*****************************************************************
08/30/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.201
*****************************************************************
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 [NYTr] Chirac warns Iran on uranium plans
2 FT.com: Europe’s mendacity doomed Iran talks to failure
3 IPS: IRAN IS NOT THE REAL NUCLEAR THREAT
4 Reuters: New Iran defence minister -atomic arms "forbidden"
5 AFP: Iran claims new nuclear breakthrough
6 Mehr News: Next generation should not have to rely on others for nuc
7 Mehr News: Iran cannot wait any longer in nuclear talks- Rafsanjani
8 IRNA: IAEA report to back up Iran's position in nuclear row - German
9 Guardian Unlimited: China Leader Aims to Address U.S. Worries
10 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Lawmakers Visit North Korea
11 Korea Herald: U.S. agrees to N.K. delay of nuke talks
12 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Pyongyang's mannerisms
13 BBC: US congressmen head for N Korea
14 Xinhua: US Congress delegation visits Pyongyang
15 Reuters: Korea nuclear talks to resume in week of Sept.12-China
16 Guardian Unlimited: Bush is the real threat
17 US: Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Demotion raises many questions
18 US: courant.com: State Files Suit Over Air Guard
19 US: courant.com: Navy Releases Construction Funds
20 Reuters: U.S. praises Libya, wags finger at Iran, North Korea
21 US: OpEdNews.Com: Halliburton Contracts Illegal - But Bush Busts The
22 US: Las Vegas SUN: Rumsfeld: Military-Ecology Balance Needed
23 Las Vegas SUN: Bush: U.S. Must Protect Iraq From Terror
24 US: OJ: Busheviks bust Bunny for blowing whistle on 'improper' Halli
25 Guardian Unlimited: Congress to Consider Nuke Deal With India
26 Guardian Unlimited: Scientist: Brazil Nearly Built Atom Bomb
27 albawaba.com: Egypt refuses to sign nuclear ban treaty if Israel won
28 BBC: Member states discuss UN reform
29 BBC: Nuclear rivals to free prisoners
NUCLEAR REACTORS
30 US: [NukeNet] Close Oyster Creek action alert: Submit public
31 US: NRC: NRC Continues to Monitor Nuclear Plants Affected by Hurrica
32 US: NRC: NRC Renews Operating Licenses for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Pl
33 US: newsobserver.com: Utility eyes new nuclear reactor
34 US: APP.COM: Nuclear agency needs to start answering questions
35 US: APP.COM: Plant, state taking heat on cooling system
36 US: NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting
37 US: Reuters: NRC to survey undamaged Waterford 3 nuclear plant
38 US: Reuters: PSEG fixes failed breaker at N.J. Hope Creek nuke
39 US: Reuters: Entergy reduces Miss. Grand Gulf nuke due Katrina
40 US: Reuters: AEP gets license extensions for Michigan nuke
41 Reuters: German opposition adviser backs longer nuclear extension
42 US: Resource Investor: Progress starts plans for new nuclear power p
NUCLEAR SECURITY
43 People's Daily: Cambodia to strength nuclear transport law
NUCLEAR SAFETY
44 [DU Information List] What have we done - by Dahr jamail
45 Daily Ittefaq: Radioactive wounds of Iraq war
46 US: St. Petersburg Times: For ill workers, families, new hope may he
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
47 US: Bradenton Herald: More drilling tests ahead
48 US: SignOnSanDiego.com: Celebrities urge Schwarzenegger to clean up
49 US: EC: Hollywood Calls for Schwarzenegger to Take Action on Rocket
50 Japan Times: Accident halts transport of radioactive soil
51 AU ABC: Scullion urges NT to name alternate dump site.
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
52 Guardian Unlimited: Idaho Supports Plutonium Production Plan
53 Colorado Daily: Anderson files grievance
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NYTr] Chirac warns Iran on uranium plans
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 12:15:44 -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 Simon McGuinness
[France's lame duck president shares his vacuous imperial dreams.]
The Irish Times, Tue, Aug 30, 05
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2005/0830/586633937FR30CHIRAC.html
Chirac warns Iran on uranium plans
by Lara Marlowe in Paris
FRANCE: President Jacques Chirac yesterday threatened Iran with action
by the United Nations Security Council if the Islamic republic continues
to move towards uranium enrichment.
Mr Chirac spoke in his annual address to the ambassadors' conference,
traditionally a summary of the president's world view.
He gave the Iranian nuclear question top priority, placing it at the
beginning of his speech.
"The use of civilian nuclear energy, which is perfectly legitimate, must
not serve as a pretext for pursuing activities that could actually be
aimed at building up a military nuclear arsenal," Mr Chirac said.
"The International Atomic Energy Agency showed that Iran was conducting
a secret nuclear programme in the past."
Earlier this month, France, Britain and Germany failed to persuade
Tehran to renounce uranium enrichment in exchange for political,
economic and technological incentives offered by the European Union.
Cyrus Nasseri, Iran's negotiator at the IAEA, dismissed the EU offer as
"lollipops".
Mr Chirac nonetheless asked Iran "to choose the path of co-operation and
confidence by carefully examining this offer and resuming their
commitment to suspend activities related to the production of fissile
materials as the Paris agreement demands."
The Paris agreement of November 15th, 2004, said the EU recognised "that
this suspension is a voluntary confidence-building measure and not a
legal obligation".
If Iran did not "restore co-operation and confidence", Mr Chirac said,
"the Security Council will have no choice but to take up the issue." The
other warning in Mr Chirac's speech was directed at Turkey. "Following
its unilateral statement on Cyprus, Turkey must provide the 25-member EU
with clarification and assurances of its determination to fully live up
to its commitments," he said.
On July 29th, Ankara announced that its acceptance of the protocol on
extending the customs union to new EU members in no way signified
recognition of the Greek Cypriot government. Prime Minister Dominque de
Villepin cast doubt on negotiations on Turkish accession, which are due
to begin in five weeks.
"It seems inconceivable that any kind of negotiation process can begin
with a country that does not recognise every member of the EU," he said.
In the past, Mr Chirac supported negotiations with Turkey even when his
right-wing majority opposed EU membership for Ankara. He now appears to
be having second thoughts. "The opening of negotiations with Turkey is
only the start of a long and difficult road, of uncertain outcome..." he
said.
In previous years, Mr Chirac used his speech to France's ambassadors to
criticise the United States. But quibbles with Washington over Iraq, the
Middle East peace process, enlargement of the UN Security Council and
the role of treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol were so subtly stated
yesterday as to be unnoticeable.
Following Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's official visit to Paris last
month, France is in a rare honeymoon stage with Israel. Mr Chirac
praised "the courageous Israeli decision to withdraw from Gaza", adding:
"France commends the exemplary way in which this first step has been
carried out."
Despite France's vote against the European constitutional treaty on May
29th, Mr Chirac has clearly not abandoned his dreams of European power,
though he admitted the need for "a new European impetus".
There was also a warning for the British prime minister, Tony Blair, who
now holds the presidency of the EU.
In the current debate on Europe's future, Mr Chirac said: "I will be
strongly reaffirming the French vision of a political, ambitious, social
Europe rooted in solidarity... Europe is not destined to become a vast
free trade area diluted in the globalised economy... Europe is not a
race to the bottom as regards taxes and social benefits. Europe stands
for common rules to harmonise social legislation upwards."
Britain has clashed with France over the EU services directive and the
working time directive. Mr Chirac warned that "France will be very
vigilant" on both pieces of legislation.
) The Irish Times
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
2 FT.com: Europe’s mendacity doomed Iran talks to failure
Comment & analysis / Comment -
By Trita Parsi
Published: August 30 2005 20:13 | Last updated: August 30 2005
20:13
[Iran EU] The European Union has proved itself a most unsuitable
mediator in the nuclear stand-off between Iran and the US. While
it has managed to win extensive concessions from the Iranian
side, it has failed to compel Washington to provide adequate
incentives for Iran to agree to disregard its rights under the
nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
The Europeans doomed themselves to failure when they rejected
Iran’s right to enrich uranium in return for limited American
support for the EU’s diplomatic efforts. But Iran’s right to
enrich uranium is guaranteed by the NPT, a fact reflected by the
recent International Atomic Energy Agency resolution urging Iran
to “re-establish full suspension of all enrichment related
activities”. This step was deemed a “voluntary, non-legally
binding confidence-building measure”.
Earlier in April, the EU rejected an Iranian proposal to
dismantle its industrial scale enrichment programme while only
keeping a limited number of centrifuges under strict IAEA
inspections. The EU’s decision was not rooted in a disbelief
in the feasibility of the Iranian proposal or the ability of the
UN inspectors to ensure that Iran could not violate its
commitment, but rather in its fear of facing yet another
confrontation with Washington since the Bush administration had
made it clear that it would not accept any deal permitting Iran
to master the fuel cycle. The White House’s position was
spelled out at a press conference on April 28 2005. America
recognises that “we can’t trust the Iranians when it comes
to enriching uranium . . . they should not be allowed to enrich
uranium,” President Bush said.
Clearly incapable of compelling the US to budge, the European
strategy has been to procrastinate on the talks in the hope that
Iran would fail to call the EU’s bluff, while searching for an
exit strategy that would enable the EU to pass the blame on to
Iran. The EU found its perfect scapegoat in Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,
Iran’s new conservative president, whose reputation was
damaged prior to taking office by accusations of involvement in
the 1979 hostage crisis. In early August, the EU proposed to
Iran what an Asian diplomat referred to as an “empty offer”,
knowing that it would cause a crisis during Mr Ahmadinejad’s
first week in office. The European proposal did not recognise
Iran’s right to enrichment and offered only European – not
American – security guarantees in return for Iranian
compromises.
But as the EU ducks its international responsibilities, the
Iranian impasse becomes bigger than just nuclear proliferation.
What is at stake now is the EU’s credibility as a force to be
reckoned with in international politics.
It is true that the international community does not have many
reasons to trust the Iranian regime. At a minimum, its human
rights violations and lack of democracy hinders the development
of trust. Yet, the issue at hand is not whether the
international community can trust Iran, but whether it can trust
the IAEA and the UN inspectors.
In the case of Iraq, trust was put in intelligence reports from
Iraqi dissidents with criminal pasts rather than in the
testimonies of the UN inspection team. We now know that there
were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The IAEA and the UN
inspectors were right and the intelligence reports were wrong.
This time around, the IAEA even assembled a team of American and
international scientists to verify its conclusions, in order to
avoid having its work dismissed by untrusting western
governments.
By rejecting the Iranian compromise proposal to avoid a clash
with Washington, the EU chose to second-guess the IAEA and not
heed the lesson of Iraq. The EU’s exit strategy failed and the
Europeans must now produce a verifiable solution with Washington
that does not negate rights guaranteed by the non-proliferation
treaty.
Symmetry needs to be created in the negotiations by recognising
that Iran’s steps and the west’s incentives can only be
enduring when combined. Instead of demanding Iran permanently
give up its right to enrichment in return for a non-permanent
guarantee of access to fuel by the EU, Iran should be asked to
freeze its enrichment programme as long as the EU and the US
continue to provide it with security guarantees and access to
nuclear fuel.
If the EU chooses to refrain from seeking a nuclear solution out
of fear of angering the Bush administration, the IAEA will be
wise to request mediation from states that have the courage to
live up to their international obligations the next time the
world faces a nuclear crisis.
The writer is a Middle East specialist at Johns Hopkins
University
© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2005. "FT"
and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times.
*****************************************************************
3 IPS: IRAN IS NOT THE REAL NUCLEAR THREAT
Inter Press Service News Agency Wednesday, August 31,
2005 05:57 GMT
Alejandro Teitelbaum
SEPTEMBER 2005 (IPS) - While Germany, France, and Britain are
trying to dissuade Iran from going ahead with its programme of
nuclear fuel production, the United States does not believe
there can be a negotiated solution, and Bush has stated publicly
that the military option is on the table, writes Alejandro
Teitelbaum, lawyer and expert in international relations.
In this analysis, Teitelbaum writes that there is no juridical
basis whatsoever for demanding that Iran not proceed with
completion of its nuclear fuel cycle, including enriching
uranium, which Brazil does without drawing objections from the
IAEA.
The real reasons for the pressure on Iran must be sought
elsewhere: certain countries' interest in maintaining their
oligopoly on uranium enrichment, and the fact that the economy
of the United States appears to be flourishing in part because
of a boom in military industries and other areas of business
related to the wars in the Gulf, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and
Iraq (four wars in fourteen years).
Despite the fact that the security and stability of the Middle
East requires the complete elimination of all nuclear weapons
and other arms of mass destruction, and despite the existence of
an Arab initiative for the creation of a nuclear weapons-free
zone in this area, there is no hope for the formulation of
treaty to bring this about because of Washington's de facto
decree that the status quo remain as is, in other words, that
Israel continue to have weapons of mass destruction while its
neighbours not be permitted to develop nuclear technology.
(END/2005)
This is an abstract from the column. Editors interested in
acquiring the full text of this column, please contact
romacol@ips.orgspecifying the name and address of the
publication as well as a proposed rate. Unfortunately, we cannot
comply with requests from individuals or organisations that do
not represent print media outlets.
Copyright 2005 IPS-Inter Press Service. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
4 Reuters: New Iran defence minister -atomic arms "forbidden"
Tue Aug 30, 2005 7:53 AM ET
TEHRAN, Aug 30 (Reuters) - Iran's new defence minister said on
Tuesday using nuclear technology for military purposes was
forbidden by Islam but Tehran would continue to develop a nuclear
programme to meet its electricity needs.
Speaking at a ceremony to mark his official introduction as
minister, Brigadier-General Mostafa Mohammad Najjar added Iran
would continue to develop ballistic missiles as a deterrent
against attack.
Accused by the United States of seeking atomic arms, Iran says
it has no intention of using its nuclear facilities for anything
other than peaceful purposes.
"As our Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Ali Khamenei) has said, the
non-peaceful use of nuclear technology is religiously forbidden,"
the official IRNA news agency quoted Najjar as saying.
"Since fossil fuels are going to run out we should replace them
with nuclear energy," he said, adding that Iran must prove
through negotiations that it is not trying to build atom bombs.
Concern in the West over Iran's nuclear programme was heightened
this month when it broke U.N. seals and resumed work at a uranium
conversion facility -- a key plant in the process to create
atomic reactor or bomb-grade fuel.
Iran has rejected demands by the board of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that it stop uranium conversion, a
stance which some European Union officials have warned could see
it referred to the U.N. Security Council for punitive action when
the IAEA meets again next month.
In his speech, Najjar highlighted the importance of Iran's
Shahab-3 medium-range ballistic missile -- capable of hitting
Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf.
"One of the major projects pursued by this ministry is the
production of deterrence weapons and the manufacture of Shahab-3
is in accordance with that policy and will not be halted," the
semi-official ISNA news agency quoted him as saying.
Opposition groups say Iran plans to use the Shahab-3 to carry
nuclear warheads. Iran says Shahab-3 is a conventional weapon
which would only be used if Iran came under attack.
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
5 AFP: Iran claims new nuclear breakthrough
Tuesday August 30, 3:26 AM
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran announced it has made another breakthrough
in its controversial nuclear programme by successfully using
biotechnology to extract purer uranium from its mines.
A report on state television said researchers from Iran's Atomic
Energy Organisation, after six years of research, had mastered
the technique of employing microbes to purify uranium ore in
mines prior to mining.
It said "using biotechnology substantially decreases the cost,
increases optimisation and prevents environmental contamination"
in the process that leads to the production of yellowcake, or
concentrated uranium oxide.
The report, quoting a senior researcher, said the microbes were
"successfully used in experimental stages" in central Iran's
uranium mines.
"This bacteria is very valuable" and makes the production of
yellowcake "100 to 200 times cheaper", he said.
Yellowcake is a part of the early stages of the nuclear fuel
cycle -- a process that Iran insists it only wants to master so
it can generate electricity.
The United States in particular accuses Iran of using atomic
energy as a cover for nuclear weapons development.
The latest development, touted by state television as a
"breakthrough", is likely to reinforce the impression among
Iran's critics that even though Tehran has been forced to
suspend certain fuel cycle activities it has continued to make
great strides on others.
To make yellowcake, first uranium ore must be mined, then milled
and processed in acid. But often mined ore is of a very low
concentration and extraction involves expensive and hazardous
processes such as roasting and smelting.
Using biotechnology -- or a technique known as "bioleaching" --
a bacteria introduced to the ore, eats on iron sulphur and
produces sulphuric acid which in turn dissolves the ore and
separates the uranium.
This then makes yellowcake production easier.
On August 8 Iran chose to end its freeze on the conversion of
yellowcake to uranium hexafluoride gas (UF6) at a facility near
the central city of Isfahan.
The Islamic republic had agreed to suspend fuel cycle work, but
partially broke the freeze in retaliation to demands from
Britain, France and Germany that it scrap its fuel cycle
programme in exchange for a package of incentives.
Iran insists it has the "right" to a peaceful nuclear programme
as a signatory of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Yellowcake production and conversion is a precursor to the
ultra-sensitive process of enrichment, which involves UF6 being
spun through cascades of centrifuges to produce enriched
uranium.
When enriched to low levels, reactor fuel is produced.
But high levels of enrichment can produce the core of a nuclear
weapon -- hence the demands of the EU-3 and the United States
for Iran to abandon the fuel cycle altogether as the best
"objective guarantee" it will not acquire the bomb.
So far Iran has agreed to maintain a freeze of enrichment at a
plant in Natanz, although the board of governors of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) -- the UN's nuclear
watchdog -- passed a resolution this month telling Iran to
return to a full freeze.
Iran has refused, despite explicit threats -- including one from
French President Jacques Chirac -- that it faces referral to the
UN Security Council.
In a separate announcement, state television said hardline
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had decided to keep on Gholam Reza
Aghazadeh as head of the Atomic Energy Organisation and one of
his seven vice presidents.
The presidential decree called on Aghazadeh to "use scientists,
specialists and the young and creative forces in the
organisation and to materialise the four principles of my
government" -- which are justice, kindness, serving the people
and spiritual and financial elevation."
Copyright 2005 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
6 Mehr News: Next generation should not have to rely on others for nuclear
fuel: UCF director
MehrNews.com -
Tehran: 21:21 , 2005/08/30
TEHRAN, Aug. 30 (MNA) -- “If we abandon nuclear energy today,
future generations will become dependent on western countries for
nuclear fuel supplies,” director of the Isfahan Uranium
Conversion plant said on Tuesday.
“The United States is giving publicity to this belief that
since Iran possesses fossil fuel it should not make use of
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and this is against the
demand of the Iranian nation,” Faqihian (first name not given)
told a group of people at the first popular conference to support
nuclear technology meant for peaceful purposes.
The nuclear conference was held in Hamedan and attended by a
group of nuclear officials and experts, students and clerics from
Arak, Karaj, Isfahan and Tehran.
Various resources of fossil fuel like coal, electricity and gas
are exhaustible and also cause pollution and climate change,
Faqihian explained.
Referring to Washington’s recent threats against Iran, he
stated, “The U.S. does not want a religious system like Iran to
gain access to nuclear energy; it is also concerned over Iran’s
access to strategic weapons and thus opposes the Islamic
Republic.”
MP Ebrahim Kharkhaneyi who represents Hamedan in the Majlis also
delivered a speech, saying nuclear technology is essential for
the country’s progress and Iran’s decision to gain access to
nuclear energy is irreversible.
He noted that from a total of 490 nuclear reactors worldwide, 105
belong to the U.S., 30 are possessed by France and 7 belong to
Bulgaria which has a population of only seven million.
“Therefore depriving Iran from its right to gain access to
nuclear technology meant for peaceful purposes is
unjustifiable.”
Kharkhaneyi, who is also a member of the Majlis energy committee
said that according to Article 4 of the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty all countries have the right to make peaceful use of
nuclear technology and depriving Iran from this right is an
obvious act of injustice and a politicized approach.
The main reason behind Washington’s opposition toward Iran’s
nuclear program is the fact that it fears a religious nuclear
power like the Islamic Republic will pose a threat to its
interests in the Middle East, he observed.
HL/MS End
MNA
Photo © 2003 Mehr News Agency
*****************************************************************
7 Mehr News: Iran cannot wait any longer in nuclear talks- Rafsanjani
MehrNews.com - Iran, world, political, sport, economic news
Tehran: 20:50 , 2005/08/30
TEHRAN, Aug. 30 (MNA) -- Expediency Council Chairman Akbar
Hashemi Rafsanjani told reporters in Mashhad on Monday that the
Islamic Republic of Iran would present new proposals on its
nuclear dossier in the near future.
He went on to say that Iran has become quite active in the
nuclear sphere, adding that both President Mahmud Ahmadinejad and
Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani have
announced that they have some new initiatives which, hopefully,
will help resolve the issue.
In conclusion, Rafsanjani said that Iran cannot wait any longer
and should take a measure to frustrate those who want to deprive
Iran of nuclear technology.
SA/HG End
MNA
© 2003 Mehr News Agency
*****************************************************************
8 IRNA: IAEA report to back up Iran's position in nuclear row - German daily -
Aug 30, IRNA
The upcoming International Atomic Energy Agency's report on Iran,
scheduled to be released on September 3, will back up Tehran's
position in the ongoing nuclear dispute, saying Iran has not
violated any major regulations of the Vienna-based UN nuclear
watchdog group, the Handelsblatt newspaper reported Tuesday.
The paper cited high-ranking diplomatic circles as saying that
the report is less critical of Iran's nuclear efforts than what
European countries had hoped for.
It added that there was no proof that Iran had in any way
breached IAEA regulations.
The news report concluded by saying since there has been no
proof that Tehran has violated any of its nuclear obligations, it
will be difficult to convince the IAEA Board of Governors to send
Iran's file for possible sanctions to the UN Security Council.
*****************************************************************
9 Guardian Unlimited: China Leader Aims to Address U.S. Worries
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday August 30, 2005 1:01 PM
AP Photo BEJ201
By AUDRA ANG
Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - President Hu Jintao hopes to ease American
concerns about China's growing economic and military might
during his visit to the United States next week, a senior
official said Tuesday.
Hu is due to arrive Monday in the United States at the start of
a two-week trip that also includes stops in Canada and Mexico
and at the United Nations. The visit is Hu's first to the United
States since he became president 2 years ago.
``He will use this opportunity to deliver this important message
to the U.S. leadership and the U.S. public that China is a force
for peace and China's development is peaceful in nature,'' said
He Yafei, director of the Foreign Ministry's North America
division.
``This will also help improve China-U.S. relations and relations
between China and the rest of the world.''
U.S. officials have complained about China's trade policies and
expressed concern about increases in its military spending.
The White House says Hu and President Bush will meet Sept. 7 in
Washington. Hu will also stop in Seattle and Connecticut, where
he will give a speech at Yale University, He said at a news
conference.
The Chinese president will meet members of Congress, business
leaders and academics, He said, but did not give any specifics.
There are no plans for the signing of any agreements, he said.
The two leaders are expected to discuss Taiwan and the
six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear program, He said.
``The Taiwan question has always been a very important question
in the China-U.S. relationship,'' He said. ``It is the biggest
factor affecting the stable development of our relations.''
Taiwan and China split in 1949 during civil war. Beijing claims
the self-ruled island as its territory and has threatened war if
the two sides are not eventually unified.
The United States severed diplomatic relations with Taipei in
1979 but is the island's main arms supplier and could be drawn
into any conflict with Beijing.
``We hope that the U.S. will take relevant actions to stop its
sale of arms to Taiwan and refrain from sending any wrong
signals to secessionist forces in Taiwan,'' He said. ``If this
issue is properly handled, China-U.S. relations can develop in a
stable manner.''
Hu also is expected to address China's huge and growing energy
needs.
Those were highlighted when state-controlled CNOOC Ltd. offered
$18.5 billion for California-based Unocal Corp. CNOOC dropped
its bid Aug. 2 following opposition from U.S. politicians who
complained that the purchase could threaten national security.
He insisted that China followed ``universally recognized
business laws'' in the deal and said the two countries had a
``common interest'' in stepping up energy cooperation.
``We have no intention to scramble for more energy supply with
other countries in the world,'' He said. ``We are willing to
bring about a mutually beneficial and win-win situation in this
regard through equal-footed consultation, equal-footed
cooperation.''
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
10 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Lawmakers Visit North Korea
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday August 30, 2005 11:31 AM
BEIJING (AP) - Two U.S. lawmakers on Tuesday appealed for North
Korea to return to six-nation nuclear disarmament talks as they
set off on an official trip to Pyongyang.
The visit by U.S. Reps. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., and James Leach,
R-Iowa, came after North Korea postponed its return to the talks
by two weeks, blaming U.S.-South Korean military exercises and
Washington's appointment of a human rights envoy. The talks had
been due to resume this week.
``We are headed to Pyongyang to attempt to clarify the remaining
problems and urge the North Korean government to return to the
talks in two weeks with a very positive outlook and approach,''
said Lantos, the senior Democrat on the House International
Relations Committee.
Lantos and Leach stressed in a written statement that they were
visiting the North ``as representatives of the American people,
not as negotiators for the United States.''
Negotiators took a three-week recess earlier this month after
failing to agree on a statement of basic principles. The talks
involve the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and
Russia.
The North's Foreign Ministry said Monday it will return the week
of Sept. 12. The ministry said it refused to talk in the midst
of U.S.-South Korean military exercises that run through Friday,
and it complained about Washington's appointment of an envoy on
human rights in North Korea.
``A delay does not serve well the North Korean people,'' said
Leach, a Republican who is chairman of the House Subcommittee on
East Asian and Pacific Affairs.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
11 Korea Herald: U.S. agrees to N.K. delay of nuke talks
The Bush administration agreed to a delay till the week of
September 12 on resuming talks on the North Korean nuclear
weapons program, sidestepping complaints from the North about
U.S.-South Korean military exercises and naming of a U.S. human
rights envoy.
The State Department credited North Korea with taking a
businesslike attitude toward the effort to haltits nuclear
weapons program in exchange for energy supplies and a U.S.
promise not to attack.
We are prepared to go back the week of Sept. 12, and we are
ready," the State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said
Monday.
The precise start date for the six-party talks will be set by
China and North Korea, he said.
American and North Korean diplomats have been meeting
periodically on the sidelines in New York to try to set the
stage for adoption of a statement of principles designed to
govern ending the weapons program.
The latest session was last week.
North Korea, in announcing it would delay its return to
negotiations for two weeks, blamed U.S. joint military exercises
with South Korea and the appointment of Jay Lefkowitz, a former
adviser to President Bush, to shine a human rights spotlight in
international settings on what the administration has called
"the long-suffering North Korean people."
The North Korean foreign ministry said the six parties in the
negotiations - the Koreas, United States, China, Japan and
Russia - had agreed not to make comments or take actions that
would hinder a resumption of negotiations, which were origianlly
recessed for three weeks from Auig. 7 until this week.
The appointment last week of Lefkowitz "is little short of
spitting at the DPRK (the Democratic People's Republic of
Korea)," the official Korean Central News Agency quoted an
unnamed ministry official as saying.
On the U.S.-South Korean military exercises, the foreign
ministry said it would return to the table "when one will be
able to view that the war exercises have worn down a bit."
McCormack responded that exercises were held annually and posed
no threat to North Korea. And he said Lefkowitz' appointment was
mandated by Congress. However, he added that "it is also
something that the president and Secretary (of State
Condoleezza) Rice wholeheartedly believe in."
The appointment of Lefkowitz does not have anything to do
with the six-party talks," he added.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov telephoned Rice on
Monday. They discussed the North Korean and Iranian nuclear
programs as well as the special session of the U.N. General
Assembly to be held next week in New York, the Russian Foreign
Ministry said.
Differing with the Bush administration, Russia and South Korea
have defended North Korea's right, in principle at least, to
have a civilian nuclear energy program, provided it would be
subject to international inspection.
We're prepared to engage in six-party talks in a constructive
manner," McCormack said. "We hope that all the other parties,
including North Korea, come back to the table and resume the
businesslike atmosphere that they demonstrated during the most
recent session of the talks."
Two U..S. congressmen traveled to North Korea yesterday to try
to narrow the gap separating the two sides and urge the
Stalinist state to return to talks.
Tom Lantos, a Democrat from California, and Jim Leach, a
Republican from Iowa, departed from Beijing as Thai Foreign
Minister Kantathi Suphamongkhon returned to the Chinese capital
after talks in Pyongyang with senior leaders.
2005.08.31
*****************************************************************
12 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Pyongyang's mannerisms
Editorial/Op-Ed
North Korea's announcement Monday of its decision to postpone
the reopening of the six-way talks in Beijing to the middle of
next month once again revealed its modus operandi of trying to
assert itself against what it perceives as external pressures.
And the delay just for two weeks exposed the limits to its
maneuvering in the current international environment.
Pyongyang raised two reasons for the delay - the annual Ulchi
Focus Lens joint exercise between South Korean and U.S. forces
and Washington's appointment of an official to work for the
improvement of the North Korean human rights situation. In past
inter-Korean negotiations, Pyongyang used to postpone a
scheduled conference indefinitely by blaming joint Korea-U.S.
exercises such as Team Spirit.
The words from the North's foreign ministry spokesman, quoted
by the Pyongyang Television, sounded quite anxiously explanatory
if not apologetic. "It is unimaginable for us to sit at the
negotiating table with the United States while the air is filled
with dust from a war game opposing us," the spokesman said. He
expected that the dust from the exercise will somehow settle and
the atmosphere fouled by the joint drill will have improved by
the week starting Sept. 12, allowing the resumption of the
nuclear talks.
The military exercise, a regular event repeated since the late
1960s under different code names, and the appointment of the
human rights ambassador, who will work with funds appropriated
by a special law, have little to do with the six-party talks.
But the North felt these moves as "spitting in our face" - an
act that justified a delay of the Beijing conference - and
laboriously explained its decision to U.S. officials.
Seoul officials seem not quite anxious to find any ulterior
reason for the postponement although they suspect it might be
related to Chinese President Hu Jintao's visit to the United
States next week. Whatever Pyongyang may expect from the meeting
between its chief adversary and closest ally, the whole behavior
of the North over the delay indicated its positive stance toward
the six-way talks.
North Korea now seeks to win a guarantee for its security and
substantial economic aid plus the right to pursue peaceful,
civilian use of atomic power, in exchange for abandoning its
nuclear weapons program. For the next two weeks, Kim Jong-il's
men must be engaged in a frenetic exercise on how to maximize
gains from the deal.
2005.08.31
*****************************************************************
13 BBC: US congressmen head for N Korea
Last Updated: Tuesday, 30 August 2005
[James Leach (r) and Tom Lantos en route to Beijing airport, 30
Aug]
The US congressmen want to get the talks back on track
Two US congressmen are visiting North Korea to urge Pyongyang to
continue talks on its nuclear programme.
Their trip comes a day after North Korea announced that six-party
talks on the issue would not restart until mid-September at the
earliest.
Before then, the fourth round of talks was expected to resume
later this week.
Tom Lantos, a Democrat, and Republican Jim Leach hope to persuade
North Korea that it is in its own interest to return to the
negotiating table.
"A delay does not serve well the North Korean people," Mr Leach
said.
On Monday, North Korean Foreign Minister Paek Nam-sun said that
the talks might resume "just before the end of September".
"If things are going well, mid-September is possible," he added.
He blamed the delay on military drills taking place between the
US and South Korea, which have been denounced by North Korea as a
dry-run for a possible invasion.
Pyongyang's official media again lashed out over the drills on
Tuesday.
"If the US truly wants a negotiated peaceful settlement of the
nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula, it should stop at once its
military blackmail against the DPRK [North Korea]," the official
Minju Joson newspaper said.
Tough hurdles
The fourth round of negotiations - involving North and South
Korea, the US, China, Russia and Japan - began earlier this month
after a break of more than a year.
CRISIS TIMELINE
[The general view of th six-party talks meeting at Diaoyutai
State Guesthouse in Beijing. Archive picture] Oct
2002: US says North Korea is enriching uranium in violation of
agreements Dec 2002: North Korea removes UN seals from Yongbyon
nuclear reactor, expels inspectors Feb 2003: IAEA refers North
Korea to UN Security Council Aug 2003: First round of six-nation
talks begins in Beijing Feb 2005: Pyongyang says it has built
nuclear weapons for self-defence Timeline: Nuclear crisis
But after 13 days, on 7 August, the talks reached a deadlock and
the delegates decided to take a recess, promising to reconvene
after a short time.
When they do finally come back to the negotiating table, the
delegates are likely to face an uphill battle, with many issues
yet to resolve.
Part of the reason for the deadlock was North Korea's insistence
on maintaining a civilian nuclear programme.
The US has argued that it wants all the North's nuclear
facilities dismantled - whether for making weapons or producing
energy.
But chief US envoy Christopher Hills indicated last week that it
was now prepared to be flexible on that issue, saying that if the
North wanted to reclaim access to nuclear energy, that was "not
exactly a showstopper issue".
The timing of North Korea's proposed disarmament is another major
hurdle which delegates need to resolve.
Pyongyang wants to receive aid and diplomatic incentives before
the process is completed, but the US insists all nuclear
facilities are dismantled before any kind of concessions are
made.
*****************************************************************
14 Xinhua: US Congress delegation visits Pyongyang
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2005-08-30 22:44:48
PYONGYANG, Aug. 30 (Xinhuanet) -- A delegation of the United
States Congress Tuesday arrived in Pyongyang in a presumed bid
to break the current deadlock between the US and the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) over the DPRK's nuclear issue
and to further understand the DPRK's standpoint on the issue.
The delegation is headed by James Leach, Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Asian and the Pacific Affairs of the
InternationalRelations Committee of the House of
Representatives.
The DPRK announced on Monday that it would postpone its
participation in the second phase of the fourth round six-party
talks to mid-September because the US recently started
large-scalemilitary exercises dubbed "Ulji Focus Lens-05" with
South Korea and appointed a presidential envoy to oversee the
DPRK's human rights issues.
Leach, a senior Republican, was recently quoted by US
reports as saying that "nothing is more stupid than attacking
the DPRK". He also urged the Bush administration to widen
contact channels with the DPRK, not just limit itself to the
six-party talks. Enditem
Copyright 2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
15 Reuters: Korea nuclear talks to resume in week of Sept.12-China
Tue Aug 30, 2005 9:56 AM ET
BEIJING, Aug 30 (Reuters) - China said on Tuesday that six-way
talks aimed at persuading North Korea to scrap its nuclear
weapons programmes would restart in Beijing in the week of Sept.
12.
"An official from the Chinese Foreign Ministry said here Tuesday
the fourth round of six-party talks on Korean Peninsula nuclear
issue will be resumed in the week of 12 September," the official
Xinhua news agency reported.
Senior Ministry official He Yafei gave no specific time for the
resumption of the talks, saying China was working with other
parties on the timetable, Xinhua said.
It said that He, briefing reporters on President Hu Jintao's
Sept.5-9 visit to Washington for meetings with President George
W. Bush, added: "The two leaders will touch upon this nuclear
issue."
The talks, which went into recess on Aug. 7 after two weeks of
inconclusive discussions, had been due to resume this week.
But a North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman said on Monday
Pyongyang thought it would be best to wait until after joint
U.S.-South Korean military drills were over to resume the talks.
He said his government favoured a resumption of negotiations in
the week of Sept. 12. The Chinese hosts have now confirmed that
timetable.
Pyongyang said on Saturday Washington's decision to appoint a
special envoy to monitor human rights in North Korea had also
cast a shadow over the six-party process, which brings together
the two Koreas, the United States, China, Russia and Japan.
ASSESSING SUMMIT
Some analysts said the reason for the delay might be that
Pyongyang wanted to assess the outcome of the summit between
China, its main ally, and the United States, the country it
considers its main adversary.
North Korea has been playing the nuclear card to win diplomatic
and economic benefits since a standoff began in October 2002,
after Washington said Pyongyang had admitted to a secret
programme to enrich uranium, violating a 1994 accord.
North Korea has since denied having such a programme beyond its
known plutonium plant, but said this year for the first time that
it had nuclear weapons, arguing that it needed them to deter a
hostile United States.
While all six parties agree in principle to denuclearisation of
the Korean Peninsula, analysts said North Korea and the United
States remain far apart on the key issue of Pyongyang's right to
a civilian nuclear programme to be able to reach agreement soon.
U.S. officials have been sceptical about allowing North Korea to
pursue such a programme out of concern that it would actually be
used for military purposes.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry official said on Tuesday the
various parties, notably China, had taken advantage of the recess
to conduct extensive consultations.
He Yafei said the main problem to emerge in the first stage of
the latest round of talks was that the parties concerned differed
on Pyongyang's right to peaceful use of nuclear power.
"China hopes the parties concerned could continue to take
constructive attitude, increase mutual trust and jointly explore
ways to tackle problems so that the talks can come up with
outcome," Xinhua quoted him as saying.
The Korean nuclear issue was so complicated that it could not be
solved in merely several rounds of talks, He said. "There is
still a long way to go."
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
16 Guardian Unlimited: Bush is the real threat
Comment |
Tony Benn
Wednesday August 31, 2005
Now that the US president has announced that he has not ruled out
an attack on Iran, if it does not abandon its nuclear programme,
the Middle East faces a crisis that could dwarf even the dangers
arising from the war in Iraq.
Even a conventional weapon fired at a nuclear research centre -
whether or not a bomb was being made there - would almost
certainly release radioactivity into the atmosphere, with
consequences seen worldwide as a mini-Hiroshima.
We would be told that it had been done to uphold the principles
of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) - an argument that
does not stand up to a moment's examination.
The moral and legal basis of the NPT convention, which the
International Atomic Energy Agency is there to uphold, was based
on the agreement of non-nuclear nations not to acquire nuclear
weapons if nuclear powers undertook not to extend nuclear
arsenals and negotiate to secure their abolition.
Since then, the Americans have launched a programme that would
allow them to use nuclear weapons in space, nuclear
bunker-busting bombs are being developed, and depleted uranium
has been used in Iraq - all of which are clear breaches of the
NPT. Israel, which has a massive nuclear weapons programme, is
accepted as a close ally of the US, which still arms and funds
it.
Even those who are opposed, as I am, to nuclear weapons in every
country including Iran, North Korea, Britain and the US, accept
that nuclear power for electricity generation need not
necessarily lead to the acquisition of the bomb.
Indeed, many years ago, when the shah - who had been put on the
throne by the US - was in power in Iran, enormous pressure was
put on me, as secretary of state for energy, to agree to sell
nuclear power stations to him. That pressure came from the
Atomic Energy Authority, in conjunction with Westinghouse, who
were anxious to promote their own design of reactor.
It is easy to understand why president Bush might see the
bombing of Iran as a way to regain some of the political
credibility he has lost as a result of the growing hostility in
America to the Iraq war due to the heavy casualties suffered by
US forces there .
It is inconceivable that the White House can be contemplating an
invasion of Iran, and what must be intended is a US airstrike,
or airstrikes, on Iranian nuclear installations, comparable to
Israel's bombing of Iraq in 1981. Israel has publicly hinted
that it might do the same again to prevent Iran developing
nuclear nuclear weapons.
Such an attack, whether by the US or Israel, would be in breach
of the UN Charter, as was the invasion of Iraq. But neither
Bush, Sharon nor Blair would take any notice of that.
Some influential Americans appear to be convinced that the US
will attack Iran. Whether they are right or not, the build-up to
a new war is taking exactly the same form as it did in 2002.
First we are being told that Iran poses a military threat,
because it may be developing nuclear weapons. We are assured
that the President is hoping that diplomacy might succeed
through the European negotiations which have been in progress
for some months.
This is just what we were told when Hans Blix was in Baghdad
talking to Saddam on behalf of the UN, but we now know, from a
Downing Street memorandum leaked some months ago, that the
decision to invade had been taken long before that.
That may be the position now, and I fear that if a US attack
does take place, the prime minister will give it his full
support. And one of his reasons for doing so will be the same as
in Iraq: namely the fear that, if he alienates Bush, Britain's
so-called independent deterrent might be taken away. For, as I
also learned when I was energy secretary, Britain is entirely
dependent on the US for the supply of our Trident warheads and
associated technology. They cannot even be targeted unless the
US switches on its global satellite system.
Therefore Britain could be assisting America to commit an act of
aggression under the UN Charter, which could risk a major
nuclear disaster, and doing so supposedly to prevent nuclear
proliferation, with the real motive of making it possible for us
to continue to break the NPT in alliance with America.
The irony is that we might be told that Britain must support
Bush, yet again, because of the threat of weapons of mass
destruction, thus allowing him to kill even more innocent
civilians.
Tony Benn will be talking about War; Religion and politics;
and Democracy, at the Shaw Theatre in London on September 7, 8
and 9
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
17 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Demotion raises many questions
Today: August 30, 2005 at 8:43:37 PDT
LAS VEGAS SUN
Serious questions are raised when a woman with three master's
degrees, 30 years of experience, sterling evaluations, a top
position with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and a reputation
for professionalism is demoted by the Pentagon following her
public criticisms of no-bid contracts issued to Halliburton. Is
the Pentagon vigorously investigating her criticisms? Have any
laws been broken? Doesn't she deserve whistleblower protection?
Will her concerns be reviewed in public? And why is Halliburton,
headed by Dick Cheney before he became vice president, getting
billions of dollars worth of extended contracts with no
requirement to compete with other bidders?
With none of these questions answered satisfactorily, either by
the Pentagon or Halliburton, Bunnatine "Bunny" Greenhouse was
officially demoted Saturday following two years of having the
sword of Damocles hanging over her head. Greenhouse, whose title
in the Corps of Engineers was Principal Assistant Responsible
for Contracting (PARC), was reassigned to a much lower-level
position. She had been the Corps' top procurement officer since
1997, overseeing billions of dollars worth of contracts to
private companies for support services to troops.
In a lengthy article earlier this month, Associated Press
writer Deborah Hastings tried to get answers to the questions
about why Greenhouse was fighting for her job after such a long
and praiseworthy career, but she was stonewalled. What Hastings
did discover, though, is that Greenhouse has long questioned
Halliburton's lucrative contracts with the Pentagon. Greenhouse
criticized a 2000 Halliburton contract for services to troops in
Bosnia, saying costs were "spiraling out of control," Hastings
reported. In 2003 Greenhouse also objected to three contracts,
worth as much as $20 billion, awarded to Halliburton subsidiary
Kellogg, Brown &Root for support services in Iraq. Two of the
contracts were awarded without competitive bidding, Hastings
wrote. Greenhouse took her concerns to Congress and after that
her demotion became just a matter of time.
Retired Lt. Gen. Joe Ballard, who hired Greenhouse when he
commanded the Corps, assessed her fate. "What Bunny is caught up
in is politics of the highest damn order," he told Hastings.
"She is probably the most professional person I've ever met. And
she plays it straight. That created problems for her after I
left."
Partly because of Greenhouse's allegations that the Pentagon
was giving Halliburton preferential treatment, the FBI last fall
expanded an ongoing investigation of the Dallas-based company.
We hope the scope of the investigation includes whether the
Pentagon retaliated against Greenhouse for going public with her
concerns.
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
18 courant.com: State Files Suit Over Air Guard
Courant Services
Challenges Closing Of Fighter Wing Unit
August 30, 2005
By MARK PAZNIOKAS, Courant Staff Writer
Connecticut filed suit Monday challenging the Pentagon's
authority to move a Connecticut Air National Guard fighter wing
out of state without the governor's consent.
One of the defendants is the Base Realignment and Closure
Commission, the federal panel effusively praised last week for
saving the Groton submarine base.
"These are two separate issues, two separate bases. And they
should stand on their merits," Gov. M. Jodi Rell said.
After reversing a Pentagon decision to close the Groton base,
BRAC approved stripping Connecticut of its only Air Guard unit,
the 103rd Fighter Wing.
Nine A-10 attack planes now based at Bradley International
Airport would be combined with another unit, presumably in
Massachusetts. Eight others, including two non-flying training
craft, would be retired, essentially closing the Air Guard base
at Bradley, Rell said.
But Rell and Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said Monday
that the transfer would violate constitutional and statutory
provisions barring such a move without Rell's consent.
Pennsylvania last week persuaded a federal judge to halt a
similar realignment of planes assigned to its Air Guard.
"There is an important principle here that goes back to the
first days of the Republic. The National Guard is the successor
to our militia," Blumenthal said. "We are guaranteed a militia
by the United States Constitution."
The suit filed in U.S. District Court in Hartford also refers to
two laws prohibiting the withdrawal or relocation of a Guard
unit without the approval of a state's governor.
"Today we decided we are going to court to protect my authority
and that of future governors and future commanders in chief,"
Rell said.
The Republican governor is joined as a plaintiff in the suit by
three Democrats: U.S. Sens. Christopher J. Dodd and Joseph I.
Lieberman, plus U.S. Rep. John B. Larson, whose 1st District
includes the Guard base. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and
the BRAC commission are named as defendants.
The suit asks Senior U.S. District Judge Alfred V. Covello to
issue a preliminary injunction barring the BRAC commission from
transmitting its recommendation to the Pentagon.
To prevail, the state must demonstrate harm.
"It degrades the authority of the governor. It undermines our
ability to respond to emergencies," Blumenthal said. "There are
all kinds of harms we are prepared to show in court."
Rell and Brig. Gen. Thaddeus Martin, the commander of the
Connecticut Guard, brushed off questions about Connecticut's
need to maintain control over a small force of fighters whose
main mission is to attack tanks.
"It's a matter of having the law on our side," Rell said.
Martin said loss of the planes also would mean the loss of 384
Guard members, including 143 full-time employees, who are now
available to respond to a variety of emergencies.
Most recently, some of them were detailed to guard the Millstone
nuclear plants when security was heightened after the 9/11
attacks.
The planes, which are equipped with combat cameras, also were
used for air surveillance over Millstone and the state's power
transmission lines.
Lt. Col. John Whitford, a Guard spokesman, said the Pentagon
seemed intent on transferring the planes to Barnes airport in
Westfield, Mass., leaving Bradley with a maintenance function.
But Whitford said the BRAC action last week left unclear whether
the Connecticut A-10s still were bound for Barnes, which also
was designated to become the new home of F-15s now based on Cape
Cod.
"There are a lot of questions," he said.
the Hartford Courant today and receive up to 50%
courant.com is Copyright 2005 by The Hartford Courant
*****************************************************************
19 courant.com: Navy Releases Construction Funds
Groton Sub Base To Get $54 Million
August 30, 2005
By JESSE HAMILTON, Courant Staff Writer
The Navy is releasing about $54 million in construction
money earmarked for the Naval Submarine Base in Groton that had
been frozen pending a decision by the Base Realignment and
Closure Commission on the facility's future.
Officials have learned that the office of the Commander of Navy
Installations gave the go-ahead to resume a number of major
projects that had been delayed. The sub base leadership intends
to get them going as soon as possible, said a spokesman for U.S.
Rep. Rob Simmons, R-2nd, who got word Monday.
By a 7-1 vote, the BRAC last week voted to keep the
90-year-old base open, rejecting Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld's proposal to close it. The commission's base closure
and realignment recommendations will be forwarded to President
Bush by Sept. 8.
The projects at the Groton base include:
+ The replacement of Pier 6, expected to cost about $28 million,
including some dredging.
+ Upgrading a magazine for storing the Tomahawk cruise missiles
that are carried by fast-attack submarines.
+ Building a new submarine escape trainer, a special water
tower that trains submariners how to escape from a disabled
vessel.
+ Rebuilding entrance gates 3 and 5.
According to Simmons' chief of staff, Todd Mitchell, the
decision to keep the base open is "already paying dividends" and
this work will "further modernize an already state-of-the-art
facility."
The projects on the 687-acre base, which hosts 18 fast-attack
nuclear submarines, will be paid for from the congressionally
approved military construction budget.
Other work that was already underway at the base, including
construction work on the main gate and renovation of medical
facilities, were allowed to continue during the BRAC process.
Hartford Courant today and receive up to 50%
*****************************************************************
20 Reuters: U.S. praises Libya, wags finger at Iran, North Korea
Tue Aug 30, 2005 7:48 PM ET
By Sue Pleming
WASHINGTON, Aug 30 (Reuters) - Iran, North Korea and Russia still
are among the world's biggest violators of international arms
control agreements but Libya is a poster child for reform,
according to a U.S. State Department report on Tuesday.
In an unclassified version of a "noncompliance report," the
State Department urged tough action against countries violating
arms control, nonproliferation and disarmament agreements.
"Particularly in a post-9/11 world in which there exists a very
real threat of weapons of mass destruction being used as weapons
of terror, it is vital that the international community take all
steps necessary to end noncompliance," the report said, referring
to the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
The report, which was sent to members of Congress, did not
specify what actions should be taken but a senior State
Department official said the United States was discussing the
report with a variety of countries that she declined to name.
The report was prepared in three versions -- a watered-down
unclassified one for public consumption, another labeled "secret"
and a third marked "top secret" for a very small number of
government officials.
The United States was strongly criticized for the intelligence
it used to justify invading Iraq in 2003. The reason given was to
eradicate weapons of mass destruction but none have been found in
Iraq.
The State Department defended information in its report.
"It's fashionable to knock the compliance process in the wake of
Iraq ... but we have gotten it right more than we have gotten it
wrong," said one State Department official, who spoke on
condition of anonymity.
VIOLATORS
The State Department official called North Korea a "full
service" violator of international weapons agreements and
repeated U.S. concerns about Iran's nuclear program.
Talks have broken down between Iran and the European Union over
Iran's nuclear plans after Iran rejected an offer of incentives
in return for a suspension of sensitive nuclear work.
North Korea held six-party talks aimed at dismantling its
nuclear weapons this month but a new date has not yet been
formally set for the resumption of those discussions, which
include the United States.
While wagging a finger at countries such as Iran and North
Korea, the report praised Libya for its December 2003 decision to
give up its weapons of mass destruction program.
"This gives us a model (for how countries can change)," said the
senior State Department official.
The United States is close to resuming full diplomatic relations
with Libya and the two countries are expected to exchange
ambassadors in the coming months.
Of particular concern in the report were violators of the 1972
Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.
The report said North Korea could probably produce sufficient
quantities of biological agents for military purposes while
Russia had an offensive biological weapons program in violation
of the convention.
On chemical weapons, the United States was concerned about
China, Iran, Russia and Sudan's capabilities. Those believed not
to be in compliance with nuclear agreements such as the 1970
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty included China, Iran and North
Korea, which pulled out of the treaty in 2003.
Government agencies contributing to the report were split on
Cuba's biological weapons but all were confident Cuba had the
"technical capability" to pursue some aspects of an offensive
biological weapon.
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
21 OpEdNews.Com: Halliburton Contracts Illegal - But Bush Busts The Whistleblower
Progressive, Tough Liberal News and Opinion
by Evelyn Pringle
http://www.opednews.com
In October, 2004, Bunnatine Greenhouse, a top military official
responsible for making sure the Army Corps of Engineers complies
with contracting rules, came forward and revealed that top
Pentagon officials showed improper favoritism to Halliburton
when awarding military contracts.
The allegations made by this official were first reported by
Time Magazine.
Greenhouse said that when the Pentagon awarded Halliburton a
five-year $7 billion contract, it pressured her to withdraw her
objections, actions which she claimed were unprecedented in her
experience.
In a letter from her attorney's office, Greenhouse told members
of Congress that the Army gave the no-bid contracts to
Halliburton's subsidiary KBR for political reasons.
Greenhouse charged that contracts were approved over her
reservations, some of which were handwritten on the original
contracts, and extensions of contracts were awarded because
underlings signed them in collusion with senior officials
without her knowledge.
A five-year Iraq contract was awarded less than a month before
the invasion, under a clause which allowed for no-bid contracts
in the case of a "compelling emergency." Greenhouse contends
that she objected to the 5-year terms of the contract,
questioning the probability of an emergency lasting for five
years.
When her superiors signed off on the contract and sent it back
for her approval, she wrote the following message next to her
signature: "I caution that extending this sole-source effort
beyond a one year period could convey an invalid perception that
there is not strong intent for a limited competition."
Federal contracting rules say contracts must be awarded by
career civil servants, not political appointees. Greenhouse
claimed the Army ignored this requirement when giving contracts
to Halliburton and violated "the integrity of the federal
contracting program as it relates to a major defense
contractor."
"Employees of the U.S. government have taken improper action
that favored KBR's interests," Greenhouse wrote. "This conduct
has violated specific regulations and calls into question the
independence" of the contracting process, she said.
She also said the Army altered documents in order to justify the
Halliburton's contract work in the Balkans. In a letter from
Michael Kohn, Greenhouse's attorney, to then acting Army
Secretary Les Brownlee, Greenhouse charged that on a Balkan's
contract, a deputy assistant secretary of the Army had ordered
changes in documents to legitimize the contract "for political
reasons."
According to Kohn's letter, in January 2002, Greenhouse sent an
investigative team to review the Halliburton operation in the
Balkans. After which she reported: "The general feeling in the
theater is that the contractor (KBR) is 'out of control'" and
was able to manipulate Corps of Engineer officials.
The Balkan's contract was scheduled to expire no later than May
27, 2004. However, it was extended without Greenhouse's
knowledge, after a search for other contractors was stopped.
Although the contract was originally awarded a "compelling
emergency" exception, the extended contract was awarded under
another exception, that KBR was the "one and only source."
Nothing was ever done about the illegal contracts awarded to
Halliburton. Instead, less than a year after she reported these
blatant violations of procurement law, Bush decided to bust the
Whistleblower, Ms Greenhouse.
The August 29, 2005 New York Times reports: "A top Army
contracting official who criticized a large, noncompetitive
contract with the Halliburton Company for work in Iraq was
demoted Saturday for what the Army called poor job performance.
"The official, Bunnatine H. Greenhouse," the Times wrote, "has
worked in military procurement for 20 years and for the past
several years had been the chief overseer of contracts at the
Army Corps of Engineers, the agency that has managed much of the
reconstruction work in Iraq."
Ms Greenhouse's lawyer, Michael Kohn, "called the action an
"obvious reprisal" for the strong objections she raised in 2003
to a series of corps decisions involving the Halliburton
subsidiary Kellogg Brown &Root, which has garnered more than $10
billion for work in Iraq," according to the Times.
Whistleblower Told The Truth
When Cheney appeared on NBC's Meet the Press on Sept 14, 2003,
he arrogantly stated: "And as vice president, I have absolutely
no influence of, involvement of, knowledge of in any way, shape
or form of contracts led by the Corps of Engineers or anybody
else in the federal government."
And when Cheney was specifically asked whether he had known
about Halliburton's no-bid contract, he said, "I don't know any
of the details of the contract because I deliberately stayed
away from any information on that."
Those statements were proven false on June, 2004, by an article
in Time Magazine entitled, The Paper Trail: Did Cheney Okay a
Deal?
The truth is, Bush and Cheney both were informed that
Halliburton would get the contract before it was ever awarded.
Time Magazine quoted an email sent by the Army Corps of
Engineers, that said the contract for construction of oil
pipelines was approved by Under Secretary of Defense Douglas
Feith contingent on informing WH tomorrow. We anticipate no
issues since action has been coordinated w VPs [Vice
Presidents] office.
The author of the email, Stephen Browning, said in an interview
that he wrote the memo after he and retired Lt Gen Jay Garner
met with Douglas Feith about plans to declassify the earlier
$1.8 million contract with the Halliburton.
According to Browning, Feith told him that he had already
informed Cheney's office.
The email was dated March 5, 2003, and Halliburton was awarded
the contract three days later without allowing for any bids from
other companies.
The email totally contradicts Cheney's televised claims that he
had no involvement in Halliburton's contracts whatsoever and
proves that Cheney and the White House played a key role in
boosting Halliburton into the number one war profiteering
position in Iraq.
When confronted with the email, Bush dismissed it by saying the
Corp of Engineers was just trying to give the Vice President's
office a heads-up on the process. Now I suppose people's
opinions could vary as to what the email actually meant,
depending on what the definition of co-or-di-na-ted is.
No Political Appointees Were Involved - None
In the heat of the debate over Halliburton contracts, some
readers may recall a news conference, where Richard Boucher,
spokesman for State Department at the time, explained how
decisions are made on military contracts. "The decisions are
made by career procurement officials. There's a separation, a
wall, between them and political-level questions when they're
doing the contracts," he said.
Then the chief counsel of the Army Corp of Engineers appeared on
"60 Minutes" where he denied that there was any involvement by
political appointees in the Halliburton contract. He
specifically said: "The procurement of this particular contract
was done by career civil servants."
We also heard from a spokesman from the Department of Defense,
Major Joseph Yoswa, who claimed safeguards existed to insure
that the process was free of favoritism. "Most important, he
said, career civil servants, not political appointees, make
final decisions on contracts," according to The New Yorker.
Next Halliburton spokeswoman, Wendy Hall, stepped up to the mike
in August, 2003, and said Halliburton's military contracts were
awarded "not by politicians but by government civil servants,
under strict guidelines."
Finally, during a hearing on March 11, 2004, before the
Government Reform Committee, six senior government officials
from the CPA and DOD testified under oath, and were each asked
the following question by Republican Committee Chairman, Tom
Davis:
"I want to get this on the record, and everybody is under oath.
Have you or anyone in your office ever discussed with the Vice
President or with his office the award of a contract for Iraqi
reconstruction prior to any contract being awarded?"
Every single one of those six officials said "no sir," which
means every single one of them lied under oath. I may not know
how Cheney got this number of people to lie under oath, but the
fact is he did it and nothing was ever done about it.
Three months after the hearing, the June 14, 2004, LA Times
reported: "The Pentagon admitted that a $7 billion no-bid
contract to extinguish oil fires in Iraq was awarded to
Halliburton after a political appointee from the Bush
administration recommended the company for the job."
The political appointee referred to was Michael Mobbs, a special
assistant to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith.
During the Summer of 2002, the Times wrote, "Mobbs was in charge
of the Pentagon's Energy Infrastructure Planning Group (EIPG) to
develop a plan for reconstructing Iraq's oil industry."
This is how the Halliburton contract got set up. In November
2002, a Pentagon group led by Mobbs (under Cheney's
instruction), came up with the idea to pay Halliburton $1.9
million to develop a secret contingency plan for handling the
Iraqi oil industry. Its important to understand that it was this
order to develop a contingency plan, that ultimately led to the
firm being awarded the $7 billion oil infrastructure contract.
To ensure that Halliburton would get the contract, Cheney used
the exact same strategy that he developed back when he was
secretary of defense during the first Bush Presidency. The way
it works is actually quite simple. Halliburton gets funding to
create a market for its services and then it becomes the logical
company to carry out the plan when the time for awarding
contracts rolls around.
I'm sure no one needs reminding of how well this plan paid off
for Cheney when he left office in 1992 and soon thereafter
became very gainfully employed with Halliburton. Ten years
later, his method of contract manipulation worked like a charm
again.
According to testimony at a House oversight hearing, by GAO
investigator, William Woods, it was discovered that Michael
Mobbs even acknowledged in a memo that the $1.9 million task
order would uniquely position Halliburton to win the far larger
sole-source contract to actually do the restoration work to
Iraqi oil fields.
In fact, Mobbs himself later admitted that he had described the
contingency plan in a meeting of the Deputies' Committee to an
audience that including Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby,
Rice's deputy national security adviser, Steven Hadley (guy who
took the fall for the 16 words about uranium in Africa in Bush's
state of the union address), the deputy secretaries of state and
defense, and the deputy director of the CIA.
On March 8, 2003, Halliburton was awarded the $7 billion
contract and the war began on March 20, 2003.
When the topic of the no-bid contract came up in the media, Bush
claimed that it was merely a deal to put out oil well fires.
However, Pentagon officials were soon forced to admit that it
was a very big deal and would in fact amount to billions of
dollars for Halliburton. But even then, the story of the day was
that the contract was only temporary and would be replaced by
competitive bidding shortly.
After months of senseless delays, new contracts were finally
awarded on January 16, 2004 but once again, Halliburton netted
the top prize. The Parsons Corporation was awarded an $800
million contract, but the $1.2 billion contract went to
Halliburton.
During a June 8, 2004, briefing to staff members of the House
Committee on Government Reform, Mobbs and Pentagon officials
were asked about the specific details of the contracting
procedure that was employed with Halliburton.
Before making a final decision, Mobbs admitted that he briefed
top officials from several executive agencies, in the Deputies
Committee, to make sure they had no objections. According to
Mobbs, White House Staff members were also at the meeting. After
that meeting, Mobb's said that a White House official told
Douglas Feith that the group did not object.
These disclosures prove that Cheney and Bush were informed about
the Halliburton contracts on at least two key occasions during
the procurement process.
So we've got all these high level officials plotting together
for 6 months to set up a plan to hand Halliburton billions of
dollars, and Bush and Cheney expect us to believe that not one
of these guys uttered a word about contracts to either one of
them.
And the media is no help.
During the Clinton administration, it chased after a stupid
story about a 20-year-old land deal involving $100,000 (hardly
the crime of the century) for 8 years and to this day, I still
have never figured out what they were expecting to find exactly.
I do know one thing, it wasn't that the Clintons and their
cronies were accused of funneling billions of tax dollars
through the bodies of our slain and injured young soldiers like
what is going on right now in the Bush administration.
The media in fact spends very little effort and time
investigating and reporting on the real crimes within the
current administration, even when they involve fraud and
corruption by officials at every level of government who are
openly handing our tax dollars to war profiteers to the tune of
a billion dollars a month.
I often find myself wondering whether the mainstream media has
been bought off entirely.
Who's Next In Line For Retaliation?
The question is, who's next? Greenhouse wasn't the only official
to report on the illegal procurement practices of the Bush
administration. According to a report on an investigation of
Halliburton by the Government Accounting Office titled,
Rebuilding Iraq: Fiscal Year 2003 Contract Award Procedures and
Management Challenges, contracts worth billions of dollars were
awarded to Halliburton without full and open competition,
including Iraq's oil infrastructure contract.
The GAO determined that the administration had violated
procurement law when it issued various task orders under already
existing contracts and that out of 11 task orders examined, more
than half were awarded outside the scope of their contracts.
As an example of the inept procurement process, the GAO report
described how "a military review board approved a six-month
renewal contract with Halliburton worth $587 million in just ten
minutes and based on only six pages of documentation."
After wasting millions of tax dollars conducting the
investigation, the GAO concluded that the contracts should have
never been awarded to the company in the first place and yet
Halliburton remains the number one contractor in Iraq. Go figure.
Evelyn Pringle
epringle05@yahoo.com
(Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for Independent Media TV and an
investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in
government)
Copyright OpEdNews, 2002-2005
*****************************************************************
22 Las Vegas SUN: Rumsfeld: Military-Ecology Balance Needed
Today: August 30, 2005 at 10:56:36 PDT
By CHERYL WITTENAUER ASSOCIATED PRESS
ST. LOUIS (AP) -
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld warned Monday that
procedures designed to protect the environment can sometimes
jeopardize U.S. troops and should be balanced against military
needs.
"When those concerns are not balanced, the consequence can be
unfortunate," he told those gathered here for a White House
Conference on Cooperative Conservation.
The military is rarely on the same side as environmentalists in
political battles. Many of the Defense Department's training
ranges are in remote areas. Since 2002, the Pentagon has asked
Congress to exempt the military from various environmental laws
or grant it delays in meeting regulatory requirements.
Congress has agreed so far to five of the Pentagon's eight
requests, including making changes to the Endangered Species
Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Marine Mammal
Protection Act.
Lawmakers initially rejected most of the Pentagon's appeals
after Congress' Government Accountability Office reported in
2002 it had found little to support the Pentagon's claims that
environmental laws are hindering military training.
Rumsfeld mentioned several projects Monday where the military
and conservationists worked together. He pointed to the
resurgence of the red-cockaded woodpecker, an endangered
species, on U.S. military bases in the southeastern United
States.
He said the Defense Department recognizes that some lifesaving
military training depends on conserving habitat for wildlife and
forestalling encroachment by suburban sprawl.
Working with conservation groups and other agencies to set aside
buffers for wildlife habitat on nearby private lands has allowed
the military to conduct exercises without restrictions on noise
and use of airspace while simultaneously protecting the habitat,
Rumsfeld said.
Steven McCormick, president of the Nature Conservancy, which has
sometimes been a Pentagon partner in securing land and funding
for buffers around military bases, said there is a "tremendous
opportunity" for more joint efforts.
In northwest Florida, one of the largest open-air military test
areas in the country was threatened by rapid growth at its edges
until the Pentagon and other groups conserved open space along a
100-mile corridor.
Military bases and suburban communities do not have an easy
coexistence, said Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of Defense
Alex Beehler. Residents don't like low-flying planes or remotely
controlled weapons messing with their garage door openers. Nor
does the military want urban glow to interfere with military
exercises at night, he said.
Military bases in areas once considered remote are now the
habitats for a quarter of all 1,268 endangered and threatened
species because their grounds are less disturbed, Beehler said.
--
On the Net:
White House Conference on Cooperative Conservation:
http://www.conservation.ceq.gov/
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
23 Las Vegas SUN: Bush: U.S. Must Protect Iraq From Terror
Today: August 30, 2005 at 15:47:33 PDT
By JENNIFER LOVEN ASSOCIATED PRESS
CORONADO, Calif. (AP) - President Bush on Tuesday answered
growing anti-war protests with a fresh reason for American
troops to continue fighting in Iraq: protection of the country's
vast oil fields that he said would otherwise fall under the
control of terrorist extremists.
The president, standing against a backdrop of the imposing USS
Ronald Reagan, the newest aircraft carrier in the Navy's fleet,
said terrorists would be denied their goal of making Iraq a base
from which to recruit followers, train them and finance new
attacks.
"We will defeat the terrorists," Bush said. "We will build a
free Iraq that will fight terrorists instead of giving them aid
and sanctuary."
Appearing at the Naval Air Station North Island to commemorate
the anniversary of the Allies' World War II victory over Japan,
Bush compared his resolve now to President Franklin D.
Roosevelt's in the 1940s and said America's mission in Iraq is
to turn it into a democratic ally just as the U.S. did with
Japan after its 1945 surrender.
But Democrats said Bush's leadership falls far short of
Roosevelt's.
"Democratic Presidents Roosevelt and Truman led America to
victory in World War II because they laid out a clear plan for
success to the American people, America's allies and America's
troops," said Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean. "President
Bush has failed to put together a plan, so despite the bravery
and sacrifice of our troops, we are not making the progress that
we should be in Iraq. The troops, our allies and the American
people deserve better leadership from our commander in chief."
The speech was Bush's third in just over a week defending his
Iraq policies, as the White House scrambles to counter growing
public concern about the war. But the devastation wrought by
Hurricane Katrina in the Gulf Coast drew attention away, as the
White House announced during the president's remarks that he was
cutting his August vacation short to return to Washington to
personally oversee the federal response effort.
After the speech, Bush hurried back to Texas ahead of schedule
to prepare to fly back to the nation's capital Wednesday. He
originally was to return to the White House on Friday, after
spending more than four weeks operating from his ranch in
Crawford, Texas.
Bush's August break has been marked by problems in Iraq.
It has been an especially deadly month there for U.S. troops,
with the number of those who have died since the invasion of
Iraq in March 2003 now nearing 1,900.
The growing death toll has become a regular feature of the
slightly larger protests that Bush now encounters everywhere he
goes - a movement that has been given new life by a vigil set up
in a field down the road from the president's ranch by a mother
grieving the loss of her soldier son in Iraq.
Cindy Sheehan arrived in Crawford, Texas, only days after Bush
did, asking for a meeting so he could explain why her son and
others are dying in Iraq. The White House refused, and Sheehan's
camp turned into a hub of activity for hundreds of activists
around the country demanding that troops be brought home.
Nationwide, Bush's approval rating on his handling of Iraq has
fallen below 40 percent.
This week, the administration also had to defend the proposed
constitution produced in Iraq at U.S. urging. Critics fear the
impact of its rejection by many Sunnis and say it fails to
protect religious freedom and women's rights.
At the naval base, Bush declared, "We will not rest until
victory is America's and our freedom is secure" from al-Qaida
and its forces in Iraq led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
"If Zarqawi and bin Laden gain control of Iraq, they would
create a new training ground for future terrorist attacks," Bush
said. "They'd seize oil fields to fund their ambitions. They
could recruit more terrorists by claiming a historic victory
over the United States and our coalition."
Hoping to invoke the powerful feelings of national pride in
World War II, Bush said the mission in Iraq must succeed in
order to honor the sacrifice of that conflict's soldiers.
"We will never let the new enemies of a new century destroy with
cowardice what these Americans built with courage," Bush said to
an audience that including some WWII veterans.
Bush's V-J Day ceremony did not fall on the actual anniversary.
Japan announced its surrender on Aug. 15, 1945 - Aug. 14 in the
United States because of the time difference. Sept. 2, 1945, is
the day the surrender was signed aboard the USS Missouri.
Tuesday, the day the president spoke, was the 60th anniversary
of Gen. Douglas MacArthur's arrival in Japan to direct the U.S.
occupation and reconstruction of the vanquished foe.
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
24 OJ: Busheviks bust Bunny for blowing whistle on 'improper' Halliburton
contracts
[Online Journal]
Special Report
By Evelyn Pringle
August 31, 2005In October 2004, Bunnatine (Bunny) Greenhouse,
who was the top civilian official responsible for making sure
the Army Corps of Engineers complies with contracting rules,
came forward and revealed that top Pentagon officials showed
improper favoritism to Halliburton when awarding military
contracts. Her reward for blowing the whistle? Demotion.
The allegations made by this official were first reported by
Time Magazine.
Greenhouse said that when the Pentagon awarded Halliburton a
five-year $7 billion contract, it pressured her to withdraw her
objections, actions which she claimed were unprecedented in her
experience.
In a letter from her attorney's office, Greenhouse told members
of Congress that the Army gave the no-bid contracts to
Halliburton's subsidiary KBR for political reasons.
Greenhouse charged that contracts were approved over her
reservations, some of which were handwritten on the original
contracts, and extensions of contracts were awarded because
underlings signed them in collusion with senior officials
without her knowledge.
A five-year Iraq contract was awarded less than a month before
the invasion, under a clause which allowed for no-bid contracts
in the case of a "compelling emergency." Greenhouse contends
that she objected to the 5-year terms of the contract,
questioning the probability of an emergency lasting for five
years.
When her superiors signed off on the contract and sent it back
for her approval, she wrote the following message next to her
signature: "I caution that extending this sole-source effort
beyond a one year period could convey an invalid perception that
there is not strong intent for a limited competition."
Federal contracting rules say contracts must be awarded by
career civil servants, not political appointees. Greenhouse
claimed the Army ignored this requirement when giving contracts
to Halliburton and violated "the integrity of the federal
contracting program as it relates to a major defense
contractor."
"Employees of the U.S. government have taken improper action
that favored KBR's interests," Greenhouse wrote. "This conduct
has violated specific regulations and calls into question the
independence" of the contracting process, she said.
She also said the Army altered documents in order to justify the
Halliburton's contract work in the Balkans. In a letter from
Michael Kohn, Greenhouse's attorney, to then acting Army
Secretary Les Brownlee, Greenhouse charged that on a Balkan's
contract, a deputy assistant secretary of the Army had ordered
changes in documents to legitimize the contract "for political
reasons."
According to Kohn's letter, in January 2002, Greenhouse sent an
investigative team to review the Halliburton operation in the
Balkans. After which she reported: "The general feeling in the
theater is that the contractor (KBR) is 'out of control'" and
was able to manipulate Corps of Engineer officials.
The Balkan's contract was scheduled to expire no later than May
27, 2004. However, it was extended without Greenhouse's
knowledge, after a search for other contractors was stopped.
Although the contract was originally awarded a "compelling
emergency" exception, the extended contract was awarded under
another exception, that KBR was the "one and only source."
Nothing was ever done about the illegal contracts awarded to
Halliburton. Instead, less than a year after she reported these
blatant violations of procurement law, Bush decided to bust the
Whistleblower, Ms Greenhouse.
The August 29, 2005 New York Times reports: "A top Army
contracting official who criticized a large, noncompetitive
contract with the Halliburton Company for work in Iraq was
demoted Saturday for what the Army called poor job performance."
"The official, Bunnatine H. Greenhouse," the Times wrote, "has
worked in military procurement for 20 years and for the past
several years had been the chief overseer of contracts at the
Army Corps of Engineers, the agency that has managed much of the
reconstruction work in Iraq."
Ms Greenhouse's lawyer, Michael Kohn, called the action an
"obvious reprisal" for the strong objections she raised in 2003
to a series of corps decisions involving the Halliburton
subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root, which has garnered more than
$10 billion for work in Iraq," according to the Times.
Whistleblower Told the Truth
When Cheney appeared on NBC's Meet the Press on Sept 14, 2003,
he arrogantly stated: "And as vice president, I have absolutely
no influence of, involvement of, knowledge of in any way, shape
or form of contracts led by the Corps of Engineers or anybody
else in the federal government."
And when Cheney was specifically asked whether he had known
about Halliburton's no-bid contract, he said, "I don't know any
of the details of the contract because I deliberately stayed
away from any information on that."
Those statements were proven false on June, 2004, by an article
in Time Magazine entitled, "The Paper Trail: Did Cheney Okay a
Deal?
The truth is Bush and Cheney both were informed that Halliburton
would get the contract before it was ever awarded. Time Magazine
quoted an email sent by the Army Corps of Engineers that said
the contract for construction of oil pipelines was approved by
Under Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith "contingent on
informing WH tomorrow. We anticipate no issues since action has
been coordinated w[ith] VP's [vice president's] office.
The author of the email, Stephen Browning, said in an interview
that he wrote the memo after he and retired Lt Gen Jay Garner
met with Douglas Feith about plans to declassify the earlier
$1.8 million contract with the Halliburton.
According to Browning, Feith told him that he had already
informed Cheney's office.
The email was dated March 5, 2003, and Halliburton was awarded
the contract three days later without allowing for any bids from
other companies.
The email totally contradicts Cheney's televised claims that he
had no involvement in Halliburton's contracts whatsoever and
proves that Cheney and the White House played a key role in
boosting Halliburton into the number one war profiteering
position in Iraq.
When confronted with the email, Bush dismissed it by saying the
Corp of Engineers was just trying to give the vice president's
office a heads-up on the process. Now I suppose people's
opinions could vary as to what the email actually meant,
depending on what the definition of co-or-di-na-ted is.
No Political Appointees Were InvolvedNone
In the heat of the debate over Halliburton contracts, some
readers may recall a news conference, where Richard Boucher,
spokesman for State Department at the time, explained how
decisions are made on military contracts. "The decisions are
made by career procurement officials. There's a separation, a
wall, between them and political-level questions when they're
doing the contracts," he said.
Then the chief counsel of the Army Corp of Engineers appeared on
"60 Minutes" where he denied that there was any involvement by
political appointees in the Halliburton contract. He
specifically said: "The procurement of this particular contract
was done by career civil servants."
We also heard from a spokesman from the Department of Defense,
Major Joseph Yoswa, who claimed safeguards existed to insure
that the process was free of favoritism. "Most important, he
said, "career civil servants, not political appointees, make
final decisions on contracts," according to The New Yorker.
Next Halliburton spokeswoman, Wendy Hall, stepped up to the mike
in August 2003, and said Halliburton's military contracts were
awarded "not by politicians but by government civil servants,
under strict guidelines."
Finally, during a hearing on March 11, 2004, before the
Government Reform Committee, six senior government officials
from the CPA and DOD testified under oath, and were each asked
the following question by Committee Chairman Tom Davis (R-Va.):
"I want to get this on the record, and everybody is under oath.
Have you or anyone in your office ever discussed with the vice
president or with his office the award of a contract for Iraqi
reconstruction prior to any contract being awarded?"
Every single one of those six officials said "no sir," which
means every single one of them lied under oath. I may not know
how Cheney got this number of people to lie under oath, but the
fact is he did it and nothing was ever done about it.
Three months after the hearing, the June 14, 2004, LA Times
reported: "The Pentagon admitted that a $7 billion no-bid
contract to extinguish oil fires in Iraq was awarded to
Halliburton after a political appointee from the Bush
administration recommended the company for the job."
The political appointee referred to was Michael Mobbs, a special
assistant to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith.
During the Summer of 2002, the Times wrote, "Mobbs was in charge
of the Pentagon's Energy Infrastructure Planning Group (EIPG) to
develop a plan for reconstructing Iraq's oil industry."
This is how the Halliburton contract got set up. In November
2002, a Pentagon group led by Mobbs (under Cheney's
instruction), came up with the idea to pay Halliburton $1.9
million to develop a secret contingency plan for handling the
Iraqi oil industry. Its important to understand that it was this
order to develop a contingency plan, that ultimately led to the
firm being awarded the $7 billion oil infrastructure contract.
To ensure that Halliburton would get the contract, Cheney used
the exact same strategy that he developed back when he was
secretary of defense during the first Bush Presidency. The way
it works is actually quite simple. Halliburton gets funding to
create a market for its services and then it becomes the logical
company to carry out the plan when the time for awarding
contracts rolls around.
I'm sure no one needs reminding of how well this plan paid off
for Cheney when he left office in 1992 and soon thereafter
became very gainfully employed with Halliburton. Ten years
later, his method of contract manipulation worked like a charm
again.
According to testimony at a House oversight hearing, by GAO
investigator, William Woods, it was discovered that Michael
Mobbs even acknowledged in a memo that the $1.9 million task
order would uniquely position Halliburton to win the far larger
sole-source contract to actually do the restoration work to
Iraqi oil fields.
In fact, Mobbs himself later admitted that he had described the
contingency plan in a meeting of the Deputies' Committee to an
audience that including Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby,
Rice's deputy national security adviser, Steven Hadley (guy who
took the fall for the 16 words about uranium in Africa in Bush's
state of the union address), the deputy secretaries of state and
defense, and the deputy director of the CIA.
On March 8, 2003, Halliburton was awarded the $7 billion
contract and the war began on March 20, 2003.
When the topic of the no-bid contract came up in the media, Bush
claimed that it was merely a deal to put out oil well fires.
However, Pentagon officials were soon forced to admit that it
was a very big deal and would in fact amount to billions of
dollars for Halliburton. But even then, the story of the day was
that the contract was only temporary and would be replaced by
competitive bidding shortly.
After months of senseless delays, new contracts were finally
awarded on January 16, 2004 but once again, Halliburton netted
the top prize. The Parsons Corporation was awarded an $800
million contract, but the $1.2 billion contract went to
Halliburton.
During a June 8, 2004, briefing to staff members of the House
Committee on Government Reform, Mobbs and Pentagon officials
were asked about the specific details of the contracting
procedure that was employed with Halliburton.
Before making a final decision, Mobbs admitted that he briefed
top officials from several executive agencies, in the Deputies
Committee, to make sure they had no objections. According to
Mobbs, White House Staff members were also at the meeting. After
that meeting, Mobbs said that a White House official told
Douglas Feith that the group did not object.
These disclosures prove that Cheney and Bush were informed about
the Halliburton contracts on at least two key occasions during
the procurement process.
So we've got all these high level officials plotting together
for 6 months to set up a plan to hand Halliburton billions of
dollars, and Bush and Cheney expect us to believe that not one
of these guys uttered a word about contracts to either one of
them.
And the media is no help.
During the Clinton administration, it chased after a stupid
story about a 20-year-old land deal involving $100,000 (hardly
the crime of the century) for 8 years and to this day, I still
have never figured out what they were expecting to find exactly.
I do know one thing, it wasn't that the Clintons and their
cronies were accused of funneling billions of tax dollars
through the bodies of our slain and injured young soldiers like
what is going on right now in the Bush administration.
The media in fact spends very little effort and time
investigating and reporting on the real crimes within the
current administration, even when they involve fraud and
corruption by officials at every level of government who are
openly handing our tax dollars to war profiteers to the tune of
a billion dollars a month.
I often find myself wondering whether the mainstream media has
been bought off entirely.
Who's Next in Line for Retaliation?
The question is, who's next? Greenhouse wasn't the only official
to report on the illegal procurement practices of the Bush
administration. According to a report on an investigation of
Halliburton by the Government Accounting Office titled,
Rebuilding Iraq: Fiscal Year 2003 Contract Award Procedures and
Management Challenges, contracts worth billions of dollars were
awarded to Halliburton without full and open competition,
including Iraq's oil infrastructure contract.
The GAO determined that the administration had violated
procurement law when it issued various task orders under already
existing contracts and that out of 11 task orders examined, more
than half were awarded outside the scope of their contracts.
As an example of the inept procurement process, the GAO report
described how "a military review board approved a six-month
renewal contract with Halliburton worth $587 million in just ten
minutes and based on only six pages of documentation."
After wasting millions of tax dollars conducting the
investigation, the GAO concluded that the contracts should have
never been awarded to the company in the first place and yet
Halliburton remains the number one contractor in Iraq. Go
figure.
Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for Independent Media TV and an
investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in
government. She can be reached at:
epringle05@yahoo.com
Copyright 1998-2005 Online Journal. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
25 Guardian Unlimited: Congress to Consider Nuke Deal With India
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday August 30, 2005 8:01 AM
AP Photo WX101
By FOSTER KLUG
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Congress will soon take a hard look at
President Bush's plan to share civilian nuclear technology with
India, a proposal that could bolster an important U.S. ally -
though some fear it would open the floodgates to nuclear
proliferation.
Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced the
agreement during a visit to Washington last month. Before the
technology can be shipped to India, Congress must approve an
exception to - or change - the U.S. law banning civilian nuclear
cooperation with countries that haven't submitted to full
nuclear inspections.
The administration will start pushing its case in earnest after
lawmakers return from their summer break Sept. 6. Already,
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has sought support from
congressional leaders.
Some legislators believe the deal would rewrite the rules on how
the world exchanges nuclear supplies. India has refused to sign
the international Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and some
fear that the Bush plan could eventually allow rogue countries
outside the NPT to build nuclear weapons programs with imported
civilian nuclear technology.
Others call it a clever U.S. strategy to help sate a thirst for
energy in the world's largest democracy while setting up nuclear
safeguards. If China's influence in Asia is counterbalanced by
India's new strength and prestige, they argue, so much the
better.
The stakes of the debate are high, and other nuclear powers -
and those who hope one day to join the club - will closely watch
what Congress decides.
``At the end of the day, historians are going to judge this
agreement primarily by whether or not it does provide a
convenient pretext for other non-nuclear weapons states to
become nuclear weapons states,'' said Robert Hathaway, director
of the Woodrow Wilson Center's Asia Program.
Indian and White House officials are working on the deal's
specifics, and both sides have agreed to review their progress
when Bush visits India in the spring.
While many lawmakers are undecided or aren't making public their
views yet, Sen. John Cornyn said he supports it.
``It just makes enormous sense that the world's largest
democracy and the world's oldest democracy get together and work
together in pursuit of our common values,'' said the Texas
Republican. Cornyn chairs the bipartisan India Caucus, which
promotes Indian affairs in Congress.
For some, however, the deal would ruin the Nonproliferation
Treaty, which was created, in part, to allow civilian nuclear
cooperation with those countries that agree not to pursue
nuclear weapons. Critics question how the Bush administration
can provide nuclear technology to India, which besides shunning
the NPT conducted nuclear tests in 1974 and 1998.
``With one decision, Bush has made a mockery of the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty and the likelihood that any other
country in the world will take it seriously,'' said Democratic
Rep. Edward Markey.
In return for U.S. civilian nuclear technology, India says it
will separate its civilian and military nuclear facilities,
declare its civilian facilities to the United Nations' nuclear
watchdog agency and continue a self-imposed moratorium on
nuclear testing.
Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns has said that India's
promises ``will, in effect, in a de facto sense, have India
agreeing to the same measures that most of the NPT states have
agreed to.''
Dennis Kux, a retired State Department South Asia specialist,
said the deal ``would create a new category of states, with
India the first member. It sets a precedent: we're saying you
can be a responsible nuclear player, by following the NPT norms,
without being in the NPT.''
As he works to persuade Congress, Bush will likely have the
support of a large group of legislators from both parties eager
to encourage India's recent economic success. In the 100-member
Senate, the India Caucus chaired by Cornyn and Sen. Hillary
Rodham Clinton, a Democrat, includes more than 40 lawmakers.
Democratic Rep. Frank Pallone, the founder of the House India
Caucus, which has nearly 200 members, said India would use U.S.
nuclear technology responsibly ``because everything in India is
civilian controlled. They have no history of trying to send
nuclear weapons or technology to third parties.''
Still, some worry how the world's other nuclear powers will view
a unilateral decision by the United States to loosen
restrictions on the distribution of nuclear supplies.
``The signal is that we want to change the rules of the game,''
said Michael Krepon, an expert on South Asia at the Henry L.
Stimson Center. ``Other nuclear suppliers will be very free to
reinterpret the rules as they like in subsequent cases.''
India's nuclear rival Pakistan, where scientist A.Q. Khan ran a
network smuggling nuclear technology to Libya, Iran and North
Korea, will be particularly interested in what happens in
Congress.
``This is a big deal for Pakistan,'' Krepon said. ``If an
exception is to be made for India, it should be made for
Pakistan, as well. That's Pakistan's position.''
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
26 Guardian Unlimited: Scientist: Brazil Nearly Built Atom Bomb
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday August 30, 2005 8:16 AM
By MICHAEL ASTOR
Associated Press Writer
RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (AP) - Brazil's military continued work
on an atomic bomb after it was ordered to scrap the program in
1985 and by 1990 had nearly finished building one, a leading
nuclear scientist said.
Jose Luiz Santana, the former president of Brazil's nuclear
energy commission, known by its Portuguese acronym CNEN, said
the military was preparing a test explosion when the program was
ultimately dismantled in August 1990.
Earlier this month, former President Jose Sarney, who led
Brazil's first civilian government after a 1964-85 military
dictatorship, told Globo TV that he scrapped a program to build
an atomic bomb when he came to power. The ruling generals were
long suspected of seeking nuclear weapons, but Sarney's comments
were the first confirmation of the secret program.
Santana, however, said the military was still working on a bomb
when former President Fernando Collor succeeded Sarney in 1990
and hoped to conduct an underground test blast in September of
that year at a remote base in Brazil's eastern Amazon.
Military officials had even obtained the enriched uranium needed
to fuel the bomb, Santana told Globo TV in an interview
televised late Sunday.
Santana said it took him and his team seven months to dismantle
the program.
``I took office in April 1990 ... but it was only in August that
CNEN managed to gain control of the container'' of enriched
uranium from the military, Santana told Globo.
He said the military obtained the uranium from another country
but declined to identify it. He also refused to name military
officials behind the nuclear effort.
CNEN denied Santana's contentions. ``There do not exist any
documents in the institutional archives or information that
prove the claims in the story,'' it said in a statement Monday.
It added that all nuclear material in Brazil is stored with the
knowledge of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
In 2003, Brazil's science minister at the time, Eduardo Campos,
caused a furor when he said Brazil should pursue ``any form of
scientific knowledge, whether the genome, DNA or nuclear
fission.''
Many took the comment to mean Brazil intended to develop nuclear
weapons. The government denied having any such goal, stressing
that Brazil's constitution bans the use of nuclear energy for
non-peaceful purposes.
Brazil's nuclear program again stirred concern last year, when
the government announced it was working to enrich its uranium
and refused to allow the U.N. nuclear agency to inspect nuclear
facilities in Resende, 60 miles southwest of Rio.
The government cited the need to protect industrial secrets.
Eventually an agreement was reached allowing the inspections to
go ahead with Brazil having to unveil its centrifuges.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
27 albawaba.com: Egypt refuses to sign nuclear ban treaty if Israel won't join as
well
Posted: 30-08-2005 , 05:57 GMT
Egypt's foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, announced on Monday
that Egypt would not sign a Comprehensive Nuclear Ban Treaty at
the request of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
before Israel joins a similar agreement.
Gheti reportedly told the nuclear watchdog that by not joining
the United Nations' Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Israel had
made the Middle East region more dangerous.
"Egypt's ratification of the [test ban] treaty is linked to the
extent of developments that may occur in regional and
international circumstances, including the possibility that
Israel may join the NPT" Gheit told reporters of Egytpian News
Agency MENA.
Israel is the only Middle Eastern nation not to have siged the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, under which states without
nuclear weapons promise not to develop them. Five signatory
nations known to be in possesion of nuclear weapons the US,
China, Russia, France and Britain, have pledged to eliminate
such weapons eventually.
Arab states have requested that the international community put
more pressure on Israel, believed to be in possesion of nuclear
warheads, to sign the treaty.
Egypt's nuclear program reportedly fills reasearch and civilian
medical needs. It has consistently denied any military character
of the program, or any intention of developing nuclear weapons,
according to Haaretz daily.
2005 Al Bawaba (www.albawaba.com)
*****************************************************************
28 BBC: Member states discuss UN reform
Last Updated: Tuesday, 30 August 2005
[Kofi Annan]
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has put forward plans for wide
reforms
Last-minute negotiations have begun at the United Nations
headquarters in New York to try to reach agreement on ways of
reforming the organisation.
The General Assembly had produced a draft document which it hoped
would be adopted at next month's world summit to mark the 60th
anniversary of the UN.
But last week, the US produced a series of objections to the
document.
Critics fear the UN could end up with a short statement of
principles rather than one of substantive reforms.
Fresh impetus
Negotiations carried on into the night on Monday, and will resume
on Tuesday. The BBC's Michael Voss in New York says it is a race
against time.
A group of around 30 countries has been given the task of
reaching a consensus on a range of contentious issues before
world leaders gather in New York in mid-September.
The UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, had hoped to use the summit
to push through a series of reforms aimed at redefining the
organisation for the 21st Century.
These include management changes as well as fresh action to meet
its millennium goals to reduce poverty and promote development.
After six months of discussions, a 38-page draft document was
presented to the General Assembly earlier this month.
Then, last week, the new US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton,
stepped in, asking for hundreds of changes.
The US objects to references to the International Criminal Court,
action on global warming and increases in development aid.
At the same time it wants greater commitment to tackling
terrorism and nuclear proliferation.
The UN has set itself a deadline of the end of this week to
produce a new document.
*****************************************************************
29 BBC: Nuclear rivals to free prisoners
Last Updated: Tuesday, 30 August 2005
Indian interior minister Shivraj Patel (r) with Pakistan interior
secretary Syed Kamal Shah
India and Pakistan have decided to free hundreds of civilian
prisoners in each others jails, officials say.
The two sides have decided to release all civilians whose
identities have been established and who have completed their
prison terms on 12 September.
The agreement was reached after two days of talks in Delhi.
But there is no mention of the fate of an Indian prisoner facing
the death penalty for carrying out bomb attacks in Pakistan.
The agreement to release prisoners in each other's jails came at
the end of talks between senior interior ministry officials of
the two countries.
An unnamed Indian interior ministry official was quoted by the
AFP news agency as saying that many prisoners remained behind
bars after they had completed their sentences because of the
tense relations between the two countries.
"We have made a fairly substantial move forward on various
issues, which is an achievement," a joint statement issued by the
both sides said.
The issues of terrorism and drug trafficking were also discussed
at the talks.
"Both sides reiterated their commitment to combat terrorism and
re-emphasised the need for effective steps for the complete
elimination of this menace," the joint statement said.
'Mistaken identity'
In a related development, Indian diplomats met an Indian prisoner
on the death row on Tuesday after consular access was granted, an
official said.
[Swapandeep Kaur shows off a photograph of her father Sarabjit
Singh ] Singh identified himself as Manjit and Sarabjit at trial,
Pakistan says
Manjit Singh was sentenced for carrying out a series of bomb
blasts in 1990. Islamabad says he was working for Indian
intelligence.
Earlier this month Pakistan Supreme Court upheld his death
sentence.
Since then his family has been pleading for his release,
threatening suicide if the sentence is carried out.
They say that it is a case of mistaken identity and that he is
really Sarabjit Singh.
But so far there has been no move to pardon him.
Pakistan's Human Rights Commission chairman Asma Jahangir told
the BBC that official documents available to the rights body
showed the government did not have a strong case against Singh
on spying charges.
Legal experts say since the case has already gone through the
entire judicial process, only Pakistan's president can stop the
execution by accepting his mercy petition.
*****************************************************************
30 [NukeNet] Close Oyster Creek action alert: Submit public
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:58:11 -0700
WHITE_PHRASE autolearn=ham version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Close Oyster Creek supporters,
Hello! I just came back to Trenton after directing NJPIRG's citizen
outreach office this summer, and was happy to hear that over 150 people
came to the NRC's meeting on Oyster Creek last week. This fall, we will
continue our work on the Close Oyster Creek campaign and the Stop Exelon's
Energy Takeover campaign.
This week, please submit comments to the NJ DEP in support of requiring
Oyster Creek to install a closed-cycle cooling system as part of their
water permit, to hold another public hearing on this issue and to extend
the public comment period by an additional 60 days. The comments are due by
September 6th. (see below for more information)
If the NJ DEP requires Oyster Creek to install closed-cycle cooing system,
Exelon could decide it is not worth the investment to keep the plant open
(towers cost $740 million with another $145 million in annual maintenence)
and retire the plant on schedule. Submit your comments to the NJ DEP today!
Best,
Suzanne
****Public Comment NEEDED****
HELP CLOSE THE LOOP
TAKE ACTION TO SUPPORT THE BEST OPTION FOR THE BAY AND MARINE LIFE
Attend the Public Hearing on August 29 or Send Comments by September 6, 2005.
After 35 years of exterminating marine life, Oyster Creek Nuclear Power
Plant in Lacey Township, NJ, is being directed by the NJ Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP) to implement technologies that will
eliminate a major source of destruction to the Barnegat Bay ecosystem.
Exelon (parent company of AmerGen, which operates the facility) is seeking
to renew their pollution discharge permit that regulates the cooling water
system at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant. The current permit (a
once-through cooling system) removes and destroys 1.4 billion gallons of
life-rich estuarine waters from Barnegat Bay and discharges 1.4 billion
gallons of chlorinated, super-heated, nearly lifeless wastewater each year.
Relief at Long Last: The NJDEP has recently issued a draft permit that
calls for Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant to install a closed-cycle system
and identified it as the "Preferred Alternative" - Alternative # 1. A
closed-cycle system, also called a closed-loop system, draws water into
plants for cooling and re-circulates it, expelling the heat through cooling
towers. Some water must be replaced, but closed-cycle cooling reduces water
intake by 95% and dramatically decreases the number of fish, eggs, and
larvae that are destroyed by once-through systems by being entrained
(sucked into system), impinged (pinned on screens), or fatally scalded.
In the draft permit, NJDEP states closed-cycle cooling is the only cooling
water intake structure technology available to the facility to reduce
entrainment. NJDEPs decision sends a strong message to Oyster Creek
Nuclear Power Plant that the State will no longer allow them to destroy the
marine environment. Instead, Exelon must upgrade the facility to adequately
protect, improve, and restore the health of Barnegat Bay. The installation
of a closed-cycle cooling system will:
Save trillions of animals -- including 13 million fish and shellfish
PER YEAR such as: blue crabs, striped bass, winter flounder, bluefish,
grass and sand shrimp, blackfish, bay anchovies, menhaden, spot, and spearing.
Eliminate fish kills caused by thermal shock from the discharge.
Stop the dumping of up to 365 tons of toxic chlorine into the bay per
year. Current allowable discharge levels are 20 times the lethal level of
many estuarine organisms including striped bass, bunker, and mummichogs
(killis).
Create hundreds of jobs building the new closed-loop system including
cooling towers.
Potential Roll-Back Option Looms: Although NJDEP states that the
closed-loop system is the #1 Preferred Alternative, if the facility can
demonstrate that Alternative #1 is unavailable, the State allows for a
fall-back option-- the use of mitigation measures. This option, called
Alternative #2, is unacceptable, as it will allow the continued
destruction of marine life in Barnegat Bay.
Exelon Has the Resources and Responsibility to Build a Closed-Loop System:
Exelon, the recent purchasers of Oyster Creek Power Plant, has the
financial resources to install a closed-loop system. According to Exelon,
it is one of the nations largest electric utilities with 5 million
customers and $15 billion in annual revenues. The company expects to
generate $3.7 billion of cash between 2004-2006 after funding capital
expenditures. Exelon made a decision to buy Oyster Creek Nuclear Power
Plant, and has a responsibility to meet NJDEPs recommendations to protect
the environment. Indeed, Exelons recent brochure states, We are a
staunch protector of South Jersey wildlife and natural resources.
Public Comment Period is Poor TimingAt Best: The timing for public comment
is bad news, as it is the last week of the summer season and just before
school starts. It is an unreasonable time of year to obtain fair and
honest public review and comment. Citizens are urged to request an
extension to the comment period and an addition public hearing.
****Public Comment NEEDED****
HELP CLOSE THE LOOP
TAKE ACTION TO SUPPORT THE BEST OPTION FOR THE BAY AND MARINE LIFE
Attend the Public Hearing on August 29 or Send Comments by September 6, 2005.
NJDEP issued a draft New Jersey Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NJPDES) permit renewal to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating facility on
July 19, 2005. Visit http://www.nj.gov/dep/dwq/hot.htm to view the Public
Notice and Fact Sheet.
A public hearing will be held at the Lacey Township Municipal Building, 818
Lacey Road, Ocean County, NJ, from 1:00-4:00 pm and 7:00-9:00 on August
29th.
Public comments are due September 6th, 2005. Send comments to:
Howard B. Tompkins, Chief
Attention: Comments on Public Notice NJ0005550
Bureau of Point Source Permitting, Region 1
P.O. Box 029
Trenton, NJ 08625
Howard.Tompkins@DEP.state.nj.us
Citizens are urged to attend the hearing and/or write comments. Be sure to
include the following:
* Request an additional public hearing (due to the first public hearing
being held at a time when many citizens are out-of-town).
* Request a 60-day extension of the public comment deadline (to provide
enough time to hold another public hearing and give sufficient time to
comment).
* Support NJDEP's "Preferred Alternative" - Alternative # 1 - requiring
a closed-cycle cooling system.
* Oppose NJDEP's Alternative # 2 allowing the Applicant to "select,
install, properly operate and maintain a combination of design and
construction technologies, operational measures, and/or restoration
measures" since closed-cycle cooling is the "best available technology" and
restoration measures have not been proven to be effective in offsetting the
loss of marine life from once-through cooling systems.
This is a critical opportunity to finally stop the marine life-killing
machine the once through cooling water system at Oyster Creek Nuclear
Power Plant. If you would like more information, contact the groups below:
For more information:
American Littoral Society: 732-291-0055
Clean Ocean Action: 732-872-0111, or visit
www.cleanoceanaction.org for a detailed
position paper.
Save Barnegat Bay: 732-830-3600
Prepared by Clean Ocean Action, August 23, 2005.
Suzanne Leta
Clean Energy Advocate
NJPIRG
11 N. Willow St
Trenton, NJ 08608
609 394 8155 x310
sleta@njpirg.org
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
31 NRC: NRC Continues to Monitor Nuclear Plants Affected by Hurricane Katrina
News Release - Region IV - 2005-03
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs, Region IV
No. IV-05-031 August 30, 2005
CONTACT: Victor Dricks
Phone: 817-860-8128
E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov
operators at three nuclear plants to ensure continued safe and
secure operations in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
As a precautionary measure, the Waterford 3 nuclear plant near
Taft, La., shut down when a hurricane warning was issued for St.
Charles Parish on Saturday. It remains in an Unusual Event, the
lowest of four emergency action levels. Electrical power for key
safety systems on site is being supplied by the plant's standby
diesel generators, following a loss of off-site power caused by
instability in the regional electrical grid.
NRC staff have independently verified that key plant systems and
structures, are undamaged and able to support current plant
operations. At the direction of the NRC, the nations nuclear
plants, which are among the most robust structures in the
critical infrastructure, have increased security preparedness
and capabilities available during emergencies.
A member of the NRC staff plans to accompany officials from the
State of Louisiana and the Federal Emergency Management Agency
during a survey of the site within the next 48 hours. NRC
approval is needed before the plant can be restarted. This
survey will include off-site evacuation routes and emergency
sirens.
The Grand Gulf nuclear plant near Port Gibson, Miss., and River
Bend Nuclear Station near Baton Rouge, La., were both operating
at reduced power this morning. The plants operated through the
storm, but voluntarily reduced power generation to assist in
restoring stability to the electrical grid when a drop in energy
consumption caused grid voltage to fluctuate.
Some emergency sirens were unavailable at Grand Gulf and River
Bend, but Entergy Nuclear has informed the NRC they can make
offsite notifications in the event of an emergency, should the
need arise. The NRC will work with FEMA to independently verify
siren operability.
NRC staff continue to monitor the situation from its incident
response center at its Region IV office in Arlington, Texas.
Last revised Tuesday, August 30, 2005
*****************************************************************
32 NRC: NRC Renews Operating Licenses for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant for an Additional 20 Years
News Release - 2005-11
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200
Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov
No. 05-119 August 30, 2005
licenses of the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, for
an additional 20 years.
The D.C. Cook plant is located about 11 miles south of Benton
Harbor, Mich. The licensee, Indiana Michigan Power Co.,
submitted its license renewal application on Oct. 31, 2003. With
the renewal, the license for Unit 1 is extended to Oct. 25,
2034, and the license for Unit 2 to Dec. 23, 2037.
The NRCs environmental review for this license renewal is
described in a site-specific supplement to the NRCs Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear
Power Plants (NUREG-1437, Supplement 20), issued in April. The
review concluded there were no environmental impacts that would
preclude renewal of the licenses for environmental reasons. Two
public meetings to discuss the environmental review were held
near the plant on March 8 and Nov. 9, 2004.
After carefully reviewing the plants safety systems and
specifications, the staff concluded that there were no safety
concerns that would preclude license renewal, because the
licensee had demonstrated the capability to manage the effects
of plant aging. The Safety Evaluation Report Related to the
License Renewal of the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and
2, was published in May. In addition, NRC conducted inspections
of the plants to verify information submitted by the licensee.
The reports relating to the D.C. Cook renewal are available on
the NRC Web site at this address:
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati
ons/cook.html.
On July 18, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards an
independent body of technical experts which advises the
Commission issued its recommendation that the operating
licenses for D.C. Cook be renewed. That recommendation is
contained in Report on the Safety Aspects of the License Renewal
Application for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.
This document is available on the NRC Web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acrs/letters/2005/.
The D.C. Cook renewals bring the total number of renewals to 35
reactor units. A complete listing of renewal applications can be
found on the NRC Web site at
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati
ons.html.
Last revised Tuesday, August 30, 2005
*****************************************************************
33 newsobserver.com: Utility eyes new nuclear reactor
Published: Aug 30, 2005
Progress Energy says final verdict 2 years off
By JOHN MURAWSKI, Staff Writer
Progress Energy said Monday that it expects to apply for a
license to build a nuclear power plant, placing North Carolina
at the forefront of the nation's nuclear revival.
The Raleigh-based utility notified the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission last week that the company plans to pick a site for a
new reactor this year. Progress Energy's top executive has said
that a likely option would be to add a reactor at the Shearon
Harris nuclear plant south of Raleigh.
On Aug. 8, President Bush signed a federal energy bill that
offers hundreds of millions of dollars in incentives to the
first utilities that build nuclear plants. Bush said the bill
gave utilities motivation to start building nuclear plants again.
If the NRC grants the license, and if Progress Energy decides
to build a reactor, construction could begin in five years, and
the reactor could be operating by 2015. The company is among
several utilities vying to commission the country's first new
nuclear reactor in more than a quarter century.
"Nuclear is an option we need to give serious consideration,"
said Joe Donahue, Progress Energy's vice president for nuclear
engineering and services. "We're a couple of years away from
saying, 'Yes, we'll spend $1 billion or more to build a nuclear
power plant.' But we've reached the point where we need to take
certain steps so we can maintain the nuclear option."
Progress Energy officials won't decide whether to build a
nuclear plant for about two years. But the company is now the
latest of eight utilities, primarily in the fast-growing
Southeast, that have disclosed plans to seek approval for a new
reactor. Progress Energy and Duke Power in Charlotte are the
only two that expect to name a site this year, according to the
NRC.
"It is a validation of the optimism that the nuclear industry
has of the economic viability of nuclear power," said Marilyn
Kray, president of NuStart Energy, a group of 11 utilities and
nuclear-plant manufacturers that plan to seek NRC licenses for
two sites. NuStart members include Progress Energy and Duke.
Driven by bill
Environmental activists seized on the timing of the Progress
Energy announcement as evidence of their belief that nuclear
power is not economically feasible without government aid.
The energy bill includes $2 billion in risk insurance for
regulatory and legal delays experienced by the first six new
nuclear plants.
"What's going on here is being driven by Bush's energy bill,"
said Jim Warren, director of the N.C. Waste Awareness and
Reduction Network, an organization opposed to nuclear power.
"There's no way they could make nuclear pay without these
subsidies."
If Progress Energy and Duke decided to build nuclear plants,
Warren predicted, massive opposition would erupt when the
utilities identified the sites. Duke serves 2.1 million
customers, some in Durham and Chapel Hill.
Progress Energy's Shearon Harris site in Wake County is one of
the nation's youngest nuclear plants. The site, 20 miles
southwest of Raleigh, began generating electricity in 1987 and
was the nation's last operating reactor to receive a
construction permit from the NRC.
This year Progress Energy Chief Executive Robert B. McGehee
cited this region's population growth and energy demands as
strong arguments in favor of adding a reactor there.
"Here's where our load is, and here's where our growth is,"
McGehee said in an April interview. "Here's where we need
electricity. We need it in the Triangle area."
Progress Energy could build a reactor anywhere in its service
area in the Carolinas, where it serves 1.4 million customers, or
in Florida, where it serves 1.5 million, Donahue said. Company
officials will also consider coal and natural gas power plants.
Projects paralyzed
Building new reactors has not been politically feasible in this
country since the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in
Pennsylvania in 1979 and the explosion at the Chernobyl plant in
Ukraine in 1986.
The 1979 accident didn't result in any deaths or radioactive
contamination, but it paralyzed the industry. In years after the
accident, 44 utilities canceled plans to build reactors already
approved by the NRC, many already under construction and backed
by substantial investment.
But this year, nuclear energy has become more attractive for
utilities amid soaring costs of fossil fuel and concerns about
global warming. Uranium is seen as a cheap fuel that creates no
air pollutants, by contrast with coal and natural gas.
Besides safety and environmental concerns, another big drawback
to nuclear power is this country's lack of a permanent
depository for radioactive waste.
Three factors influenced Progress Energy's timing in notifying
the NRC last week, Donahue said:
* The need for new power plants to meet energy demand.
* A desire to get an early start on the approval process in
case the company decides to build a nuclear plant.
* And the energy bill's generous loan guarantees, risk
insurance and production credits.
"Obviously, you don't want to miss out on that," Donahue said.
"It helps manage the financial risk."
Staff writer John Murawski can be reached at 829-8932 or
murawski@newsobserver.com.
Copyright 2005, The News &Observer Publishing Company
A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company
*****************************************************************
34 APP.COM: Nuclear agency needs to start answering questions
Asbury Park Press Online
Published in the Asbury Park Press 08/30/05 BY PEGGI STURMFELS
Oyster Creek nuclear power plant's recent application for license
renewal has set into motion a process that appears, on its
surface, industry-biased and public-deceptive. Operating under
rules that are thinly explained, and purposely covert, the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission confirms the perception of many of
us that it has never changed from its original mission of
supporting the nuclear industry, as opposed to regulating it for
the public good.
In setting out its agenda and time frame, the commission does not
tell the public what data it will be looking at, what data it
requires, the integrity of the data or the people who are in
charge of the process.
A major example of this was the granting of a waiver to plant
owner Exelon to accept its application without having all the
documents that would have deemed it complete. No opportunity for
the public to object to the waiver was given. As the residents of
Ocean, Monmouth and Atlantic counties asked questions at every
meeting held prior to the filing of the license renewal, answers
were either deliberately vague or not forthcoming at all.
Even senior members of the House Energy and Commerce and Homeland
Security committees, which have oversight of the NRC, are
thwarted in their endeavors to receive information. Rep. Edward
Markey, D-Mass., has expressed his frustration in attempting to
get answers from the NRC on issues such as radiation-induced
cancer risks and assessment of security plans to determine their
adequacy.
Questions from residents living near the Oyster Creek plant in
Lacey about their experiences over many years regarding
evacuation go unanswered. Even a simple "yes, those things
demographics, population growth and deteriorating roads, etc.,
will be considered" would be more reassuring than the polite
smiles and silence that are usually exhibited.
How can it be considered giving terrorists classified information
to tell people that the evacuation plan will work in reality vs.
a computer program, and assure that the county and state
Department of Transportation have been involved in making
recommendations with regards to infrastructure repair schedules?
How long does it take for the Federal Emergency Management Agency
to review it and make public its recommendations?
Questions about whether environmental effects will be considered,
such as the marine life kills that happen through the plant's
cooling system, are not answered. When the NRC's environmental
impact statement is issued in spring 2007, does the NRC accept
it? Maybe.
If the NRC grants the renewal, will it allow for extended power
update experiments that Exelon conducted in its Quad Cities,
Dresden and North Carolina plants that literally shook the steam
dryers apart? Does the renewal license allow Exelon to dispose of
and discharge other waste from other sources on the side, given
that their discharge permits are so broad?
Questions about security still raise serious alarms. On June 21,
2001, Wayne Lanning, the NRC's Region II director, wrote to
Oyster Creek Vice President Ron DeGregorio:
"On May 8-9, the NRC-OSRE (Operations Safeguard Response
Evaluations) team observed and evaluated four force-on-force
exercises. In one force exercise, your response strategy was
insufficient to successfully interdict an adversary force.
Consequently, there was a loss of a complete target set that was
necessary to mitigate core damage."
The understanding is that these drills must be done once every
four years. Has another one been done? Did the NRC require
corrective action? Was it done? Where is the public
documentation?
Why is the sky over the plant not an enforced no-fly zone?
Beachgoers and residents know about the eight operating airports
in the area? Does the NRC or Federal Aviation Administration? If
not, why not? Where does the public find the answers to these
questions?
With regards to aging: The renewal of this license will put this
plant on line for 60 years. What are the "lessons learned data"
that guarantee the degradation timeline 20 years into the future
is accurate, when no plant has ever experienced more than a
40-year run? It seems like a huge gamble almost like driving
your car backward using the rearview mirror. When the NRC uses
its aging formula, are unique components like salt air and sea
water part of the mix?
The NRC says that most of these questions are current operating
"today questions" and are set aside from the renewal process.
Well, these questions have been asked 100 yesterdays ago. Four
years later, still no answers.
As we go forward in this process, I would hope that the citizens
of Ocean County and elsewhere in this country will be able to
feel the NRC is in the business to protect the health and
well-being of the public at large, and not to be a rubber stamp
for an industry that has the power to wipe us all off the face of
the earth but still make a profit.
Peggi Sturmfels is program organizer for the New Jersey
Environmental Federation, Belmar. Go Back | Subscribe to the
Asbury Park Press
*****************************************************************
35 APP.COM: Plant, state taking heat on cooling system
Asbury Park Press Online
LOOPHOLE: Environmentalists say state gave 2nd option
DEMAND: For a closed-loop system at Oyster Creek
Plant, state taking heat on cooling system Published in the
Asbury Park Press 08/30/05 BY NICHOLAS CLUNN
MANAHAWKIN BUREAU
LACEY While a top executive from the Oyster Creek nuclear power
plant said a state-proposed closed-loop cooling system at the
facility wouldn't make sense, some environmentalists criticized
the state for giving the plant a way around building one.
Officials with the state Department of Environmental Protection
heard these opinions and others at the municipal building Monday
night during a public hearing on a permit needed by the plant to
cool steam by using water from a Barnegat Bay tributary.
Though state officials have said a closed system would kill
fewer sea creatures by requiring far less water than 1.3 billion
gallons pulled daily from the south branch of the Forked River,
plant Vice President Bud Swenson said the "environmental impacts
of the existing cooling system are too small" to warrant major
changes.
Leaders from several environmental groups at the hearing
disagreed with Swenson, as did Belmar resident Eugene Creamer,
55. He stood before a microphone and read seven reasons why he
supports a closed system for the plant.
"New Jersey deserves the best," Creamer said.
Under terms set in a draft permit, plant owner AmerGen could
build a closed system, the state's preferred option, which would
likely include a cooling tower, which is often associated with
other power plants.
The state also has given the company the option of implementing
a combination of wetlands restoration and changes to its current
cooling system to obtain the permit, which has drawn criticism
from environmentalists.
"If you really do care, put in the closed-cooling system," said
Michele Donato, attorney for several of the environmental groups
at the meeting.
The permit expires every five years, but this year's draft has
received more scrutiny from environmentalists than usual. That's
because an AmerGen proposal that would extend the plant's
operating life by 20 years beyond 2009 is now under review.
Since federal approval is needed for the extension, AmerGen must
obtain yet another permit that says the plant's use a few miles
from Barnegat Bay and alongside two of its tributaries is
consistent with the state's coastal protection rules.
AmerGen's application for this "federal consistency" permit was
denied by the state last week, a first, according to David
Kaiser, a senior policy analyst with the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
The agency oversees the administration of the federal Coastal
Zone Management Act, which requires federal license-holders to
obtain a consistency permit.
Kaiser on Monday said he could recall no other state besides New
Jersey that has objected to a license or a license renewal for a
nuclear power plant.
At the meeting Monday night, Swenson said the plant has a
"strong record of proactively implementing voluntary measures to
reduce the impact of the station on the environment."
But environmental group leaders said plant managers would build
a closed system if they were serious about protecting the
wildlife.
Staff writer Todd B. Bates contributed to this story.
the Asbury Park Press
*****************************************************************
36 NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting
FR Doc 05-17292
[Federal Register: August 30, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 167)]
[Notices] [Page 51377-51378] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr30au05-70]
Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Date: Weeks of August 29, September 5, 12, 19, 26, October 3,
2005.
Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland.
Status: Public and Closed.
Matters to be Considered: Week of August 29, 2005 There are no
meetings scheduled for the week of August 29, 2005.
Week of September 5, 2005--Tentative Wednesday, September 7, 2005
9:00 a.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1) 1:30 p.m.
Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 3 & 9) Thursday,
September 8, 2005 9:30 a.m. Discussion of Security Issues
(Closed--Ex. 1) Week of September 12, 2005--Tentative There are
no meetings scheduled for the week of September 12, 2005.
Week of September 19, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings
scheduled for the week of September 19, 2005.
Week of September 26, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings
scheduled for the week of September 26, 2005.
Week of October 3, 2005--Tentative There are no meetings
scheduled for the week of October 3, 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: Michelle Schroll, (301) 415- 1662.
The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet
at: .
The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable
accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need
this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from
the
[[Page 51378]] public meetings in another format (e.g., braille,
large print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program
Coordinator, August Spector, at 301-415-7080, TDD: 301-415-2100,
or by e-mail at . Determinations on requests for reasonable
accommodations will be made on a case-by-case basis.
This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred
subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like
to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition,
distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is
available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission
meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic
message to .
Dated: August 25, 2005.
R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-17292 Filed 8-26-05; 10:09 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
*****************************************************************
37 Reuters: NRC to survey undamaged Waterford 3 nuclear plant
Tue Aug 30, 2005 1:51 PM ET
WASHINGTON, Aug 30 (Reuters) - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
said it will survey Entergy Corp's (ETR.N: Quote, Profile,
Research) Waterford 3 nuclear plant in Louisiana within 48 hours,
a crucial step before the plant can be restarted.
Entergy shut the 1,089-megawatt plant on Sunday as a safety
precaution as Hurricane Katrina approached southern Louisiana.
The deadly hurricane crashed ashore on Monday with winds of 135
miles per hour.
"NRC staff have independently verified that key plant systems
and structures are undamaged and able to support current plant
operations," the NRC said in a statement.
An NRC official will accompany state and federal officials
during a survey of the site within the next 48 hours, including
its evacuation routes and emergency sirens, the agency said. NRC
approval is needed before the Waterford 3 plant can restart.
Separately, Entergy's Grand Gulf nuclear plant near Port Gibson,
Mississippi, and River Bend Nuclear Station near Baton Rouge,
Louisiana, were both operating at reduced power on Tuesday
morning, the NRC said. "The plants operated through the storm,
but voluntarily reduced power generation to assist in restoring
stability to the electrical grid when a drop in energy
consumption caused grid voltage to fluctuate," it said.
Entergy's subsidiaries own and operate about 30,000 MW of
generating capacity, market energy commodities, and transmit and
distribute power to 2.6 million customers in Arkansas, Louisiana,
Mississippi and Texas.
LINKS:
TAKE A LOOK-Hurricane rocks energy industry [ID:N29201347]
Katrina leaves millions without power [ID:nN30678458]
Entergy reduces Miss. Grand Gulf nuclear [ID:nN30734904]
Entergy begins damage assessments [ID:nN30286119]
NYMEX PJM electricity prices
North American electricity prices
Reuters power news [ELN]
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
38 Reuters: PSEG fixes failed breaker at N.J. Hope Creek nuke
Tue Aug 30, 2005 3:45 PM ET
NEW YORK, Aug 30 (Reuters) - Public Service Enterprise Group
Inc. (PEG.N: Quote, Profile, Research) fixed the failed vacuum
breaker at the 1,049-megawatt Hope Creek nuclear power station in
New Jersey, a spokesman for the plant said Tuesday.
The spokesman, however, could not say when the unit would return
to service, noting it would likely not be a long time.
The unit shut on Aug. 28 due to the inoperable vacuum breaker.
He said workers found a loose alignment screw in the vacuum
breaker, which kept the breaker in an open position. The breakers
are usually closed.
Vacuum breakers act as a check valve to prevent a vacuum from
forming in the reactor building that could affect the structural
integrity of the containment during an accident.
The spokesman also said the company inspected the plant's seven
other vacuum breakers and found one other loose screw, which they
tightened.
Before the plant returns to service, the spokesman said
operators would work on some other items. Nuclear plants
typically have a list of projects that operators can only work on
during an outage but do not alone require a plant shutdown.
Traders noted the extra work would not keep the unit down long
enough to require PSEG to replace the vibrating recirculation
pump shaft.
In an agreement with the NRC in January, PSEG agreed to replace
a vibrating recirculation pump shaft during the unit's next
refueling outage in the spring of 2006 or during an outage
expected to last at least three weeks.
The Hope Creek station is located in Hancocks Bridge in Salem
County, about 40 miles south of Philadelphia.
One MW powers about 800 homes, according to North American
averages.
Exelon Nuclear, a unit of Chicago-based energy company Exelon
Corp.'s (EXC.N: Quote, Profile, Research) Exelon Generation Co
LLC subsidiary, operates the station for PSEG.
In December, Exelon, the biggest nuclear power operator in the
United States, agreed to acquire New Jersey-based PSEG. Pending
regulatory and shareholder approvals, the companies expect to
complete the deal in 2006.
Exelon's subsidiaries own and operate more than 38,000 MW of
generating capacity, market energy commodities, and transmit and
distribute electricity (5.1 million) and natural gas (460,000) to
customers in Illinois and Pennsylvania.
PSEG's regulated and unregulated subsidiaries own and operate
more than 16,000 MW of generating capacity, market energy
commodities, and transmit and distribute electricity and natural
gas to customers in North America, South America, the Middle
East, Europe and India.
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
39 Reuters: Entergy reduces Miss. Grand Gulf nuke due Katrina
Tue Aug 30, 2005 7:44 AM ET
NEW YORK, Aug 30 (Reuters) - Entergy Corp.'s (ETR.N: Quote,
Profile, Research) 1,263-megawatt Grand Gulf nuclear power
station in Mississippi dipped to 75 percent of capacity by early
Tuesday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said in a report.
Monday morning, the New Orleans-based energy company told the
NRC in an event report that it would shut the reactor before the
hurricane-force winds of Katrina reached the plant site.
As the operator was reducing the unit's power output, the
station lost off-site power due to the effects of the storm,
forcing the plant to rely on its emergency diesel generators for
back-up power.
Entergy stopped reducing the plant's output as the storm moved
away from the plant site toward the north-northeast.
The unit was operating at full power early Monday.
The Grand Gulf station is located in Port Gibson in Claiborne
County, about 130 miles north of Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
One MW powers about 800 homes, according to North American
averages.
New Orleans-based Entergy Corp.'s Entergy Nuclear subsidiary
operates the station for its owners, Entergy (90 percent) and
South Mississippi Electric Power Association (10 percent).
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
40 Reuters: AEP gets license extensions for Michigan nuke
Tue Aug 30, 2005 1:35 PM ET
NEW YORK, Aug 30 (Reuters) - Utility operator American Electric
Power (AEP.N: Quote, Profile, Research) on Tuesday said the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved 20-year license renewals
for the two generating units at the Cook Nuclear Plant in
Bridgman, Michigan.
The two units went on-line in 1975 and 1978, respectively, with
40 years licenses.
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
41 Reuters: German opposition adviser backs longer nuclear extension
Tue Aug 30, 2005 11:52 AM ET
FRANKFURT, Aug 30 (Reuters ) - German utilities should be
allowed to extend the lives of nuclear reactors beyond the
40-year lifespan proposed by the conservative opposition,
according to a top adviser to the conservatives.
The opposition, tipped to lead a new government after national
elections on Sept 18, has said it would back an eight-year
extension to 40 years.
Adviser Heinrich von Pierer, a former chief executive of
industrial group Siemens AG (SIEGn.DE: Quote, Profile, Research),
said the extension should go further, with 60 years a feasible
option.
"We will have to take a fresh look at nuclear energy," he told
the Handelsblatt newspaper in an interview issued ahead of
publication on Wednesday.
Von Pierer said the guiding principle should be safety before
economic efficiency and that energy policy should not become
overly reliant on the nuclear option.
The current government five years ago agreed with nuclear
operators to shut the country's 17 reactors, which meet just
under a third of national electricity requirements, by the early
2020s.
Reuters 2005.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
42 Resource Investor: Progress starts plans for new nuclear power plant
Pitpundit Blog
By Jon Nones
30 Aug 2005 at 07:01 AM
Progress Energy is laying plans to build a nuclear power plant,
according to a filing with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
The Raleigh-based utility, which operates the Shearon Harris
nuclear plant in southwest Wake County, indicated in the filing
that it expects to select a possible site and a reactor supplier
by the end of the year.
An application for a combined construction and operating license
could be filed in early 2008, and if approved, construction
could begin as early as 2010 and the new plant could be online
by about 2015.
With the passing of the energy bill, this could quite possibly
be the first of any applications.
*****************************************************************
43 People's Daily: Cambodia to strength nuclear transport law
UPDATED: 14:22, August 30, 2005
With the ratification of three draft laws, Cambodiawill become a
signatory to several international conventions, local media
reported on Tuesday.
Cambodia's National Assembly on Monday ratified the three draft
laws, including one which will bring Cambodia in line with
international standards on the transportation of nuclear
materials.
Another draft law will make Cambodia part of an international
convention against illegal activities on sea borders, according
to The Cambodia Daily.
National Assembly President Price Norodom Ranariddh told the
assembly that sea border issues, which are complicated by the
matters of oil exploration, are more tangled than those on land.
The third draft law passed by the National Assembly is on the
international convention against illegal activities at sea.
Defense Minister Tea Banh on Monday pledged that government
will pay attention to the nuclear issues and will form a
committee to cooperate with international partners to prevent
the nation from ever being used as a transit route for such
material.
But he also raised concerns about the country's ability to deal
with nuclear problems, stating Cambodia does not have
specialized laboratories to identify nuclear substances and
local nuclear experts still have limited competence. He appealed
to the international community to provide more human resource
training in the field.
In 2000, the National Assembly unanimously agreed to ratify the
nuclear test ban treaty, aligning Cambodia with most of the
world's nations in a global campaign aimed at preventing nuclear
proliferation.
Source: Xinhua
Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved
*****************************************************************
44 [DU Information List] What have we done - by Dahr jamail
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:58:09 -0700
X-Spam-filter-host: darwin.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
AN interesting comment from a soldier on the ground towards the end of
the article, on the amount of radiation exposure.
"What Have We Done?"
By Dahr Jamail
Iraq Dispatches
Friday 05 August 2005
As the blood of US soldiers continues to drain into the hot sands of
Iraq over the last several days with at least 27 US soldiers killed and the
approval rating for his handling of the debacle in Iraq dropping to an
all-time low of 38%, Mr. Bush commented from the comforts of his ranch in
Crawford, Texas today, "We will stay the course, we will complete the job in
Iraq."
Just a two hour drive away in Dallas, at the Veterans for Peace National
Convention in Dallas, I'm sitting with a roomful of veterans from the
current quagmire.
When asked what he would say to Mr. Bush if he had the chance to speak
to him, Abdul Henderson, a corporal in the Marines who served in Iraq from
March until May, 2003, took a deep breath and said, "It would be two hits-me
hitting him and him hitting the floor. I see this guy in the most
prestigious office in the world, and this guy says 'bring it on.' A guy who
ain't never been shot at, never seen anyone suffering, saying 'bring it on?'
He gets to act like a cowboy in a western movie...it's sickening to me."
The other vets with him nod in agreement as he speaks somberly...his
anger seething.
One of them, Alex Ryabov, a corporal in an artillery unit which was in
Iraq the first three months of the invasion, asked for some time to
formulate his response to the same question.
"I don't think Bush will ever realize how many millions of lives he and
his lackeys have ruined on their quest for money, greed and power," he says,
"To take the patriotism of the American people for granted...the fact that
people (his administration) are willing to lie and make excuses for you
while you continue to kill and maim the youth of America and ruin countless
families...and still manage to do so with a smile on your face."
Taking a deep breath to steady himself he continues as if addressing
Bush first-hand; "You needs to resign, take the billions of dollars you've
made off the blood and sweat of US service members....all the suffering
you've caused us, and put those billions of dollars into the VA to take care
of the men and women you sent to be slaughtered. Yet all those billions
aren't enough to even try to compensate all the people who have been
affected by this."
These new additions to Veterans for Peace are actively living the
statement of purpose of the organization, having pledged to work with others
towards increasing public awareness of the costs of war, to work to restrain
their government from intervening, overtly and covertly, in the internal
affairs of other nations and to see justice for veterans and victims of war,
among other goals.
I type furiously for three hours, trying to keep up with the stories
each of the men shared....about the atrocities of what they saw, and
committed, while in Iraq.
Camilo Mejia, an army staff sergeant who was sentenced to a year in
military prison in May, 2004 for refusing to return to Iraq after being home
on leave, talks openly about what he did there:
"What it all comes down to is redemption for what was done there. I was
turning ambulances away from going to hospitals, I killed civilians, I
tortured guys...and I'm ashamed of that. Once you are there, it has nothing
to do with politics...it has to do with you as an individual being there and
killing people for no reason. There is no purpose, and now I'm sick at
myself for doing these things. I kept telling myself I was there for my
buddies. It was a weak reasoning...because I still shut my mouth and did my
job."
Mejia then spoke candidly about why he refused to return:
"It wasn't until I came home that I felt it-how wrong it all was and
that I was a coward for pushing my principles aside. I'm trying to buy my
way back into heaven...and it's not so much what I did, but what I didn't do
to stop it when I was there. So now it's a way of trying to undo the evil
that we did over there. This is why I'm speaking out, and not going back.
This is a painful process and we're going through it."
Camilo Mejia was then quick to point towards the success of his
organization and his colleagues. "When I went back to Iraq in October of
2003, the Pentagon said there were 22 AWOL's. Five months later it was 500,
and when I got out of jail that number was 5,000. These are the Pentagons'
numbers for the military. Two things are significant here-the number went
from 500-5,000 in 11 months, and these are the numbers from the Pentagon."
While the military is falling short of its recruitment goals across the
board and the disaster in Iraq spiraling deeper into chaos with each passing
day, these are little consolation for these men who have paid the price
they've had to pay to be at this convention. They continue to pay, but at
the same time stand firm in their resolve to bring an end to the occupation
of Iraq and to help their fellow soldiers.
Ryabov then begins to tell of his unit firing the wrong artillery rounds
which hit 5-10 km from their intended target.
"We have no idea where those rounds fell, or what they hit," he says
quietly while two of the men hold their heads in their hands, "Now we've
come to these realizations and we're trying to educate people to save them
from going through the same thing."
After talking of the use of uranium munitions, of which Ryabov stated
300 tons of which were used in the '91 Gulf War, and 2,200 tons and counting
having been used thus far in the current war, he adds, "We were put in a
foreign country and fire artillery and kill people...and it shouldn't have
even happened in the first place. It's hard to put into words the full
tragedy of it-the death and suffering on both sides. I feel a grave
injustice has been done and I'm trying to correct it. You do all these
things and come back and think, 'what have we done?' We just rolled right by
an Iraqi man with a gunshot in his thigh and two guys near him waving white
flags....he probably bled to death."
Harvey Tharp sitting with us served in Kirkuk. His position of being in
charge of some reconstruction projects in northern Iraq allowed him to form
many close friendships with Iraqis...something that prompts him to ask me to
tell more people of the generous culture of the Iraqi people. His
friendships apparently brought the war much closer to home for him.
"What I concluded last summer when I was waiting to transfer to NSA was
that not only were our reasons for being there lies, but we just weren't
there to help the Iraqis. So in November of '04 I told my commander I
couldn't take part in this. I would have been sent into Fallujah, and he was
going to order me in to do my job. I also chose not to go back because the
dropping of bombs in urban areas like Fallujah are a violation of the laws
of warfare because of the near certainty of collateral damage. For me,
seeing the full humanity of Iraqis made me realize I couldn't participate in
these operations."
Tharp goes on to say that he believes there are still Vietnam vets who
think that that was a necessary war and adds, "I think it's because that
keeps the demons at bay for them to believe it is justified...this is their
coping mechanism. We, as Americans, have to face the total obvious truth
that this was all because of a lie. We are speaking out because we have to
speak out. We want to help other vets tell other vets their story...to keep
people from drinking themselves to death."
When he is asked what he would say to Mr. Bush if he had a few moments
with him, he too took some time to think about it, then says, "It is obvious
that middle America is starting to turn against this war and to turn against
you...for good reason. The only thing I could see that would arrest this
inevitable fall that you deserve, is another 9/11 or another war with say,
Iran. There are some very credible indications in the media that we are
already in pre-war with Iran. What I'm trying to do is find a stand
Americans can take against you, but I think people are willing to say 'don't
you dare do this to us again.' My message to the American people is this-do
you want to go another round with these people? If not-now is the time to
say so."
The men are using this time to tell more of why they are resisting the
illegal occupation, and it's difficult to ask new questions as they are
adding to what one another share.
"I didn't want to kill another soul for no reason. That's it," adds
Henderson, "We were firing into small towns....you see people just running,
cars going, guys falling off bikes...it was just sad. You just sit there and
look through your binos and see things blowing up, and you think, man they
have no water, living in the third world, and we're just bombing them to
hell. Blowing up buildings, shrapnel tearing people to shreds."
Tharp jumps in and adds, "Most of what we're talking about is war
crimes...war crimes because they are directed by our government for power
projection. My easy answer for not going is PTSD...but the deeper moral
reason is that I didn't want to be involved in a crime against humanity."
Ryabov then adds, "We were put in a foreign country to fire artillery
and kill people...and it shouldn't have even happened in the first place.
It's hard to put into words the full tragedy of it-the death and suffering
on both sides. I feel a grave injustice has been done and I'm trying to
correct it. You do all these things and come back and think, what have we
done?"
Michael Hoffman served as a Marine Corps corporal who fought in Tikrit
and Baghdad, and has since become a co-founder of Iraq Veterans Against the
War.
"Nobody wants to kill another person and think it was because of a lie.
Nobody wants to think their service was in vain," says Hoffman.
His response to what he would say to Mr. Bush is simple, "I would look
him straight in the eye and ask him 'why?' And I would hold him there and
make him answer me. He never has to deal with us one on one. I dare him to
talk to any of us like that, one on one, and give us an answer."
Hoffman then adds, "What about the 3 year old Iraqi girl who is now an
orphan with diseases and nightmares for the rest of her life for what we
did? And the people who orchestrated this don't have to pay anything. How
many times are my children going to have to go through this? Our only choice
is to fight this to try to stop it from happening again."
Earlier this same day Mr. Bush said, "We cannot leave this task half
finished, we must take it all the way to the end."
However, Charlie Anderson, another Iraq veteran, had strong words for
Bush. After discussing how the background radiation in Baghdad is now five
times the normal rate-the equivalent of having 3 chest x-rays an hour, he
said, "These are not accidents-the DU [Depleted Uranium]-it's important for
people to understand this-the use of DU and its effects are by design. These
are very carefully engineered and orchestrated incidents."
While the entire group nods in agreement and two other soldiers stand up
to shake his hand, Anderson says firmly, "You subverted us, you destroyed
our lives, you owe us. I want your resignation in my hand in the next five
minutes. Get packin' Georgie."
Yahoo!
Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC
calling
worldwide with voicemail
----------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
* Visit your group
"pandora-project" on the web.
*
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
*
pandora-project-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
*
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
Yahoo! Terms of Service.
----------
*****************************************************************
45 Daily Ittefaq: Radioactive wounds of Iraq war
'
Last Updated: Aug 30th, 2005 - 11:47:17
nation.ittefaq.com
By Dave Lindorff
Gerard Matthew thought he was lucky. He returned from his Iraq
tour a year and a half ago alive and in one piece. But after the
New York State National Guardsman got home, he learned that a
bunkmate, Sgt. Ray Ramos, and a group of N.Y. Guard members from
another unit had accepted an offer by the New York Daily News
and reporter Juan Gonzalez to be tested for depleted uranium
(DU) contamination, and had tested positive.
Matthew, 31, decided that since hed spent much of his time in
Iraq lugging around DU-damaged equipment, hed better get tested
too. It turned out he was the most contaminated of them all.
Matthew immediately urged his wife to get an ultrasound check of
their unborn baby. They discovered the fetus had a condition
common to those with radioactive exposure: atypical syndactyly.
The right hand had only two digits.
So far Victoria Claudette, now 13 months old, shows no other
genetic disorders and is healthy, but Matthew feels guilty for
causing her deformity and angry at a government that never
warned him about DUs dangers.
U.S. forces first used DU in the 1991 Gulf War, when some 300
tons of depleted uraniumthe waste product of nuclear power
plants and weapons facilitieswere used in tank shells and
shells fired by A-10 jets. A lesser amount was deployed by U.S.
and NATO forces during the Balkans conflict. But in the current
wars in Afghanistan and, especially, Iraq, DU has become the
weapon of choice, with more than 1,000 tons used in Afghanistan
and more than 3,000 tons used in Iraq. And while DU was fired
mostly in the desert during the Gulf War, in the current war in
Iraq, most of DU munitions are exploding in populated urban
areas.
The Pentagon has expanded DU beyond tank and A-10 shells, for
use in bunker-busting bombs, which can spew out more than half a
ton of DU in one explosion, in anti-personnel bomblets, and even
in M-16 and pistol shells. The military loves DU for its unique
penetration capabilityit cuts through steel or concrete like
theyre butter.
The problem is that when DU hits its target, it burns at a high
temperature, throwing off clouds of microscopic particles that
poison a wide area and remain radioactive for billions of years.
If inhaled, these particles can lodge in lungs, other organs or
bones, irradiating tissue and causing cancers.
Worse yet, uranium is also a highly toxic heavy metal. Indeed,
while there is some debate over the risk posed by the elements
radioactive emissions, there is no debate regarding its chemical
toxicity. According to Mt. Sinai pathologist Thomas Fasey, who
participated in the New York Guard unit testing, the element has
an affinity for bonding with DNA, where even trace amounts can
cause cancers and fetal abnormalities.
Dr. Doug Rokke, a health physicist at the University of Illinois
who headed up a Pentagon study of depleted uranium weapons in
the mid 90s after concerns were raised during the Gulf War,
concluded there was no safe way to use the weapons. Rokke says
the Pentagon responded by denouncing him, after earlier
commending his work.
No one knows how many U.S. soldiers have been contaminated by DU
residue. Despite regulations authorizing tests for any military
personnel who suspects exposure, the U.S. military is avoiding
doing those testsor delaying them until they are meaningless.
When we asked to be tested at Ft. Dix, they wrongly told us we
didnt have to worry unless we had DU fragments in our body,
says Matthew. His buddy, Sgt. Ramos, who exhibits symptoms
resembling radiation sickness and heavy metal poisoning, adds
that at Walter Reed Medical Center he was grilled for hours
about why he wanted to be tested and was then branded a
troublemaker by his own unit. Matthew says Walter Reed lost
his sample.
At the wars start, the United States refused to allow U.N. or
other environmental inspectors to test DU levels within Iraq.
Now the United Nations wont even go near Iraq because of
security concerns.
It doesnt seem right that we are poisoning the places we are
supposed to be liberating, Ramos says.
The Pentagon continues to insist, on the basis of no field
evidence, that DU is safe. To date, only some 270 returned
troops have been tested for DU contamination by the military and
Veterans Affairs. But even those tests, mostly urine samples,
are useless 30 days after exposure, because by that time most of
the DU has left the body or migrated into bones or organs.
Gonzalez and the Daily News paid for costlier tests for nine
Guardsmentests that could pinpoint uranium inside the body and
identify the special isotope signature of man-made DU. Four of
the nine tested positive for DU; all had symptoms of uranium
poisoning.
Even harder evidence may soon arrive. Connecticut State
Representative Pat Dillon (D-New Haven), a Yale-trained
epidemiologist, has crafted state-level legislation that
Connecticut and Louisiana have unanimously passed, authorizing
returned National Guard troops to request and receive
specialized DU contamination tests at the Pentagons expense.
This approach bypasses the Pentagons feet-dragging because
National Guard troops fall under state, rather than federal,
jurisdiction.
This was not a Democratic or a Republican issue, Dillon says.
These are our kids and someone needs to protect them. She says
that since passage of her bill, which takes effect this October,
military groups and family organizations, state legislators, and
even National Guard unit commanders have contacted her for
copies of her bill to promote in their states. Bob Smith, a
veteran in Louisiana who got hold of Dillons bill and
spearheaded a successful effort to pass similar legislation in
Louisiana, claims that 14 to 20 other states are considering
similar measures.
If enough Guard troops avail themselves of the testingand start
testing positive for contaminationit seems likely that
reservists and active duty troops and veterans will demand
similar access to rigorous tests, which can cost upwards of
$1000 per person.
One way or another, the Pentagon will pay a price. DU is a war
crime. Its that simple, Rokke says. Once youve scattered all
this stuff around, and then refuse to clean it up, youve
committed a war crime.
Copyright 2003 by The New Nation
*****************************************************************
46 St. Petersburg Times: For ill workers, families, new hope may help
News of the Tampa Bay area
Former Largo GE workers and survivors whose claims had
languished welcome a new federal effort at amends.
By WILL VAN SANT, Times Staff Writer
Published August 30, 2005
SEMINOLE - Mike Holloway arrived home to his wife and children
one night wearing a disposable jumpsuit instead of his standard
shirt and tie.
That day, the scientist had handled a radioactive film used in
triggering devices for nuclear bombs. Usually when the films
were broken for analysis they split cleanly, leaving a jagged
edge. But the one Holloway handled was brittle, releasing a puff
of powder infused with radioactive tritium.
Holloway accidentally inhaled the powder, according to written
statements by colleagues at the General Electric plant in Largo.
When he arrived at their Seminole home that day in 1978 or
1979, Sandra Holloway remembers being alarmed at her husband's
outfit.
He told her not to worry, he was fine.
In early 1980, Holloway - a health-conscious guy who ran 3 to 5
miles a day - noticed a lesion on the roof of his mouth. After
testing, doctors revealed a shocking diagnosis: He had a rare
leukemia. Despite vigorous treatment, Holloway died in January
1981 at age 40. His son was 12, his daughter 14.
The Cold War had not yet ended. Plants like General Electric's
pumped out weaponry for the Department of Energy. Workers took
pride in what they were doing for America.
Though far from any battlefield, some, like Holloway, may have
sacrificed all.
"People gave everything to that company," Sandra Holloway said
in a recent interview. "And, in the end, I believe, he gave his
life for what he thought was a good thing."
* * *
Congress created a program in 2000 to help remedy the weapons
industry's legacy of illness and death. Since that time, 1,020
former employees of the General Electric plant in Largo or their
survivors have filed compensation claims.
Before 2000, options were few. Workers sought compensation
through state programs and the courts, with spotty success.
The federal program, though, has hardly been a windfall. Of the
claims filed by former workers at the General Electric plant and
their families, nine have been approved and about $1-million has
been paid. Payment amounts on two other cleared claims are being
determined.
According to those who manage the program, efforts to process
claims stalled when the job was handled by the Department of
Energy. In October, Congress handed the task over to the
Department of Labor as a way to rescue what had become a hobbled
effort.
Congress also broadened the program's scope. Now, not only
those who were harmed by radioactive material are eligible, but
those whose illnesses can be linked to other workplace toxins
can get benefits as well.
Labor officials are touring the country to tout the changes,
making stops near former Department of Energy sites like the
Largo plant, which at its height employed 2,000 workers. The
plant went through a phased shutdown in the mid 1990s as demand
for nuclear weaponry fell.
They brought their message to the Radisson Hotel and Conference
Center in Pinellas Park last week and met with about 200
frustrated former plant workers and their loved ones.
Presenters cautioned that eligibility standards for the
revamped program are still in development, and said their job is
made harder because critical industry documents have been lost
or destroyed.
Still, they promised a renewed effort to investigate and settle
claims.
"There were a lot of workers who were exposed to some pretty
nasty stuff," program administrator John Vance told them. "We
are moving as quickly as we can to make as many decisions as we
can."
* * *
Federal officials say they are not ready to make public a full
inventory of what toxins were present at the Largo plant, but
acknowledge that weapons manufacturing sites were home to a
range of deadly chemicals whose hazards were not recognized
until years later.
In addition to radioactive materials, workers at the Largo
plant can recall the presence of asbestos, benzene, beryllium
and other toxins.
Many did not know what they were getting into. When he started
as a janitor at General Electric, Dave Bossard thought the plant
made toaster ovens. But it was a place where good employees
moved up, and Bossard eventually found himself working on
weapons components.
Bossard spent 34 years with General Electric. He is now
president of the Quarter Century Club, whose members worked at
the plant for 25 years or more. Bossard has seen countless
colleagues fall ill and die from diseases he thinks can be
traced to the work they did for General Electric.
"I have seen a lot of people that have suffered, that have
died, friends of mine," said Bossard, who remains healthy at age
63. "It's very, very sad."
Bossard is happy that those with illnesses caused by
nonradioactive toxins are now eligible for benefits. He just
wishes the federal government had acted sooner, before so many
passed away. Despite that regret, he views the Labor
Department's new initiative as a good sign.
"Now I have hope," he said. "Now it means that they are trying
to make amends."
* * *
When Sandra Holloway was left a widow, she found full-time work
and set about raising her two children. She would eventually go
on to own a picture framing shop in St. Petersburg. Holloway,
63, retired three years ago.
In 2001, a former colleague of her husband's told her about the
program created by the federal government. She quickly filed a
claim seeking survivor benefits.
It took the Department of Energy almost a year to even
acknowledge that Mike Holloway had worked at General Electric -
even though he worked there for 16 years before his death. To
date, no decision has been made on Sandra Holloway's claim.
"I would talk to people who knew nothing," she said of her
frequent calls to officials. "Nothing. It seemed like it was
people they had hired off the street."
The plant kept detailed records of accidents and visits to the
on-site medical clinic. As part of the claims process, the
Department of Energy compiled these forms on Mike Holloway.
According to Sandra, a record was made each time her husband
sneezed, but government officials have told her they can't
locate anything from the years 1978 and 1979, the period during
which her husband was exposed to tritium, a radioactive isotope
of hydrogen and a component in the triggering mechanism of
nuclear weapons.
Deborah Maroney, who worked at the plant, was part of the team
that inventoried 40 years of records and supervised their
transfer. Getting the records out quickly as the plant closed
was a major concern, she said.
According to co-workers, Mike Holloway tested positive for
contamination the day of his exposure. Those test results, as
well as an incident report, were most certainly recorded,
Maroney said.
By federal statute, they must be archived for at least 75 years.
"Something is not right about that," the 57-year-old Maroney
said of the apparent gap in Mike Holloway's records. "To say
they are missing or destroyed is a cop-out."
They may reside in a government records depository, she said,
but in the compensation program created by Congress, the
government has not assumed ultimate responsibility for
investigating claims. The burden of proof falls on victims and
survivors.
* * *
Sandra Holloway doubts how serious the Department of Labor is
about the overhaul of its program. But she recently got some
good news. Her husband's case has been turned over to a health
physicist, an expert on radiation science, for review.
As the surviving spouse of a man whose death may be linked to
his work at a Department of Energy weapons plant, Holloway is
eligible for a settlement of between $125,000 to $175,000.
Holloway is uncomfortable even discussing those figures. It's
too much like putting a price on a man's life.
"The money, that's a hollow victory, really," she said. "It's
about recognition that the government put people in such grave
danger and ruined so many lives."
--Will Van Sant can be reached at 445-4166 or
vansant@sptimes.com[Last modified August 30, 2005, 02:45:28]
*****************************************************************
47 Bradenton Herald: More drilling tests ahead
08/30/2005 |
Lockheed plans 13 more wells for golf course, Tallevast
DONNA WRIGHT
Herald Staff Writer
TALLEVAST - Crews working for Lockheed Martin Corp. plan to
drill 13 more monitoring wells in Tallevast and on a nearby golf
course over the next few weeks, a company spokeswoman said
Monday.
The first drilling rig will be moved onto the property of Wire
Pro Inc., site of the former Loral American Beryllium Co. at
1600 Tallevast Road, said Meredith Rouse Davis, Lockheed's
senior manager for corporate affairs.
One community leader was surprised by Lockheed's plans.
"We were not notified of any new drilling," said Laura Ward,
president of the advocacy group Family Oriented Community United
and Strong. "Nobody said a word to us."
The Loral plant has been identified as the source of an
underground plume of contamination now known to cover 131 acres,
but Lockheed - and Dr. Tim Varney, consultant to Tallevast
residents - have long suspected there might be another source
contributing to the plume in the vicinity of a nearby golf
course.
As the owner of the Loral plant when the contamination was
discovered in 2000, Lockheed has assumed the responsiblity for
determining the size of the plume and cleaning up the mess.
Lockheed hopes samplings from the new wells will help to
determine whether there is more than one source of the plume,
Davis said. The new wells will be drilled to probe those two hot
spots that previous tests have identified as the most
contaminated areas of the plume.
Even though Lockheed is confident earlier tests defined the
plume, the new wells are necessary, Davis said, to fully
understand the depth and breadth of those hot spots.
No new wells are planned for the residential area, Davis said.
Meanwhile Michael Graves, another consultant Tallevast residents
hired, is running his own soil and water tests for the
community. Robert P. DeMott, a Tampa toxicologist, is beginning
a health risk assessment to determine how the contamination may
be affecting the wellbeing of residents.
Davis said Lockheed plans to design a remediation plan to get
rid of contamination while tests continue.
But that remediation design will be updated, as new results come
in, Davis said.
"Whether it is the health risk assessment or well sampling, if
results come back that we should modify the remediation plan,
then we will," Davis said. "But we will move ahead now designing
a remediation system based upon results we know."
Tallevast leaders and Varney have said they do not believe
Lockheed has done enough testing in the right areas to know the
full extent of the plume.
Donna Wright, health and social services reporter, can be
reached at 745-7049 or at .
HeraldToday.com
*****************************************************************
48 SignOnSanDiego.com: Celebrities urge Schwarzenegger to clean up
water pollution
ASSOCIATED PRESS
8:00 p.m. August 29, 2005
SACRAMENTO A group of celebrities, including actors Alec
Baldwin and Don Cheadle, is calling on Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger to clean up a toxic chemical used in rocket fuel
that has contaminated the Colorado River.
In a letter to be delivered Tuesday, the group contends that
perchlorate a defense manufacturing ingredient found to
interfere with thyroid function and considered especially
harmful to children has tainted the river and threatens
Southern California's water supply.
The actors urge the governor to back a pollution standard of no
more than one part per billion, tougher than the six parts per
billion California has set as a public health goal.
Margita Thompson, a spokeswoman for the governor, had no
immediate comment because administration officials had not yet
received the letter.
Among those signing the petition, organized by the nonprofit
group Environment California, are activist Erin Brockovich and
actors Dylan McDermott, Amy Smart, Rebecca DeMornay, Bradley
Whitford and Ed Begley Jr.
"We urge you to protect Southern California's most important
waterway from rocket fuel polluters," the letter reads. "Any
weaker standard would let polluters off the hook and fail to
provide California's children with the protection they deserve."
Contact SignOnSanDiego| Site Index| Online Media Kit| Make us
Asked Questions| UTads.com Copyright 2005 Union-Tribune
Publishing Co.
*****************************************************************
49 EC: Hollywood Calls for Schwarzenegger to Take Action on Rocket Fuel
in Colorado River
Environment California
For Immediate Release:
August 30, 2005
For More Information:
Sujatha Jahagirdar
(213) 251-3688 ext. 321
Letter signed by Erin Brockovich, Don Cheadle, Alec Baldwin,
others calls for perchlorate drinking water standard that will
ensure full cleanup of vital waterway
Close to twenty members of the entertainment community,
including Maria Bello, Edward Norton and Bradley Whitford
submitted a letter to Governor Schwarzenegger today, calling for
immediate action to clean up rocket fuel contamination of the
Colorado River. The letter asked the Governor to immediately
establish a drinking water standard for perchlorate, the primary
component of rocket fuel at a level that would force the primary
company responsible for the contamination, Kerr McGee, to fully
clean up the millions of pounds of rocket fuel it has leaked
into the river over decades.
The Schwarzenegger administration should protect our children
and not the special interests and get rocket fuel out of
drinking water, stated actors Shiva Rose and Dylan McDermott,
who also signed the letter.
The administration is moving toward proposing its final standard
for perchlorate in drinking water this fall. A final standard
issued at the level of the states health recommendation may
leave millions of Californians exposed to Kerr McGees rocket
fuel pollution. A December Environmental Protection Agency
reports lists the maximum level of perchlorate in the Colorado
River at Parker Dam at 5.7 ppb, just under the new health
recommendation.
Rocket fuel has no place in Southern Californias most important
water supply. stated Sujatha Jahagirdar, Clean Water Advocate
for Environment California. The River provides water to more
than 135 California cities, irrigates much of the nations winter
produce, and supports a $400 billion Southern California
economy.
Perchlorate can interfere with the working of the thyroid gland,
which is essential to normal brain development in children. An
abnormal level of hormones produced by the thyroid gland has
been linked to conditions like attention deficit disorder and
learning disabilities. Massachusetts regulators have suggested
one part per billion as a safer threshold to protect babies.
When adjusted to protect infants and account for exposure
through food, recent EPA and National Academy of Sciences
studies point to the same.
Contaminated water from the Colorado River is currently used to
irrigate most of the nations winter produce crops. Tests
conducted by the United States Department of Agriculture have
detected perchlorate pollution in lettuce throughout the
country. A January study released by Texas Tech University also
found perchlorate build up in the milk of nursing mothers. In
addition, polluted water from the Colorado River used the
recharge groundwater is the suspected source of perchlorate
contamination in Orange County.
The bottom line is that any rocket fuel pollution in the
Colorado River is unacceptable. stated Jahagirdar, co-author of
the recent Environment California Research & Policy Center
study, Perchlorate and Childrens Health. "As the people's
governor, Mr. Schwarzenegger needs to focus attention on
cleaning up the most important water supply that Southern
Californians have.
The full list of signers is: Alec Baldwin, Ed Begley Jr., Maria
Bello, Erin Brockovich, Don Cheadle,
Rebecca DeMornay, Mike Farrell, Janet Grillo, Harry Hamlin,
Dylan McDermott, Wendie Malick, Edward Norton, Lisa Rinna, Shiva
Rose, David O Russell, Amy Smart, Heather Thomas, Bradley
Whitford, and Daphne Zuniga.
3435 Wilshire Blvd. #385 Los Angeles, CA 90010
Phone (213) 251-3688 Fax (213) 251-3699
E-mail: Top Photo by Greg Ward
*****************************************************************
50 Japan Times: Accident halts transport of radioactive soil
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Shipments to U.S. postponed after bag falls from truck, injures
man
TOTTORI (Kyodo) A governmental nuclear research and development
institute began work here Monday to ship soil contaminated with
uranium to the United States, but the work was soon suspended
when a bag packed with radioactive soil accidentally fell off a
truck.
[News photo]
Workers in Yurihama, Tottori Prefecture, examine a bag of
uranium-contaminated soil that fell off a truck Monday while
being transported to Kobe for disposal in the United States.
The work to transport the contaminated soil from Yurihama,
Tottori Prefecture, to the U.S. for disposal has been put on
hold until steps are taken to ensure the safety of shipments,
officials at the Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute said.
Initially, the work was to last 19 days.
Some 40 workers began packing the soil at around 8:30 a.m. and
prepared eight bags for shipment. But at 10 a.m., one of the
bags fell from a truck while being transported, causing slight
injuries to a worker.
The institute said the bag was not damaged.
The original schedule called for 33 bags to be shipped Monday,
the institute said.
The shipment of contaminated soil is aimed at paving the way
for a solution to a long-standing legal row between the local
community and the nuclear research and development institute
that erupted after the existence of the contaminated soil came
to light in 1988.
However, because the soil to be shipped constitutes only 10
percent of the total amount of contaminated soil, the issue is
unlikely to be resolved quickly.
Of the 3,000 cu. meters of contaminated soil in the town's
Katamo district, the institute will dispose of 290 cu. meters
with a relatively high surface-radiation level.
According to the institute's plan, the soil will be transported
to Kobe port by truck. After clearing customs, it will be
shipped to the United States on a container vessel in early
October.
In the U.S., a contractor of the institute will dispose of the
soil at a cost of about 660 million yen, and use the extracted
uranium for power generation there, institute officials said,
without specifying the exact destination and contracting party.
The soil originated from test drilling for uranium by the
institute's predecessor, Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel
Development Corp., around Ningyo Pass on the border of Tottori
and Okayama prefectures in the 1950s and 1960s.
It was revealed in August 1988 that the soil had been left
behind in the Katamo district, triggering an outcry from the
local community.
In November 2000, the Katamo community association filed a
lawsuit against the institute with the Tottori District Court
and obtained an order to clear away all of the soil.
The court order for removal was upheld by a higher court and
finalized by the Supreme Court last October after a protracted
legal battle.
The institute has been paying 750,000 yen per day to the local
community, as ordered by the Tottori District Court, for failing
to remove the soil before the court-appointed deadline of March
10 this year.
The institute unveiled a plan in February to temporarily keep
the soil at its waste-storage site at another location in
Yurihama, but the prefecture blocked the move.
The Japan Times: Aug. 30, 2005
(C) All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
51 AU ABC: Scullion urges NT to name alternate dump site.
30/08/2005. ABC News Online
Country Liberal Party (CLP) Senator Nigel Scullion is
challenging the Northern Territory Government to lobby for the
Commonwealth nuclear waste facility to be put in South
Australia.
Senator Scullion argues that the Martin Government cannot
effectively fight against the dump being put in the Northern
Territory without an alternative site being put forward.
The Federal Government was last year forced to abandon its plans
for the dump in South Australia.
Senator Scullion says extensive research has identified South
Australia's Woomera region as the best site for the facility.
"I think it's very clear and I've been trying to press the
Federal Government," he said.
"There were no politics in this, this was the process of
science that said that's the very best place to put it and
that's where we're going to put it.
"Now the silliness and the political expediency of the South
Australian Government now has to come back to roost."
*****************************************************************
52 Guardian Unlimited: Idaho Supports Plutonium Production Plan
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday August 30, 2005 4:46 AM
By CHRISTOPHER SMITH
Associated Press Writer
BOISE, Idaho (AP) - The state is supporting an Energy Department
proposal to start producing plutonium-238 for NASA and national
security agencies at a federal nuclear research compound in
eastern Idaho.
But in comments submitted Monday to the government, the state
called on the Bush administration to spell out a plan to
transfer the highly radioactive waste created at the Idaho
National Laboratory to disposal sites out of state.
The state also wants the Energy Department to allow independent
monitoring of air emissions and workplace safety at the proposed
$300 million production facility.
With those caveats, the administration of Gov. Dirk Kempthorne
said it will endorse the government's plan to consolidate U.S.
production of plutonium-238 ``space batteries'' at the
890-square-mile complex outside of Idaho Falls.
``It's a concept we can support, but there are some details that
still need to be worked out and DOE needs to improve some of its
evaluation and communication,'' said Kathleen Trever,
Kempthorne's coordinator for oversight of the lab.
Some Idaho residents have opposed the plan for fear it would
increase cancer deaths, threaten the nearby Yellowstone
ecosystem and make the region a potential terrorist target.
Plutonium-238 is not used for nuclear weapons, but its steady,
virtually infinite release of heat during decay makes the
isotope valuable as a heat source to produce electricity in
spacecraft and for some satellites that are unable to rely on
the sun as an energy source.
It is many times more radioactive than weapons-grade
plutonium-239, however, and ingesting a speck can be fatal.
The United States stopped producing plutonium-238 when it shut
the last weapons reactor at the Savannah River complex in South
Carolina in the mid-1990s. Instead it has relied on existing
stockpiles and a supply provided by Russia that is limited to
use by NASA in the space program.
The Bush administration wants to use an existing reactor at the
lab to make 11 pounds of plutonium-238 annually for 35 years,
beginning in 2010.
Guardian Unlimited Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
53 Colorado Daily: Anderson files grievance
BY MATT WILLIAMS Colorado Daily Staff
Writer
Former CU-Boulder environmental studies instructor Adrienne
Anderson said Monday she will file a grievance of "wrongful
termination" Friday with the University of Colorado Privilege
and Tenure Committee.
Anderson was notified in February her contract with the
CU-Boulder environmental studies department would not be renewed
beyond the spring semester.
She claims she was forced out because of her research into
alleged environmental hazards at Lockheed Martin Corp.
facilities and the Lowry Landfill Superfund site.
CU administrators have said Anderson was not rehired because of
"curricular issues" and budget shortfalls.
Anderson appealed her termination to the environmental studies
department last spring, but she was not reappointed.
"There's evidence of the CU administration's complicity in
improperly caving into external pressure from polluters and the
(Gov. Bill) Owens administration regarding my environmental
hazard research," Anderson told the Colorado Daily on Monday.
CU recently announced it has joined a coalition of 30 U.S.
universities spearheaded by the University of Texas system and
Lockheed Martin Corp. in a bid for the operating contract for
Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).
In a letter dated Monday to Privilege and Tenure Committee chair
Weldon Lodwick of CU-Denver, Anderson wrote she is "seeking
review of improprieties and violations" due to undisclosed
conflicts of interest.
Anderson requests in the letter that members of the Privilege
and Tenure Committee be free of ties to the Department of
Energy, Lockheed Martin and Coors, among a number of other
corporations and agencies she claims have ties to CU.
CU spokesperson Pauline Hale said she could not talk about
Anderson's grievance because it is a confidential personnel
matter.
Contact Matt Williams in regard to this story at (303) 443-6272,
ext. 111, or e-mail williams@coloradodaily.com.
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************