizing that he had been contaminated with americium 241. That's according to a Los Alamos lab incident report made public Monday by the Project on Government Oversight, a lab watchdog based in Washington, D.C. Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory spokeswoman Cindy Clark confirmed that the West Mifflin, Pa., lab received the contaminated package. Clark said 11 workers who handled the shipment did not suffer any adverse effects. The Los Alamos worker who was initially contaminated spread it to his home and locations he visited in Colorado and Kansas. Copyright 2005 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. © 2005,Internet Broadcasting Systems, Inc. ***************************************************************** 59 lamonitor.com: Contamination found out of state The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS, , Monitor Assistant Editor The intensity of the latest radiological accident at Los Alamos National Laboratory may be relatively small, but the geographic extent is growing, as new information about the incident emerges. A lab report updated July 29, revealed that the lab worker who was contaminated by americium-241 in mid-July made an ordinary Federal Express shipment of weld test samples he was working on to Bechtel Bettis Inc., a DOE laboratory in West Mifflin, a suburb of Pittsburgh, Penn. The package, processed as a non-hazardous, domestic unclassified shipment contained welded capsules of uranium pellets and was shipped on July 20, according to the report. The occurrence report was obtained by the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington, D.C., public interest organization. The contaminated package reached Bettis on July 21, Bechtel Bettis lab confirmed today. When Bettis was notified by LANL on July 27 that the package might have inadvertently contained radioactivity, Bettis lab's statement said, Bettis conducted a comprehensive survey of items or locations that might have been contaminated. "No radioactivity was found on the outside of the shipping container or in areas of Bettis where the shipment was handled," the statement added. Bettis calculated that the maxium amount of radioactivity detected was about 1/1000 of the amount of radioactivity in a common household smoke detector. Americium-241 is commonly used in a variety of smoke-detectors. While Bechtel Bettis officials found "no adverse affect on Bettis employees, the public or the environment," their statement indicated 11 employees who may have been exposed to the low-level radioactivity are undergoing monitoring. The source of the americium-241 contamination had not been determined at the July 29 update of the occurrence report, and identifying the source is still one of the subjects of the investigation, Delucas said. "We discovered the incident on July 25, but the pathways of contamination weren't fully known until July 27," she added, explaining the two-day delay in notifying the Bettis lab. According to the LANL's report, the problem was initially uncovered when a radiological control supervisor found a radiological material tag in a trash can in an unexpected location - in a non-radiological area of the Sigma Complex in the main administrative area. The supervisor began reconstructing the situation, tracing the event to a technical staff member who had received a shipment of radioactive materials on July 14 and unpacked it at that time. The supervisor surveyed the room and a found reading of 118,000 dpm (disintegrations per second) in areas around the glove box that was used in unpackaging the initial shipment. Significantly lower amounts were subsequently measured on the technical staff member, in his office, and personal badge. A reading of 10,000 dpm was recorded from the back of his office chair and 9,000 dpm on his right thumb. The preliminary investigation led to a temporary closure of the Sigma Complex and several workers from the immediate area were placed on a testing regime. Additional amounts were found at the technical staff member's home, on computer equipment, furniture, and household pipes, as well as on parts of his private vehicle. The worker who delivered the repackaged material for shipment to Pennsylvania was surveyed and a towel on which the shipment rested before being dispatched recorded 2,000 dpm. David Chen, a radiation biologist and director for the molecular radiological biology group at UT Southwestern in Dallas, noted that the alpha particle radiation of americium-241 was not strong enough to penetrate through the dead skin of the employee's thumb, for example, but might pose a more serious problem if it contacted sensitive areas of the nose or eyes. "The problem is we really don't know the low-dose effect," Chen said, a former group leader at LANL, "That's why the Department of Energy has a low-dose program," researching the question. He also noted the long half-life of americium-241, over 400 years, as the reason it had to be cleaned up. Bernie Pleau, a team leader of the Department of Energy's Radiological Assistant Program that conducted sweeps of two out-of-state locations the LANL employee visited, said Monday that the employee drove to his wife's house in Colorado and then on to a location in Kansas. He said harmless amounts of radioactivity were detected, but some items were removed for safe disposal. "It is an ongoing, unraveling story," Delucas said, "One for which we won't have all the facts and details for quite awhile." © 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: *****************************************************************