*****************************************************************
09/19/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.217
*****************************************************************
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] Opposition hardens to UN action on Iran nuclear plans
2 [NYTr] EU-Iran nuclear row escalates
3 IPS-English POLITICS: China's Nuclear Policy in Iran, N. Korea
4 IPS-English IRAN-NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: U.S. and EU should end
5 Korea Herald: Iran and North Korea
6 AFP: UN watchdog meets on Iran nuclear programme
7 IPS-English NORTH KOREA-NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: Accord for
8 Korea Herald: Six-party talks reach agreement
9 RIA Novosti: Russian delegations hails North Korean document as hist
10 BBC: N Korea to 'give up nuclear aims'
11 BBC: Real tests ahead on N Korea deal
12 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Eleventh-Hour Breakthrough Ends N.Korean
13 AFP: N.Korea pledges to give up nuclear weapons
14 Xinhua: Nuke talks end with adoption of common statement
15 Xinhua: IAEA chief welcomes outcome of six-party nuclear issue talks
16 Reuters: Six parties to hold fifth round of talks in Nov
17 Reuters: CHRONOLOGY-North Korea nuclear crisis
18 Korea Times: Inter-Korean Cabinet Talks End With Flicker of Progress
19 Korea Times: Breakthrough in Six-Party Talks
20 Korea Times: NK to Scrap Nuclear Program
21 Guardian Unlimited: Text of Joint Statement From Nuclear Talks
22 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea Agrees to End Nuclear Programs
23 AU: Australia welcomes NKorea nuclear pledge -
24 US: [NukeNet] GROUP SIGN-ONS NEEDED, Letter to Congress to cut
25 Study Says Stalin Killed To Prevent Nuclear War
NUCLEAR REACTORS
26 US: KSDK: Callaway Plant Shut Down To Replace Steam Generators
27 US: gainesvilletimes.com: Georgia utilities exploring wind energy -
NUCLEAR SECURITY
28 Reuters: Bulgaria thwarts smuggling of nuclear material
29 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria Busts Materials for Radioactive Synthes
NUCLEAR SAFETY
30 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Navajos still reeling from effects of last
31 US: Reuters: Letters to the Editor:Strategic Advice for the Cancer B
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
32 US: [shundahaialert] Skull Valley Nuclear Dump Approved. Please
33 US: Deseret News: Utah isn't a nuke dump
34 US: Salt Lake Tribune: The third uranium boom, or just a simmer?
35 EPA: Public Hearings on Amended Yucca Mountain Standards -
36 US: Bostone Globe: Board travels south for hearing on dry cask stora
37 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Public Service to hold hearing on cask sto
38 AU ABC: SA Opposition to lobby Vic Govt over waste dump
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
39 DOE: Secretary of Energy Advisory Board; Notice of Open
40 Tri-Valley Herald: Secret laser experiments proposed
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NYTr] Opposition hardens to UN action on Iran nuclear plans
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:48:47 -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
Reuters - Sep 19, 2005
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=worldNews&summit=&storyid=2005-09-19T151515Z_01_MCC762956_RTRUKOC_0_US-NUCLEAR-IRAN.xml
Opposition hardens to UN action on Iran nuclear plans
By Louis Charbonneau and Francois Murphy
VIENNA (Reuters) - The EU pressed the IAEA on Monday to bring Iran's nuclear
program before the U.N. Security Council over suspicions it is seeking
nuclear bombs.
Diplomats said Britain, France and Germany were working to convince the
35-nation board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which began
meeting on Monday, to refer Iran to the Security Council after it resumed
nuclear processing last month.
They faced intense opposition from Russia and developing countries on the
IAEA board, who are sympathetic to Iran's insistence it has a right to run a
peaceful nuclear program to generate electricity. Iran denies it is seeking
nuclear bombs.
"Do we think we have a majority? Yes, we probably have," said one EU
diplomat. "Do we think that a majority of, say, 20 out of 35 with some big
countries voting against or abstaining would be enough to pressure Iran?
That is the question."
The United States, which has long accused Tehran of seeking nuclear bombs,
is pushing for fast action after Britain, France and Germany failed to
convince Iran to mothball its nuclear program in return for political and
economic incentives.
"We think a report to the Security Council is long overdue," U.S. ambassador
to the IAEA Gregory Schulte told Reuters.
"The board had wanted Iran to pursue a course of cooperation and
negotiation," Schulte said. "Instead Iran appears to be pursuing a course of
rhetoric and confrontation while continuing the fuel cycle activities that
give us such concern."
NO IMMEDIATE SANCTIONS
EU diplomats say the EU3 would not seek immediate sanctions against Iran,
but ask the Security Council to call on Tehran to refreeze its nuclear
program.
Iran, however vowed on Monday to press ahead with its nuclear program after
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in a speech to the U.N. General Assembly on
Saturday, branded Western efforts to restrict it as "nuclear apartheid".
The official IRNA news agency on Monday quoted Ali Larijani, secretary of
Iran's Supreme National Security Council, as saying Tehran refused to bow to
pressure. "We will continue our nuclear activities in the framework of the
IAEA regulations."
Russia, China, Brazil and IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei oppose an
immediate referral to the U.N. Council, along with many developing countries
on the board.
Twelve of 14 IAEA board members from the Non-Aligned Movement, who met on
Monday to forge a common position, believed Iran's case should be resolved
within the IAEA, diplomats said, with only Peru and Singapore ready to back
a referral.
"Everybody would like to avoid a contentious debate in the Security
Council," Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh, speaking in New York, told
NDTV television news.
Washington and the EU want an early IAEA referral, before the 2005-2006 IAEA
board takes office with more non-aligned states. Any vote on a referral to
the Security Council is unlikely before the end of the week, if at all.
The Iran issue has split IAEA board members between Western countries
favoring tough action and emerging economies which accuse the West of trying
to deprive poor nations of independent nuclear programs.
Western countries say that since Iran hid a uranium enrichment program from
the IAEA for 18 years, the only way it can prove it is not seeking nuclear
bombs is to renounce sensitive nuclear technology altogether.
Developing countries back Iran's assertion that it is not now breaking any
rules under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which it is a signatory, that
allows it to run a civilian nuclear program under the supervision of the
IAEA.
(Additional reporting by Francois Murphy)
) Reuters 2005.
*
================================================================
.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 [NYTr] EU-Iran nuclear row escalates
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:51:35 -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
EU Observer - Sep 19, 2005
http://euobserver.com/?aid=19889&rk=1
EU-Iran nuclear row escalates
By Lucia Kubosova
The EU and the US aim to step up pressure on Iran to cease nuclear fuel
enrichment activities, but UK foreign minister Jack Straw has ruled out
military action similar to the war in Iraq.
Germany, France and Britain are meeting their US counterparts today to
discuss a coordinated approach towards Tehran, following the Iranian
president's statements at the UN summit on Sunday (18 September).
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made it clear over the weekend that his country did
not intend to abandon its uranium enrichment projects, noting it had an
"inalienable right" to produce nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
Mr Straw remarked that the president's speech was "disappointing and
unhelpful", as he had offered nothing "to suggest that he wants to abide
by the agreement Iran has made".
However, the British foreign minister pointed out in an interview with
the BBC: "This will not be resolved by military means, let's be clear
about that".
"It needs to be resolved by all facilities available to the
international community", he added.
British officials are drafting a resolution to be put to a meeting of
the 35-strong International Atomic Energy Agency board in Vienna today
(19 September), according to UK daily, the Guardian.
The statement is to suggest that Iran should be sent to the UN's
security council, which would then consider imposing sanctions.
However, it is not yet clear if the EU and US diplomats can gather the
support of 18 countries required to push through the move.
Mr Ahmadinejad's statements over the weekend have been interpreted as a
clear sign that the two-year negotiations between the EU and Tehran have
failed.
Washington has supported the European diplomatic initiative so far, but
has also said that diplomatic failure should lead to further measures by
the international community.
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
3 IPS-English POLITICS: China's Nuclear Policy in Iran, N. Korea
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:46:08 -0700
version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
ROMAIPS AP DV IP SC ML
POLITICS: China's Nuclear Policy in Iran, N. Korea Gets Critical
Antoaneta Bezlova
BEIJING, Sep 18 (IPS) - As North Korea ups the stakes in a poker game of
nuclear negotiations and Iran faces a showdown at the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) this week, China's policy of avoiding clear-cut
choices over support for countries, considered international outlaws by the
United States, is reaching a critical point.
Six-party talks over Pyongyang's nuclear programme that had resumed on
Sunday after China, the hosts, failed to broker any deal between the United
States and North Korea on Saturday has now been extended into Monday in the
hopes of an agreement that also involves Russia, Japan and South Korea.
''The talks are nearing the end and will continue on Monday,'' said Chinese
delegation spokesman Liu Jianchiao as differences persisted over mention in
the draft joint-document, proposed by Beijing, of the construction of a
light-water reactor that Pyongyang insists on having as part of its
civilian nuclear programme.
Beijing has repeatedly argued that its friendly bilateral ties with North
Korea and Iran have enabled it to play a moderating role in those regional
crises. Detractors have, however, countered that its attitude stems purely
from self-interest.
Possession of nuclear weapons by Pyongyang would threaten China, and any
further crisis in the hermit republic would unleash a refugee exodus across
the border. As North Korea's oldest ally, economic benefactor and a U.N.
Security Council (UNSC) member with veto-yielding power, China wields
enormous clout in Pyongyang.
However, ever since Pyongyang expelled the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) inspectors in 2003 and quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT), Beijing has resisted efforts to censure North Korea at the UNSC.
In the case of Iran, Beijing's encouragement of Tehran in its obstructive
attitude towards attempts to rein in its nuclear ambitions can be linked to
China's huge oil interests in that country.
China, which has become the world's second largest oil importer over the
past decade, currently gets 14 percent of its oil imports from Iran and
wants to step up imports of Iran's natural gas too.
When Chinese President Hu Jintao met with U.S. President George W. Bush,
before the UN General Assembly convened in New York last week, he offered
no concrete steps on getting North Korea and Iran to give up their nuclear
weapons programme. He merely promised to urge Iran to follow the mandates
of the IAEA.
Previously, China's ambassador to the UN, Wang Guangya had
expressed reluctance to see Iran's uranium-enrichment activities sent to
the UNSC. ''I don't think IAEA talks will be helpful to bring the issue to
the [security] council. The council has too many things on its table. Why
should we add to this,'' Wang was quoted as saying.
But U.S. patience may be wearing thin. A little more than a week
ago, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice cited Russia, China and India as
vital potential partners in telling Iranian leaders to ''live up to their
international obligations'' to suspend uranium conversion and enrichment
permanently.
The same sense of growing urgency was reflected in Bush's comments when he
lobbied Hu not to block action by the IAEA this week to refer Iran's work
on uranium enrichment to the UNSC.
Iran suspended enrichment work late last year, but resumed it in August
saying the West's offer of incentives, for dropping the uranium conversion
and enrichment work permanently, was inadequate.
In the six-nation talks to try to defuse the North Korean nuclear issue,
China has indeed played a more constructive, though still ambiguous, role.
When the latest negotiations stalled amid Pyongyang's insistence on
possessing a costly light-water nuclear reactor, Beijing tabled a new
compromise agreement.
The proposal in principle affirmed the North's right to peaceful nuclear
power and promised Pyongyang it would receive the reactor at some future
point, but it also reflected the U.S. demands that any such steps occur
after Pyongyang dismantles its nuclear weapons.
Pyongyang has threatened to extract more plutonium in its atomic weapons
programme if its demands were not met.
If there is no breakthrough in the current contacts, the Bush
administration will have to decide whether to abandon the talks altogether
and face a confrontation with the Stalinist regime of Kim Jung-Il.
Any attempt to punish Pyongyang for its nuclear brinkmanship -- whether it
is a UNSC resolution condemning the regime and applying economic sanctions,
or a U.S. naval blockade, would force Beijing to consider what is more
important -- good relations with Washington and moving in the global
mainstream or defending North Korea.
How Beijing responds to the Pyongyang and Tehran nuclear challenges in the
coming week would test China's commitment to prevent nuclear proliferation.
North Korea has become the first country to walk away from the NPT and has
threatened to test a nuclear device.
Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing joined world leaders on Sep.15 in
signing an international treaty, which defines as a crime the possession of
radioactive material with the intention of committing a terrorist act.
China's signing of the Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear
Terrorism indicates the country's determination to combat terrorism and its
support for international efforts to prevent proliferation, Chinese Foreign
Ministry spokesman said in Beijing.
''China never helps any country to develop nuclear arms,'' spokesman Qin
Gang told reporters.
While the talks were proceeding in Beijing, in New York, Condoleezza Rice
said negotiations were only part of the effort to contain the spread of
nuclear weapons. She warned that those who spread atomic weapons faced a
potential freeze on their assets. (END/IPS/AP/IP/DV/SC/ML/AB/RDR/05)
= 09181357 ORP002
NNNN
*****************************************************************
4 IPS-English IRAN-NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: U.S. and EU should end
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:46:10 -0700
version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
WD AF DV IF IP G8 MD=20
IRAN-NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: U.S. and EU should end pressure, says UAE paper
Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)
SHARJAH, Sep. 19 (WAM) - A United Arab Emirates (UAE) daily has called fo=
r
an end to the international divide on Iran's nuclear programme, warning t=
hat
such division will lead to mounting tension.
The Sharjah-based 'The Gulf News' said in an editorial on Monday that
with Iran toughening its stand on the nuclear issue and pressure being
applied on Tehran by the United States and European Union to drop its
nuclear enrichment programme, there seems to be no indication that any of
them would seek to cool the situation.
It said that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board, whic=
h
will meet on Monday, is divided into two opposing camps giving Iran an
opportunity to play one against another.
=94Sensing that the Western-dominated lobby is seeking to sideline a Th=
ird
World, emerging powers such as China and India have joined South Africa a=
nd
sought Russia's assistance to resist moves to isolate Iran. This division
has emboldened Iran to step up a campaign focusing on its right to develo=
p
peaceful nuclear programme,=94 argued the English language daily.
Apparently, according to the paper, the U.S.-led group is unfazed abou=
t
Israel having nuclear weapon stockpile developed through its policy of
nuclear ambiguity. =94The ardour that the U.S. is demonstrating against I=
ran's
programme is lacking in Washington's attitude towards Israel. It is such
double standards that have arrayed a large number of Third World countrie=
s
behind Iran on what Iranian president described as nuclear apartheid.=94
The newspaper said in spite of the fatwa issued by Iran's Supreme lead=
er
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei prohibiting the country from developing weapons of
mass destruction, the EU and the wealthy countries led by the U.S. are
seeking to divide the international community.
=94Such division would undermine attempts to find an amicable solution=
to
the issue. Iran's brinkmanship and that of the wealthy bloc would lead to
mounting tension. It is therefore important that at Monday's lAEA meeting
efforts should be made to find a consensus that should lead to an end to
nuclear bickering. The international divide on the nuclear issue should b=
e
bridged,=94 concluded the paper. (WAM)
=20
*****************************************************************
5 Korea Herald: Iran and North Korea
Editorial
What Koreans found notable about U.S. Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice's U.N. address Saturday was the absence of any
direct reference to North Korea while she condemned Iran as a
country that threatens the effectiveness of the global
nonproliferation regime.
As is generally understood, North Korea is at least five years
ahead of Iran in nuclear weapons development. Rice must have
exercised caution not to include the North in her address,
considering that a multilateral meeting was underway in Beijing
but this could give the North a wrong message.
On the same day, a few hours later, Iran's new President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad took the U.N. rostrum to proclaim his country's
"inalienable right" to produce nuclear fuel. In contrast to
Pyongyang's announcement of the possession of nuclear weapons,
which it said were needed for its self-defense against U.S.
nuclear attack, Ahmadinejad denied his nation had any intention
of producing nuclear arms.
Iran last month turned down economic incentives proposed by the
EU Three - Britain, Germany and France - and resumed work for
uranium enrichment. The Iranian president offered partnership
with private and public sectors of other countries for the
nuclear fuel project "to provide the greatest degree of
transparency." It was a gesture to deter the EU and U.S. moves
to refer the Iranian question to the Security Council.
Russia, China, India and Pakistan, which are board members at
the IAEA, are still reluctant to involve UNSC in any action
against Iran. Moscow in particular is building a reactor in
southern Iran and is even vouching for Tehran on its claim of no
intention to develop nuclear weapons.
Iran and North Korea are prodding each other in their precarious
nuclear ventures. The split international response to Iran's
nuclear activities has apparently emboldened North Korea in its
current negotiations in Beijing. In the six-way talks in the
Chinese capital, the North has raised its ante by demanding the
construction of a light-water reactor apparently looking at
Russia's ongoing project in Bushehr. The developments in the two
regions prove that a multilateral process is not so effective in
dealing with the two diehard aspirants for the nuclear club.
2005.09.20
*****************************************************************
6 AFP: UN watchdog meets on Iran nuclear programme
19/09/2005 11h49
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohammed
ElBaradei
©AFP - Dieter Nagl
VIENNA (AFP) - UN atomic watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei called
on Iran finally to allow access to sensitive sites as his agency
met to consider sending Tehran to the UN Security Council
because of alleged weapons-related nuclear activities.
The "ball is very much in Iran's court on this issue," said
ElBaradei, head of International Atomic Energy Agency.
"We need a number of additional transparency measures," he said
Monday, pressing Iran to provide "access to certain sites,
including access to certain individuals, including making a
number of documents available."
As the IAEA meets this week in Vienna, the United States and the
European Union are calling for the agency to refer Iran to the
Security Council for sanctions due to two decades of concealing
atomic activities and a resumption of nuclear fuel work last
month.
The crisis escalated at the UN General Assembly on Saturday when
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahadinejad attacked Western demands he
halt uranium enrichment activities, which can produce fuel for
nuclear power reactors but also the raw material for atom bombs.
EU negotiators Britain, France and Germany appear determined to
do something about Iran's intransigence, even though there is
stiff opposition on the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors to
referring the matter to the Security Council.
The Security Council could use measures ranging from resolutions
to trade sanctions to try to get Tehran to stop making nuclear
reactor fuel.
ElBaradei took heart from breakthrough agreement by North Korea,
which promised Monday to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange
for pledges of aid and security. The deal was reached in talks
between North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan, Russia, and the
United States.
"What we have seen coming today from North Korea gives me a lot
of encouragement that issues as complex (as Iran) can in fact be
resolved if good faith on both sides exist," ElBaradei said.
IAEA inspectors should return to North Korea as early as
possible after having been kicked out in December 2002, he said.
Iranian ambassador Akhondzadeh Basti
©AFP - Dieter Nagl
On Iran, "regrettably we are going through a period of
confrontation and political brinkmanship," ElBaradei said.
The IAEA has been investigating Iran since February 2003 on US
charges that the Islamic Republic is using what it says is a
peaceful nuclear power program to hide atomic weapons work.
Iranian ambassador Mohammad Akhondzadeh told reporters Monday
that the "intention of Iran is peace, peace and peace."
The Western drive for UN action against Iran's nuclear fuel
programme faces opposition from Russia and Russia and China,
which both have major business interests with Iran, as well as
non-aligned states.
These countries back Iran's claim to peaceful nuclear technology
under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
The IAEA board last month called on Iran to halt uranium
conversion it had resumed in August. Iran had suspended fuel
work in November last year to start talks with the European trio
on guaranteeing Iran's nuclear program is peaceful.
Conversion is the first step in enriching uranium for reactor
fuel.
"The Iranians are convinced they are in a strong position" as
the United States is bogged down militarily in Iraq and the
Islamic Republic has clout as a crucial supplier to an already
tight world oil market, a non-Western diplomat close to the IAEA
said.
While the West has a slim majority to push the matter through
the board, diplomats said this would be a disaster for a body
that has always approved nuclear compliance matters by
consensus.
"You can refer it by vote but then this will show very weak
support," especially with nuclear powers Russia and China able
to veto any Security Council measures, the diplomat said.
"What good does it do to refer to the Security Council with 15
abstentions? This is terrible, even 10 abstentions," the
diplomat said, referring to a possible count from the 35-nation
board. Some countries might abstain so as to avoid direct
opposition to the West. Iranian technicians remove a container
of radioactive uranium
©AFP/File - Behrouz Mehri
Diplomats said that the EU-3, which has been working on a draft
resolution for the past two weeks, might try to gain time by
proposing a deadline for Iran to halt the fuel work.
This would give Iran one last chance to comply, with another
IAEA board meeting to be called within a few weeks.
In New York Saturday, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had
said there was still "time for diplomacy."
+ Next: Fifty percent turnout estimated in key Afghan poll
+ Previous: N.Korea pledges to give up nuclear weapons
+ Back to Contents
+ Àðàáñêèé Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005
*****************************************************************
7 IPS-English NORTH KOREA-NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: Accord for
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:46:10 -0700
version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
WD AF DV IF IP G8 MD=20
NORTH KOREA-NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: Accord for nuke-free Korean peninsula
Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)
SEOUL, Sep. 19 (WAM) - North Korea has agreed to scrap all its nuclear
weapons and weapons-related programmes and rejoin an international
non-proliferation regime in exchange for political and economic benefits,
said a joint statement, the South Korean Yonhap news agency reported on
Monday.
According to Yonhap's Beijing-datelined dispatch, the six-point statem=
ent
summing up a week of tough negotiations involving the two Koreas, the Uni=
ted
States, China, Japan and Russia, confirmed that the realization of a
nuclear-free Korean Peninsula in a verifiable way is their ultimate goal.
China's top envoy, Wu Dawei, hailed the agreement as =94the most succe=
ssful
outcome=94 ever since the six-nation talks began a year after the dispute
erupted in 2002. All delegates stood up and clapped when Wu made the
announcement.
South Korea welcomed the agreement, saying that it =94has made an impo=
rtant
turning point in resolving the North Korean nuclear issue.=94 =94We hope =
that
the adoption of the statement would serve as an opportunity to advance
practical means of helping peace take root on the Korean Peninsula,=94 Yo=
nhap
quoted Kim Man-soo, a presidential spokesman, as having said. South Korea=
's
chief negotiator in the six-nation talks, Song Min-soon, said in Beijing
that the agreement was a victory of South Korea's diplomacy.
=94This has opened the way for us to write our history in our own way,=
=94
Song told reporters. =94The six countries are now on the same boat headin=
g to
the same designated port. No country should fall back, and even one
straggler will get us nowhere.=94 He praised North Korea for agreeing to =
give
up all nuclear weapons in its possession as well as its weapons-related
programmes, which he said is unprecedented.
Analysts cautioned against too much expectations, saying that the
agreement will require complex and time-consuming verification.
=94It is just the beginning of a long settlement process, not the end,=
=94
said Paik Seung-gi, a political science professor at Kyongwon University =
in
Seoul. =94The agreement can falter and may go back to square one if any o=
ne
party changes its mind.=94 This round of talks, which began in Beijing la=
st
Tuesday after a five-week recess, had bogged down over North Korea's dema=
nd
for power-generating light-water reactors as part of its right to =94peac=
eful
nuclear activities=94.
The breakthrough came after the United States softened its stance of
opposing the North keeping even a civilian nuclear programme, citing its
past history of diverting research facilities for weapons development in
violation of international agreements, including one in 1994.
Apparently frustrated by the drawn-out negotiations, the chief U.S.
envoy, Christopher Hill, once had said he would leave from the talks at t=
he
end of Monday, regardless of the outcome.
The China-drafted statement calls for North Korea to rejoin the Nuclea=
r
Non-proliferation Treaty as soon as possible and come under the control o=
f
the UN nuclear monitor, the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The North, in return, will be given security guarantees plus fuel oil =
and
electricity aid, it said.
The participants have pledged to honor the North's claim to peaceful u=
se
of nuclear energy and agreed to start discussions on providing it with a
power-generating light-water reactor at =94an appropriate time,=94 the st=
atement
said.
The sequence of those agreements was not specified in the statement bu=
t
North Korea has publicly stated that it would never give up its nuclear
weapons programme before getting promised benefits.
The current nuclear row was caused by U.S. allegations in 2002 that No=
rth
Korea had admitted to having a uranium-based arms programme, in addition =
to
its known plutonium-based one, a claim denied by the North.
As the dispute escalated, North Korea expelled International Atomic
Energy Agency monitors and withdrew from the global non-proliferation reg=
ime
NPT. (WAM)
=20
*****************************************************************
8 Korea Herald: Six-party talks reach agreement
Joint statement sets guidelines on future steps on N. Korean
nukes
By Lee Joo-hee and news reports
The six parties reached a dramatic consensus yesterday on North
Korea's nuclear weapons programs after last-minute delays,
agreeing on a joint statement that would act as the set of
principles for follow-up negotiations aimed to end the
decade-long standoff over the communist state's nuclear
ambitions.
Wu Dawei, chief delegate to the six-party talks representing
the host country China, said the parties have reached an
agreement and that the joint statement will soon be released.
Details of the six-article statement, compiled by the host
country China and signed by the other parties including the two
Koreas, the United States, Japan and Russia, were not available
at the time of going to press.
The agreement came two years after the first round of the
six-party talks on August 2003 that were often bogged down by
conflicting interests and most recently boycotted for over a
year by North Korea.
It was reported the statement ratifies that North Korea will
forego all nuclear programs for the sake of a nuclear-free
peninsula and that other participants will give compensations
including security assurance, heavy fuel and electricity
support, as well as disbanding various sanctions and normalizing
relations with the hermit state.
The statement also clarifies that if North Korea regains
international trust by rejoining the Non-proliferation Treaty
and abides by all the security obligations set by the
International Atomic Energy Agency, it will gain the right to
peacefully use nuclear energy, reports said. The parties also
agreed to discuss North Korea's demand for a construction of a
light-water reactor as its power source at an appropriate time,
sectioning off the most contentious debate that caused this
fourth round of negotiations to suffer a three-week recess
earlier this month.
Observers said the joint statement will become a stepping stone
for the relevant parties to speed up their negotiations with the
North and other parties to conclude the nuclear standoff that
has been considered a major international threat.
So, the drawn-out talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons
programs ended successfully with a joint statement but the
crucial plenary meeting suffered last-minute delays as the six
parties involved in the talks took time contacting their
domestic governments.
The meeting was delayed for three and a half hours yesterday
morning with each members making last-ditch negotiations and
contacting their main governments.
Earlier in the day, the chief U.S. envoy, Christopher Hill,
said this round of talks, which began a week ago, was nearing
its end.
"We're at the end game this morning. We're very close to the
end. I suspect it will be over in a matter of hours," Hill told
reporters as he left his hotel. He said Sunday that he planned
to leave the talks in Beijing at the end of the day regardless
of the outcome.
Japanese senior delegate Kenichiro Sasae also confirmed that it
will be the last day of the talks. He said that there was "a
possibility that an agreement could be reached."
South Korean reports said the host country China distributed
the latest version of the joint statement to each member
delegates.
On Sunday, Hill described the Chinese text as "a good effort to
try to bridge the remaining differences" and said that "it's
difficult but not insurmountable."
This second part of the fourth round of six-nation talks bogged
down soon after it opened in Beijing a week ago after North
Korea insisted on having power-generating light-water reactors
as part of its right to "peaceful nuclear activities," a demand
rejected by the United States.
Participants have offered North Korea economic aid, security
guarantees from Washington and free electricity from South Korea
in exchange for dismantling its weapons program. The North has
demanded it be given a light-water nuclear reactor for
generating electricity before disarming, promising to open such
a facility to co-management and international inspections.
North Korea was promised two light-water reactors - more
difficult to divert for making nuclear bombs - under a 1994 deal.
That agreement fell apart in late 2002 with the outbreak of the
latest nuclear crisis, when U.S. officials say North Korea
admitted having a secret uranium enrichment program.
North Korea is believed to have enough radioactive material for
about a half-dozen bombs from its publicly acknowledged
plutonium program, but hasn't performed any known nuclear tests
to prove its
capability. In February, the North claimed it had nuclear
weapons.
"Today is the time to make a decision," South Korea's main
envoy, Song Min-soon, said yesterday.
He added that a resolution depended on all six countries at the
talks - China, Japan, Russia, the United States and the two
Koreas.
"It is not a situation where just one party decides whether to
accept," Song said.
The main Russian envoy had said earlier the draft agreement
acknowledged North Korea's right to a peaceful nuclear program
after it disarms _ but it wasn't known if the draft had since
been revised. Washington had previously rejected allowing North
Korea any atomic program, saying its decades of relentlessly
pursuing a nuclear bomb means it can't be trusted.
2005.09.20
*****************************************************************
9 RIA Novosti: Russian delegations hails North Korean document as historic
19/ 09/ 2005
BEIJING, September 19 (RIA Novosti, Alexei Yefimov) - The
Russian delegation to the six-nation nuclear talks on the North
Korean nuclear problem are hailing the resulting document as
"historic".
"The joint document outlining the key principles of the future
nuclear-free status of the Korean peninsula was adopted for the
first time in the history of the six-nation talks," Deputy
Foreign Minister Alexander Alekseyev said. "We think this is a
historic document as it contains a number of provisions that we
could not consider real even six months ago."
On Sept. 19, the sides endorsed the agreement, ending the fourth
round of negotiations, which began on July 26. The round
recessed Aug. 7 and resumed Sept. 13.
The talks involved the United States, North Korea, Russia,
China, South Korea and Japan.
© 2005 "RIA Novosti"
*****************************************************************
10 BBC: N Korea to 'give up nuclear aims'
Last Updated: Monday, 19 September 2005
[North Korean delegates applaud at the close of the talks over
North Korea's nuclear crisis in Beijing, September 19, 2005.]
North Korean delegates gave a standing ovation as the talks ended
North Korea has agreed to give up all nuclear activities and
rejoin the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, in a move diplomats
called a breakthrough.
In return, the US said it had no intention of attacking the
North, which was also promised aid and electricity.
The agreement came during a fourth round of six-nation talks in
Beijing, aimed at ending a three-year standoff over North Korea's
nuclear ambitions.
But correspondents warned that some key issues had not yet been
resolved.
"This is the most important result since the six-party talks
started more than two years ago," said Wu Dawei, China's vice
foreign minister.
DETAILS OF DEAL
N Korea to abandon all nuclea weapons and programmes N Korea to
return to nuclear treaty and UN monitoring US states it has no
intention of attacking N Korea N Korea says it has right to
"peaceful uses of nuclear energy" N Korea's demand for light
water reactor to be discussed at "appropriate time" Full text of
agreement Real tests still lie ahead
Mohammad ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy
Agency [IAEA] also welcomed the development, saying that UN
inspectors should return to North Korea as soon as possible.
"The earlier we go back the better," he said.
The chief US negotiator at the talks, Christopher Hill, praised
the development as a "win-win situation", adding: "We have to
seize the momentum of this."
But he promptly urged Pyongyang to end operations at its main
nuclear facility at Yongbyon.
"The time to turn it off would be about now," Mr Hill said.
The BBC's Charles Scanlon in Seoul says that while the statement
appears to be a significant step forward in principle,
difficulties may arise in its implementation.
One issue which has yet to be resolved is North Korea's demand
that it be given a civilian light-water nuclear reactor to
generate electric power.
This US has described this request as a non-starter, but agreed
in Monday's statement that the issue could be addressed again in
the future.
Disagreement also remains over the scope and scale of North
Korea's weapons programmes.
The question of verification of these programmes has yet to be
addressed - an issue which our correspondent says could present
the most formidable obstacle to a final agreement.
Inspections
This historic joint statement came as hope was fading that the
six-party talks could ever reach a deal.
CRISIS TIMELINE
Oct 2002: US says North Kore 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
Sep 2005: N Korea agrees to give up nuclear goals Timeline:
Nuclear crisis
Correspondents say the US was on the verge of walking out of the
talks and heading home - a fact that may have been the clincher
which forced North Korea to back down.
In Monday's statement, the North "promised to drop all nuclear
weapons and current nuclear programmes, and to get back to the
Non-Proliferation Treaty as soon as possible".
This latter detail is crucial, as it will allow United Nations
inspectors to return to the North's nuclear sites.
In return the US made some conciliatory statements, affirming it
had no nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula and "has no
intention to attack or invade [North Korea] with nuclear or
conventional weapons".
The joint statement also said the other five nations involved in
the talks - China, Japan, South Korea, Russia and the US - were
willing to provide energy assistance to North Korea, as well as
promoting "economic co-operation in the fields of energy, trade
and investment".
South Korea has already offered to deliver 2m kilowatts of
electric power.
The agreement also mentioned North Korea's relations with Japan.
Tokyo and Pyongyang have been locked in a dispute about Japanese
citizens kidnapped by North Korea, and the statement promised the
two countries would "take steps to normalise their relations".
The six parties agreed to implement Monday's agreement "in a
phased manner", using the principle of "commitment for
commitment, action for action".
When they meet again in November, they will have the difficult
task of working out how this will work in practice.
The long-running nuclear dispute began in late 2002, when the US
accused North Korea of having a uranium-based nuclear arms
programme, in violation of international agreements.
*****************************************************************
11 BBC: Real tests ahead on N Korea deal
Last Updated: Monday, 19 September 2005
By Charles Scanlon BBC correspondent in Seoul
It is the fruit of three years of confrontation, florid insults
and intermittent negotiations - a statement of principles
intended to form the framework for an eventual agreement to rid
the Korean peninsula of nuclear weapons.
Under intense pressure from its neighbours and the United States,
North Korea signed up to a document that commits it - in theory -
to scrapping its nuclear weapons and weapons programmes and
readmitting inspectors from the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA).
[North Korean spent nuclear fuel rods in Yongbyon]
Verifying North Korea's nuclear claims will be a key test
The North's neighbours and the US, in return, have agreed to
supply energy assistance and move towards diplomatic
normalisation.
The US also stated it had no nuclear weapons on the Korean
peninsula and had no intention to attack the North.
The joint statement is the first tangible sign of progress after
four rounds of six-party talks in Beijing - a diplomatic process
that recently appeared to be in danger of stalling.
But the real test will come when the diplomats return in
November to discuss how the agreement is implemented, and how
North Korea's nuclear claims will be verified.
"Whether this agreement helps solve this will depend in large
measure on what we do in the days and weeks that follow," said
the chief US negotiator, Christopher Hill.
The US negotiator only manag to reach the current agreement by
postponing discussion of the most contentious disputes
"We need to take the momentum of this agreement and work to see
that it is implemented."
Mr Hill came to the negotiations this summer with new tactics -
to show more flexibility and engage the North Koreans directly.
But he only managed to reach the current agreement by postponing
discussions on the most contentious disputes.
North Korea came back to the talks last week with a new demand
that threw the negotiations into disarray, and threatened a
breakdown that might have scuppered the diplomatic process
altogether.
It called for the construction of a modern, civilian nuclear
power plant, in addition to the other rewards on offer for
scrapping its nuclear programmes.
That was clearly unacceptable to the Bush administration, which
insists the Communist state cannot be trusted with any nuclear
capabilities.
Monday's agreed statement merely said this issue would be
discussed again "at an appropriate time", which looks like a
recipe for further deadlock in the future.
Omissions
A fundamental disagreement over the scope of North Korea's
nuclear capabilities has also not been addressed.
PROBLEMS TO SOLVE
No mention in agreement of Korea's alleged uranium programme N
Korea still claiming right to peaceful nuclear programme Also
wants to be built a light-water nuclear reactor Timing and
verification of N Korea ending its nuclear programmes yet to be
agreed
North Korea continues to deny American allegations that it is
running a second, secret uranium enrichment programme in
addition to its well known plutonium plant at Yongbyon.
There is also no agreement on sequencing - who is to make the
first move? - and this could be another key stumbling block.
And the fraught question of verification - North Korea is one of
the world's most closed and secretive nations - has also not
been addressed.
Given these omissions, the agreed statement looks like the
minimum necessary to keep the diplomatic process alive.
Nevertheless, the agreement has been warmly welcomed in the
region - perhaps more out of relief than any expectation of an
early settlement.
The accord is "an important turning point that will help peace
take root," said a statement issued by the South Korean
government.
South Korean officials believe it will be hard for the North to
go back on an agreement that was signed in the presence of all
the regional powers as well as the US.
But they are also aware that North Korea has made many previous
commitments to abandon its nuclear ambitions.
There is a clear understanding in the region that the real work
of defusing the North Korean nuclear threat is only just
beginning.
*****************************************************************
12 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Eleventh-Hour Breakthrough Ends N.Korean Nuclear Talks
Home> National/Politics Updated Sep.19,2005 19:09 KST
Four-Nation Talks Could Discuss Korean Peace Treaty
Will Agreement Shake Cooperation Between Seoul and Washington
Seoul Saved Six-Party Talks: Unification Minister
N.Korea's Reactor Dreams Should not Grow Further
North Korea on Monday agreed to give up all its nuclear weapons
and programs and rejoin the Non Proliferation Treaty in return
for normal diplomatic ties with Washington and energy and other
assistance from participants. Moreover, the participants in the
six-party talks agreed to respect North Korea¡¯s right to use
nuclear energy peacefully and to discuss the provision of
light-water reactors at an appropriate time.
The joint statement of principles announced by the delegations
from both Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia on
Monday brings record-length fourth round of the talks to a
successful conclusion many had doubted was possible. A fifth
round of talks slated for early November will work out the
schedule and logistics of the general agreement reached in
Beijing. South Korean chief negotiator Song Min-soon expressed
satisfaction. ¡°This agreement prepares the six nation¡¯s joint
principles for resolving the North Korean nuclear dispute,¡± he
said.
North Korea agreed that in the process of scrapping its nuclear
programs it will return to the NPT and embrace IAEA safeguard
regimes.
The U.S. in turn offered reassurances that it had ¡°no intention
to attack or invade the DPRK with nuclear or conventional
weapons.¡± Japan also pledged to continue work towards
normalizing its chilly relationship with North Korea,
reaffirming a 2002 agreement between Tokyo and Pyongyang to
normalize ties once a number of thorny bilateral issues have
been resolved.
The ¡°win-win¡± statement, in the words of U.S. chief negotiator
Christopher Hill, also puts in writing South Korea¡¯s pledge to
provide the North with 2 million kilowatts of free electricity a
year, with other parties also pledging energy aid to the North.
The parties agreed to set up a separate forum to discuss a
permanent peace framework for the Korean Peninsula. The Korean
War ended with only an armistice which theoretically remains in
force until today.
Experts said the statement was an important step toward a
resolution of the conflict but warned of a tug of war later over
concrete measures, chief among them the order and timing of
North Korea¡¯s dismantling of its nuclear facilities and
programs. A member of the South Korean delegation was unable to
conceal a note of admiration. ¡°North Korea also made a big
decision, but they got everything they wanted from the United
States,¡± he said.
(englishnews@chosun.com )
*****************************************************************
13 AFP: N.Korea pledges to give up nuclear weapons
19/09/2005 11h43
Negotiators talks hold hands at the close of six-nation talks
in Beijing
©AFP/Pool - Ng Han Guan
BEIJING (AFP) - North Korea promised to give up its nuclear
weapons in exchange for pledges of aid and security, the first
major breakthrough in more than two years of deadlock over the
high-stakes crisis.
The unexpected agreement also said the United States would
respect the North's sovereignty and would not attack, a fear
Pyongyang had repeatedly said was a main reason for insisting on
developing an atomic bomb programme.
Chief US negotiator Christopher Hill praised the deal, which
capped a tough week of talks among six nations -- also including
China, Japan, Russia and South Korea -- which have tried since
2003 to persuade the North to disarm.
"It is a big decision for them but is absolutely the right
decision for them," Hill said Monday.
"The success or prosperity of the DPRK (North Korea) does not
depend on nuclear weapons. In fact, it depends on relations with
the others. So this is a moment which will be very important in
their history," he said.
According to the agreement, the North would renounce all nuclear
weapons and programmes, return to the international
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and allow UN weapons inspectors
back into the country.
In return the other nations agreed to "recognise" the North's
demand for peaceful nuclear energy and said Pyongyang's request
to have a light-water nuclear reactor for peaceful purposes
would be revisited "at an appropriate time."
Hill said the issue would only be addressed after North Korea
rejoins the NPT and allows inspectors back in.
"Talk about the DPRK's right to peaceful use in advance of them
is really to talk theory rather than facts," he said. US
negotiator Christopher Hill
©AFP/Pool - Ng Han Guan
In Vienna, International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed
ElBaradei said inspectors should return to North Korea as soon
as possible.
"The earlier we go back the better," ElBaradei said.
The energy-starved North's demand for a light-water nuclear
reactor was the sticking point when the talks broke up last
month, even though experts have said the country's crumbling
power grid could not handle one.
Song min-soon, chief delegate of South Korea, said the deal
paved the way for the isolated North to become a responsible
member of the international community.
"A stepping stone has been prepared for dismantling the Cold War
structure and establishing a peace mechanism on the Korean
peninsula," he said.
Hopes had been small of any agreement after what had appeared to
be another week of impasse.
But agreement to move forward avoided the immediate possibilty
of Washington taking the issue to the UN Security Council to
press for sanctions, a move opposed by the North's main backer
China.
North Korea has said such a step would be tantamount to war.
The United States has already accused Pyongyang of not holding
to a 1994 agreement, and Monday's deal offered no details on
when the various pledges would be met.
It said the goals would be achieved "at an early date" and
progress depended on "commitment for commitment, action for
action." Another round of talks was set for November. Song
Min-soon (L) chats with North Korea's chief negotiator Kim Gye
Gwan
©AFP - Ng Han Guan
"The next stage is the implementation of this agreement. A key
element will be a verification regime," said Hill.
The United States has indicated that it wants the process to
start with a complete and verifiable dismantling of North
Korea's weapons, while Pyongyang has insisted on a step-by-step
approach.
In what appeared to be a concession, Washington agreed in the
statement to gradually normalise relations with the reclusive
communist regime headed by Kim Jong Il, which US President
George W. Bush has called part of an "axis of evil."
The international standoff began when the United States accused
North Korea in 2002 of running a secret uranium enrichment
programme in violation of the 1994 agreement.
North Korea threw out international inspectors and said it had
succeeded in building an atomic bomb.
Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura of Japan, which has
criticised the North over a kidnappings dispute, said Tokyo
would "make its maximum efforts toward a common objective of
realizing peace and stability in Northeast Asia."
Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005
*****************************************************************
14 Xinhua: Nuke talks end with adoption of common statement
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-19 19:29:18
Special report: 4th round of six-party talks
BEIJING, Sept. 19 (Xinhuanet) -- The fourth round of
six-party talks on the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue concluded
here Monday afternoon with the adoption of a much-expected
common statement.
Wu Dawei, chairman of the current talks and Chinese chief
negotiator(L), declares the adoption of the joint statement at
the meeting in Beijing Sept 19, 2005. (Xinhua Photo)
In the current round of talks, which comprises two phases, all
parties reached a six-point consensus on a nuclear-free Korean
Peninsula.
At the closing ceremony held here Monday, chief negotiators
from host China, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
(DPRK),Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), Russia and the United
States, on behalf of their respective governments, unanimously
adopted a common statement.
After the conclusion of the talks, Chinese State Councilor
Tang Jiaxuan met with chief envoys of the delegations.
The common statement says the six parties unanimously
reaffirmed that the goal of the six-party talks is the
verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a
peaceful manner.
The DPRK is committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and
existing nuclear programs, the statement says.
The DPRK also pledges to return, at an early date, to the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and to the
supervision of International Atomic Energy Agency.
The United States affirms that it has no nuclear weapons in
the Korean Peninsula and has no intention of attacking or
invading the DPRK with nuclear or conventional weapons, says the
statement.
Christopher Hill (1st L), head of the United States delegation
to the six-party talks, shakes hands with his counterpart of the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) Kim Gye-gwan (3rd
L) after the end of the fourth round of the six-party talks in
Beijing, capital of China, Sept. 19, 2005. (Xinhua photo)
The DPRK says it has the right to the peaceful uses of nuclear
energy. Other parties have expressed their respect and agreed to
discuss, at an appropriate time, the subject of the provision of
lightwater reactor to the DPRK.
The DPRK and the United States pledge in the statement to
respect each other's sovereignty, co-exist peacefully, and take
steps to normalize their relations. The DPRK and Japan also
pledgeto take steps to normalize their relationship in
accordance with the Pyongyang Declaration.
The statement says the six parties will promote cooperation
in energy, trade and investment. They also agree to take
coordinated steps to implement the a fore-mentioned consensus in
a phased manner in the principle of "commitment for commitment,
action for action."
The six parties agree to hold the fifth round of talks in
Beijing in early November this year at a date to be determined
through consultations, says the statement.
Wu Dawei, chairman of the fourth-round talks and Chinese
chief negotiator, declared the adoption of the common statement
at the closing meeting.
Wu said that with efforts made by all parties concerned, the
fourth round of six-party talks was rounded off satisfactorily.
"We have reached a consensus on the general goal of the
fourth round of six-party talks and have agreed to announce a
common statement, which is the most significant achievement for
the past two years or more," he said.
Kim Gye-gwan, Alexander Alexeyev, Wu Dawei, Song Min-soon and
Kenichiro Sasae (From R to L), heads of the delegations of the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Russia, China, South
Korea and Japan to the six-party talks, hold a press conference
following the end of the fourth round of the six-party talks on
the Korean Peninsular nuclear issue in Beijing, capital of
China, Sept. 19, 2005. (Xinhua photo)
The common statement reflects the strong political will of the
six governments involved to peacefully resolve the nuclear issue
on the Korean Peninsula, make the peninsula nuclear-free and
safeguard its peace and stability, Wu said.
Wu, who is Chinese vice foreign minister, said the mechanism
of six-party talks is a "practical and effective" means to the
peaceful solution to the nuclear issue in the Korean Peninsula
andaccords with the fundamental interests of all parties.
He said the adoption of the common statement is the
beginning of a new stage.
"We still have a long way to go. We'll run into difficulties
and setbacks, but we'll never give up," he said.
China will, with joint efforts from all parties concerned,
adhere to the orientation of peaceful solution through dialogue
and to the goal of denuclearization in the peninsula. "We will
safeguard the long-lasting peace and stability of the Korean
Peninsula and Northeast Asia in order to promote common
development," Wu said.
Wu noted that the common statement reflects the "wisdom and
endeavor" of all parties concerned and "a major step forward"
toward the goal of denuclearization in the peninsula. Enditem
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
15 Xinhua: IAEA chief welcomes outcome of six-party nuclear issue talks
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2005-09-19 19:11:03
VIENNA, Sept. 19 (Xinhuanet) -- IAEA Director General
Mohamed ElBaradei on Monday extended warm welcome to the outcome
of the six-party talks on the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue,
saying he hoped the IAEA would go back to the DPRK for
inspection as soon as possible.
Speaking prior to a board of governors meeting of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Baradei lauded the
commitment of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK)
to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs,
which the DPRK made at the six-party talks in Beijing.
"There is a balanced package," he said, noting that this
would be served as an encouragement to resolving the Iran
nuclear issue the IAEA boarding meeting would strive to address
over this week.
The IAEA chief said he hoped that his agency would go back
to the DPRK to do inspection "as soon as possible."
After the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue arose in the early
1990s, the IAEA started to inspect the DPRK's possible nuclear
program in May 1992. In December 2002, the DPRK announced to
dismantle inspection cameras on frozen nuclear facilities and
the IAEA stopped its inspection in the country.
Baradei said after two years' suspension of inspection by
the IAEA, he hoped his agency would soon discuss with the DPRK
authorities on the arrangements for inspection.
The outcome of the six-party talks demonstrates that
negotiation was "the best solution" to resolve disputes, Baradei
added.
The fourth round of the six-party talks concluded Monday in
Beijing with the adoption of a joint statement, in which the
DPRK agreed to abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear
programs and allow international inspections in exchange for
energy aid, economic cooperation and security guarantees.
Enditem
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
16 Reuters: Six parties to hold fifth round of talks in Nov
World Crises | Reuters.com
Mon 19 Sep 2005
BEIJING, Sept 19 (Reuters) - The six parties involved in talks to
defuse the nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula agreed to meet
for a fifth round of talks in early November in Beijing, a joint
statement issued by the countries on Monday said.
The exact timing of the fifth round would be set through further
negotiations, the statement said.
©
Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
17 Reuters: CHRONOLOGY-North Korea nuclear crisis
World Crises | Reuters.com
Mon 19 Sep 2005 5:05 AM ET
Sept 19 (Reuters) - The six parties involved in talks aimed at
resolving the crisis over North Korea's nuclear ambitions reached
a long-awaited agreement in principle on Monday and wrapped up a
marathon fourth round of negotiations.
Following is a chronology of the talks involving North and South
Korea, China, Japan, Russia and the United States:
- - - -
Oct. 2002 - Top State Department envoy James Kelly confronts
Pyongyang with evidence Washington says points to a covert
uranium-enrichment programme. North Korea says "it is entitled to
possess not only nuclear weapons but other types of weapons more
powerful than them in defence of its sovereignty in face of the
U.S. threat".
Dec. 2002 - North Korea says it plans to restart Yongbyon
reactor, disables International Atomic Enegy Agency (IAEA)
surveillance devices at Yongbyon and expels IAEA inspectors.
Jan. 2003 - North Korea says it is quitting the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty with immediate effect.
At talks between U.S. team led by Kelly and North Koreans and
China in Beijing, American officials say North Korea told the
United States that it has nuclear weapons and might test them or
transfer them to other countries.
Aug. 2003 - First round of six-way talks on the nuclear issue
takes place in Beijing. North Korea threatens to test nuclear
bomb and test-fire new missile.
Oct. 2003 - North Korea says it has enhanced its "nuclear
deterrent" with plutonium reprocessed from thousands of nuclear
fuel rods. Pyongyang says it is willing to display the deterrent.
Jan. 2004 - Pyongyang permits unofficial U.S. delegation,
including nuclear expert, to tour Yongbyon. U.S. nuclear expert
Sigfried Hecker says he is not convinced North Korea could turn
its nuclear technology into a weapon or mount it on a missile.
Feb. 2004 - Father of Pakistani nuclear bomb, scientist Abdul
Qadeer Khan, admits he passed on uranium-linked technology to
Libya, Iran and North Korea. Pyongyang calls Khan's confession a
lie.
Second round of six-party talks held in Beijing.
June 2004 - Third round of talks take place in Chinese capital.
U.S. proposes fuel aid and security guarantees to North Korea if
it scraps nuclear programmes.
Feb. 10, 2005 - North Korea's Foreign Ministry issues statement
saying country has manufactured nuclear weapons for self-defence
and is quitting six-way talks indefinitely.
June 17 - North Korean leader Kim Jong-il tells senior South
Korean envoy in Pyongyang that North Korea can return to talks as
early as July, if United States meets certain conditions, such as
treating North Korea with "respect".
July 9 - North Korea announces it has agreed to return to
stalled talks in last week of July.
July 22 - North Korea calls for peace treaty to replace
armistice that ended hostilities in 1950-53 Korean War, saying it
would resolve nuclear crisis.
July 26 - Six-party envoys begin fourth round of talks.
Parties all push to issue joint statement, but talks deadlock on
issue of North Korea's insistence of its right to develop
civilian nuclear energy programme.
Aug. 7 - Marathon fourth round goes into recess after running 13
days, longer than all previous sessions.
Aug. 23 - Top U.S. negotiator Christopher Hill says issue of
North having civilian nuclear plan would not break deal.
Sept. 13 - Fourth-round talks resume in Beijing.
Sept. 19 - Six parties issue long-awaited joint statement.
North Korea promises to give up its nuclear weapons and
programmes. In exchange, other parties express willingness to
provide oil, energy aid and security guarantees. Agreement says
North Korea could have nuclear energy programme in future if it
meets strict safeguards.
© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
18 Korea Times: Inter-Korean Cabinet Talks End With Flicker of Progress
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation
By Seo Dong-shin Staff Reporter
The 16th round of inter-Korean Cabinet talks ended its four-day
run on Friday, with mixed evaluations on the results from the
Southern side following over the weekend.
As for the six-point joint press release, Seoul officials
especially welcomed the second, which said that South and North
Korea would make efforts to ensure stable peace on the Korean
Peninsula and seek practical ways to ease military tensions on
one of the world¡¯s most heavily fortified borders.
It also added that the two sides shared a notion regarding the
importance of military talks and each would suggest it to its
own military authorities.
``The core of these Pyongyang talks was that we need to ease
military tensions between the South and North more than
anything, to construct a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula,
and that we need talks between defense ministers for that
end,¡¯¡¯ said Unification Minister Chung Dong-young in an
interview with SBS, a local broadcasting station, on Sunday.
``And we drew out a joint agreement on that,¡¯¡¯ Chung
stressed. ``Of course, the talks between the military
authorities mean those of defense ministers.¡¯¡¯
The defense ministers met once in a two-day meeting on Cheju
Island in September 2000, but no such meetings followed since
then.
Considering the fact that inter-Korean dialogue has so far
tended to concentrate more on exchanges in the economic and
social fields, the agreement made during the Pyongyang Cabinet
talks signaled a shift of focus in inter-Korean channels to the
fields concerning political and military issues.
In a similar vein, the Pyongyang talks tried to provide support
for making progress at the six-nation talks in Beijing, China,
which ran parallel to the inter-Korean talks on the North¡¯s
nuclear programs.
Chung, who also chairs the presidential National Security
Council (NSC), has repeatedly expressed hope that the
inter-Korean channel would help the multi-nation talks to come
to an agreement.
Wrapping up the Pyongyang talks on Friday, Chung, the chief
Southern delegate, told reporters that while he stayed in the
North Korean capital, the government¡¯s triangle of
``Seoul-Beijing-Pyongyang¡¯¡¯ was in full operation.
``Some expressed concerns about the NSC chairman being in
Pyongyang during the six-nation talks, but it was meaningful as
it helped to repeatedly stress the importance of an agreement at
the six-nation talks to the North,¡¯¡¯ he said.
The Seoul¡¯s top man on North Korea issues also delivered
messages from the United States and Japan to the North, which
made the inter-Korean channel once more a tool for multilateral
diplomacy.
The minister-level talks in Pyongyang saw more basic agreements
in inter-Korean economic cooperation as the third point of the
joint press release stated that the South and North will
``remove barriers in inter-Korean economic cooperation and take
active measures to boost investment and trade.¡¯¡¯
But the South¡¯s proposals, which the Seoul government put
forward ahead of the talks, fell mute as the North did not want
to include them on the agenda.
The two sides failed to discuss, for example, the South¡¯s
suggestions to jointly develop human resources in the economic
field and establish permanent liaison offices in each other¡¯s
capital.
Although more reunion sessions were promised for separated
families, the two Koreas failed to agree on another humanitarian
issue, namely the repatriation of South Korean prisoners of war
from the 1950-53 Korean War and those abducted after the war and
believed to still be held in the North.
The two sides agreed to continue discussions on the matter at
the inter-Korean Red Cross talks.
saltwall@koreatimes.co.kr 09-19-2005 19:24
*****************************************************************
19 Korea Times: Breakthrough in Six-Party Talks
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion
Pyongyang Eases Stance on Light Water Reactors
The six-party talks, which were resumed in Beijing a week ago,
following a three-week recess, closed on Monday with a major
breakthrough as North Korea eased its demand for the right to a
civilian nuclear program. Even though the change in the North's
stubborn position at last minute averted the collapse of the
dialogue, it is generally expected that the five other
participants in the talks will have to go a long way to finally
resolve the nuclear issue between Pyongyang and Washington. In
particular, they will have to reach an accord over when they
allow the North to secure light water reactors.
The talks were bogged down from the start as the North insisted
on the right to peaceful nuclear use for which it called upon
the participants in the six-party talks to build light water
reactors in exchange for the complete dismantlement of its
current nuclear facilities. The U.S. rejected the demand
outright as it did in the previous talks where the communist
regime came up with it afresh. But the U.S. accepted a new
China-proposed draft agreement of "principles" which permits the
North to have light water reactors but only after it abandons
its nuclear weapons program, rejoins the Non-nuclear
Proliferation Treaty and allows U.N. nuclear inspections. The
North also agreed to accept the six-point statement.
The Bush administration's rejection of the North's demand
demonstrated its sheer distrust of Pyongyang which triggered the
current nuclear confrontation in violation of the 1994 agreement
that the two sides signed to defuse their first nuclear crisis.
The U.S. simply ignored the North's demand for light water
reactors for peaceful purposes such as generating energy by
saying that Pyongyang has not lit a single bulb since operations
of its graphite-moderate reactors. Washington also used Seoul's
offer to Pyongyang to supply 2,000 megawatts of electricity in
its objection to the North's request. Christopher Hill, the top
U.S. nuclear negotiator, said that there is no reason for the
North to insist on having light water reactors in consideration
of their huge cost and long construction period because it can
realize the use of electricity in only two years and a half at
the expense of the South.
As for the successful conclusion of the six-party negotiations
aimed at finding a peaceful resolution to the nuclear crisis
which began in October 2002, the North needs to first dismantle
all of its nuclear facilities, as stipulated in the statement,
and rejoin the NPT and permit U.N. nuclear inspections. When the
North wins the trust and confidence of the international
community by faithfully observing global nuclear regulations,
nobody can deny its demand for light water reactors whose
construction would have already progressed substantially if the
North did not pursue nuclear ambitions.
09-19-2005 17:16
*****************************************************************
20 Korea Times: NK to Scrap Nuclear Program
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation
Washington, Tokyo to Normalize Ties With Pyongyang
By Park Song-wu Korea Times Correspondent
Kim Kye-gwan, right, chief North Korean delegate to the
six-party talks, shakes hands with his U.S. counterpart
Christopher Hill, while Song Min-soon, South Korea¡¯s chief
negotiator, looks on, after a joint statement was announced in
Beijing, China, Monday. /Yonhap
BEIJING _ North Korea agreed on Monday to give up all of its
nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs and pledged to
return to non-proliferation treaties in a historic agreement at
the six-party talks, ending the three-year nuclear deadlock.
In return, Pyongyang accomplished its purpose by persuading the
other participants, especially the United States, into
stipulating North Korea¡¯s right to peaceful uses of nuclear
energy in the agreement.
The other parties expressed their respect for Pyongyang¡¯s
stance on the civilian nuclear programs and agreed to discuss
the subject of providing a light-water reactor to North Korea at
an appropriate time, the joint statement said.
Christopher Hill, the top U.S. negotiator, praised the result as
a ``win-win situation¡¯¡¯ but said that ``verification¡¯¡¯ is
the most important process to be conducted before considering
the provision of a light-water reactor.
The American envoy also urged North Korea to keep its promises
by terminating the nuclear facility at Yongbyon as soon as
possible. ``What is the purpose of operating it at this point?''
Hill said. ``The time to turn it off would be about now.''
To compensate North Korea¡¯s promise of scrapping its nuclear
programs, five other participants stated their willingness to
provide energy assistance to Pyongyang, including South Korea¡¯s
proposal on July 12 to provide 2 million kilowatts of electric
power to its northern neighbor, the statement said.
The negotiations had hit the impasse last week as North Korea
made a strong demand for the light-water reactor. The U.S.
rejected Pyongyang¡¯s request, saying it is a ``nonstarter.¡¯¡¯
In a way to address the North¡¯s argument that it cannot disarm
under the U.S. nuclear threat, Washington affirmed that it has
no nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula and has no intention
to attack or invade North Korea with nuclear or conventional
weapons, the six-point statement said.
The next round of the talks is set to be held in Beijing in
early November, when the participants are expected to discuss
how to execute the agreement. The schedule of the fifth round of
the talks will be determined through consultations, the
statement said.
A Seoul official indicated that there is still a rocky path
ahead.
``After much labor pains, we finally delivered a baby,¡¯¡¯ he
said on a condition of anonymity. ``But it needs special care
from the parents and relatives to bring up the baby
properly.¡¯¡¯
Kenichiro Sasae, Japan¡¯s top envoy, predicted a much darker
future by saying, ``Agreeing to a common document does not
necessarily mean that the solution to our problems has been
found.''
The statement says the participants agreed to take steps to
implement the agreement in a phased manner in line with the
principle of ``commitment for commitment, action for action.¡¯¡¯
The three-page statement on the principles of how to
denuclearize the Korean Peninsula has significant meaning,
however, as it successfully framed the guidance to the permanent
peace in Northeast Asia.
North Korea and the U.S. undertook to respect each other's
sovereignty, exist peacefully together and take steps to
normalize their relations subject to their respective bilateral
policies, the statement said.
In addition, the directly related parties will negotiate a
permanent peace regime on the Korean Peninsula at an appropriate
separate forum, the statement said.
``The joint statement is the most important achievement in the
two years since the start of six-party talks,¡¯¡¯ Chinese chief
negotiator Wu Dawei said.
The nuclear standoff began in late 2002 when U.S. officials said
Pyongyang was secretly developing uranium-based weapons program.
North Korea denied the claim.
im@koreatimes.co.kr 09-19-2005 16:42
*****************************************************************
21 Guardian Unlimited: Text of Joint Statement From Nuclear Talks
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday September 19, 2005 6:31 AM
By The Associated Press
Text of the joint statement issued Monday by six nations at
talks in Beijing on North Korea's nuclear program:
For the cause of peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and
in northeast Asia at large, the six parties held in a spirit of
mutual respect and equality serious and practical talks
concerning the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula on the
basis of the common understanding of the previous three rounds
of talks and agreed in this context to the following:
1) The six parties unanimously reaffirmed that the goal of the
six-party talks is the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean
Peninsula in a peaceful manner.
The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea)
committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear
programs and returning at an early date to the treaty on the
nonproliferation of nuclear weapons (NPT) and to IAEA
(International Atomic Energy Agency) safeguards.
The United States affirmed that is has no nuclear weapons on the
Korean Peninsula and has no intention to attack or invade the
DPRK with nuclear or conventional weapons.
The ROK (South Korea) reaffirmed its commitment not to receive
or deploy nuclear weapons in accordance with the 1992 joint
declaration of the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,
while affirming that there exist no nuclear weapons within its
territory.
The 1992 joint declaration of the Denuclearization of the Korean
Peninsula should be observed and implemented.
The DPRK stated that it has the right to peaceful uses of
nuclear energy.
The other parties expressed their respect and agreed to discuss
at an appropriate time the subject of the provision of
light-water reactor to the DPRK.
2) The six parties undertook, in their relations, to abide by
the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations
and recognized norms of international relations.
The DPRK and the United States undertook to respect each other's
sovereignty, exist peacefully together and take steps to
normalize their relations subject to their respective bilateral
policies.
The DPRK and Japan undertook to take steps to normalize their
relations in accordance with the (2002) Pyongyang Declaration,
on the basis of the settlement of unfortunate past and the
outstanding issues of concern.
3) The six parties undertook to promote economic cooperation in
the fields of energy, trade and investment, bilaterally and/or
multilaterally.
China, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), Russia and the U.S.
stated their willingness to provide energy assistance to the
DPRK. The ROK reaffirmed its proposal of July 12, 2005,
concerning the provision of 2 million kilowatts of electric
power to the DPRK.
4) Committed to joint efforts for lasting peace and stability in
northeast Asia. The directly related parties will negotiate a
permanent peace regime on the Korean Peninsula at an appropriate
separate forum.
The six parties agreed to explore ways and means for promoting
security cooperation in northeast Asia.
5) The six parties agreed to take coordinated steps to implement
the aforementioned consensus in a phased manner in line with the
principle of ``commitment for commitment, action for action.''
6) The six parties agreed to hold the fifth round of the six
party talks in Beijing in early November 2005 at a date to be
determined through consultations.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
22 Guardian Unlimited: North Korea Agrees to End Nuclear Programs
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Monday September 19, 2005 11:01 AM
AP Photo XHG101
By BURT HERMAN
Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - North Korea on Monday agreed to stop building
nuclear weapons and allow international inspections in exchange
for energy aid, economic cooperation and security assurances, in
a first step toward disarmament after two years of six-nation
talks.
The chief U.S. envoy to the talks praised the breakthrough as a
``win-win situation'' and ``good agreement for all of us.'' But
he promptly urged Pyongyang to make good on its promises by
ending operations at its main nuclear facility at Yongbyon.
``What is the purpose of operating it at this point?'' said U.S.
Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill. ``The time to
turn it off would be about now.''
Despite the deal's potential to help significantly ease friction
between the North and the United States after years of false
starts and setbacks, Hill remained cautious.
``We have to see what comes in the days and weeks ahead,'' he
said.
The agreement clinched seven days of talks aimed at setting out
general principles for the North's disarmament. Envoys agreed to
return in early November to begin hashing out details of how
that will be done.
Then, the hard work of ensuring compliance will begin, officials
attending the talks said.
``Agreeing to a common document does not mean that the solution
to our problems has been found,'' said Japan's chief envoy,
Kenichiro Sasae.
Another Japanese official, who spoke on condition he not be
named in order to discuss the issue more freely, noted that
there was no common understanding among the participants about
the nature of North Korea's nuclear program.
The head of the U.N. nuclear nonproliferation agency welcomed
North Korea's decision to allow inspections, saying he hoped his
experts could take the country at its word as soon as possible.
``The earlier we go back, the better,'' said Mohamed ElBaradei,
head of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
According to a joint statement issued at the talks' conclusion,
the North ``committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and
existing nuclear programs and returning at an early date'' to
the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and International Atomic
Energy Agency safeguards.
``The six parties unanimously reaffirmed that the goal of the
six-party talks is the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean
Peninsula in a peaceful manner,'' the statement said.
Responding to Pyongyang's claims that it needs atomic weapons
for defense, North Korea and the United States pledged to
respect each other's sovereignty and right to peaceful
coexistence, and also to take steps to normalize relations.
``The United States affirmed that it has no nuclear weapons on
the Korean Peninsula and has no intention to attack or invade
(North Korea) with nuclear or conventional weapons,'' according
to the statement, in assurances echoed by South Korea.
The talks, which began in August 2003, include China, Japan,
Russia, the United States and the two Koreas.
The negotiations had been deadlocked over North Korea's demand
to keep the right to civilian nuclear programs after it disarms,
and the statement acknowledges the North has made such an
assertion but doesn't go beyond that.
North Korea had also demanded that it be given a light-water
nuclear reactor at the latest talks - a type less easily
diverted for weapons use - but Washington had said it and other
countries at the talks wouldn't meet that request.
Putting aside the question for now, the statement said: ``The
other parties expressed their respect and agreed to discuss at
an appropriate time the subject of the provision of light-water
reactor'' to North Korea.
The North will have to build trust by fulfilling all its pledges
before that issue would be discussed, said Sasae, who is
director of the Asia and Oceania Bureau at Japan's Foreign
Ministry.
North Korea has also refused to totally disarm without getting
concessions along the way, while Washington has said it wants to
see the weapons programs totally dismantled before granting
rewards. The statement, however, says the sides agreed to take
steps to implement the agreement ``in a phased manner in line
with the principle of 'commitment for commitment, action for
action.'''
The other countries at the talks said they were willing give
energy assistance to the North, including a South Korean plan to
deliver electricity across the heavily armed border dividing the
peninsula.
``This is the most important result since the six-party talks
started more than two years ago,'' said Chinese Vice Foreign
Minister Wu Dawei, Beijing's envoy.
North Korea was promised two light-water reactors under a 1994
deal with Washington to abandon its nuclear weapons. That
agreement fell apart in late 2002 with the outbreak of the
latest nuclear crisis, when U.S. officials said North Korea
admitted having a secret uranium enrichment program.
The North is believed to have enough radioactive material for
about a half-dozen bombs from its publicly acknowledged
plutonium program, but hasn't performed any known nuclear tests
to prove its capability. In February, the North claimed it had
nuclear weapons.
Japan and North Korea also said in the statement they would move
to normalize relations regarding ``the outstanding issues of
concern.'' The reference appears to allude to Tokyo's concerns
over its citizens that the North has admitted abducting.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
*****************************************************************
23 AU: Australia welcomes NKorea nuclear pledge -
Breaking News -
[www.smh.com.au]
September 19, 2005 - 10:04PM
Australia has welcomed North Korea's decision to give up its
nuclear weapons but says it must follow through with the
commitment.
After two years of negotiations, North Korea said it would give
up its nuclear weapons and programs, and take in international
inspectors.
It said it would do so in return for energy aid and normalised
diplomatic ties with nations including South Korea, the United
States, Japan, Russia and China.
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said the move to agree on a
set of principles was a good one, but just a first step towards
ensuring there were no nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula.
"The statement of principles provides a solid foundation for
progress in subsequent talks," Mr Downer said.
He said North Korea needed to use the next round of talks to
address global concerns by dismantling its nuclear weapons
programs, in line with its obligations under the
Non-Proliferation Treaty, and allow inspectors to check
progress.
"The six-party talks are the most effective forum for a peaceful
resolution of the nuclear issue and the best way for North Korea
to realise its economic, energy and security needs," Mr Downer
said.
"The talks also offer North Korea a path to normalisation with
the international community."
The six nations involved in the talks - China, Japan, Russia,
the United States and the two Koreas - have agreed to hold a
fifth round of talks in Beijing in early November.
Mr Downer said Australia was prepared to support North Korea by
providing energy assistance, development funds and safeguards
expertise.
But he said bilateral relations would remain on hold pending
progress by Pyongyang.
"Australia remains concerned about the humanitarian crisis in
North Korea," he said.
In the past decade Australia has provided North Korea with $53.8
million in humanitarian aid through multilateral organisations.
Labor's foreign affairs spokesman Kevin Rudd also welcomed the
development.
"This agreement represents a significant development in security
on the Korean peninsula," a spokesman for Mr Rudd told AAP.
"It's a tribute to the six parties who have tried to resolve
this crisis, particularly the United States and China.
"It is now up to North Korea to regain the trust of the
international community to honour its commitment to
disarmament."
It is believed North Korea has enough radioactive material for
six bombs, but that it has not conducted any tests.
In February its government admitted to having nuclear weapons.
© 2005 AAP
Copyright © 2005. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
24 [NukeNet] GROUP SIGN-ONS NEEDED, Letter to Congress to cut
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:19:22 -0700
autolearn=ham version=3.0.4
X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
To sign on, please contact Jim Bridgman at the Alliance for Nuclear
Accountability at
202-544-0217, ext.3, or jcbridgman@earthlink.net by COB Friday, September 23.
Here is the letter -- read -- and if you agree, send Jim Bridgman your
name, title, organization and organization address.
September XX, 2005
Attn: Appropriations Staff
Dear Energy & Water Conferee:
As you prepare to finalize negotiations on the Fiscal Year 2006 Energy &
Water Development Appropriations bill, we urge you to adopt cuts already
made by the House and Senate to unneeded and risky nuclear weapons and
energy programs while continuing to prioritize assistance for Gulf States
hit by hurricane Katrina. We also urge you to prioritize the cleanup of
contaminated past and present nuclear weapons sites and the dismantlement of
nuclear weapons slated for retirement.
Fiscal pressures are tight as the deficit is now over $330 billion according
to the latest estimate by the Congressional Budget Office. Adopting the
following budget recommendations would save taxpayers over $880 million in
the next fiscal year. We also argue that the increases to cleanup and
dismantlements that we support will actually help to save taxpayers' money
in the long run.
Directed Stockpile Work - We support the House cut of $137.5 million to the
National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA's) request for various
activities under Directed Stockpile Work. In particular, we support the
House cuts of $35 million to the W-80 Warhead Life Extension Program and $10
million to the W-80 Stockpile Systems Program. The W-80 is one of the
warheads slated for reductions, requiring less priority for upgrades in
these two programs.
Stockpile Services - We support the House cut of $183 million to the NNSA's
request for Stockpile Services. In particular, we support the House cut of
$4 million to the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator. Developing new nuclear
weapons is the wrong answer to an important problem. It's unnecessary and
won't work on many targets. The National Academy of Sciences has reported
that exploding RNEP in an urban setting could result in a million civilian
deaths. The president's new nuclear strike plan incorporating the option of
preemption is particularly chilling in this regard.
Modern Pit Facility - We support the House cut of $7.69 million eliminating
funding for the MPF, a new bomb plant for mass production of plutonium pits
of current and potential new designs. The MPF will cost up to $4 billion to
build and $300 million annually to operate. As the nation plans to implement
the reductions announced in the Stockpile Plan last year following from the
Moscow Treaty and studies of pit aging continue to show longer pit
lifetimes, the rationale for a new pit facility continues to erode.
Science Campaigns - We support the House cut of $45 million to the NNSA's
request for Science Campaigns. In particular, we support the House cut of
$10 million to the President's $25 million request for enhancing the
readiness of the Nevada Test Site to resume underground nuclear testing. The
United States already holds a clear advantage in having conducted more
nuclear tests than any other nation. Further efforts to enhance the test
site are unnecessarily provocative.
Additionally, we support the House cuts of $37 million to the NNSA's
Engineering Campaigns, $160 million to its Advanced Simulation and Computing
Campaign, $20.5 million to Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities, and
$33 million to Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization.
National Ignition Facility - We support the Senate cut of $146 million for
all construction funding. NIF is not required to maintain the safety of the
nuclear arsenal. The NIF continues to face tremendous technical difficulties
and is three-fold over the original budget.
Plutonium Fuel Fabrication Facility (MOX) - We support the House cut of $303
million for construction of the U.S. MOX facility. Problems with the Russian
program have forced delays in the U.S. construction timeline resulting in
$650 million in unused prior appropriations.
Yucca Mountain - We support the Senate cut of $74 million from the Defense
Nuclear Waste Disposal budget. The plan to house irradiated fuel from the
nation's nuclear power plants and high-level waste from nuclear weapons
sites at Yucca is plagued by numerous problems including bad geology, poor
planning, and even fraudulent misconduct. Recent revelations of falsified
water modeling data by the U.S. Geological Survey and the failure to account
for cracks in spent fuel assemblies entering the site after decades of
planning dramatically highlight the need for additional congressional
oversight and a search for a solution based on sound science rather than
wasting additional taxpayer dollars.
Interim Storage and Reprocessing - We oppose the House language proposing a
new Spent Fuel Recycling Initiative that would transfer commercial nuclear
waste to one or more DOE facilities for interim storage and reprocessing. We
also oppose the larger Senate appropriation of $15 million above the request
for the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative that funds reprocessing research.
Reprocessing is massively expensive and creates more waste and
contamination. It presents a security threat by increasing supplies of
separated fissile materials and encourages nonproliferation by setting the
wrong example for other countries looking to separate fissile materials for
bomb production.
Nuclear Weapons Dismantlement - We support the House action, which boosted
funding for dismantlement to $110.2 million from the President's $35.2
million request. The FY06 request forecasts a slight decline in spending
despite the need to greatly increase the pace of dismantlements to implement
reductions under the Stockpile Plan following from the Moscow Treaty.
Environmental Cleanup - We support the House increase for DOE environmental
cleanup, including $160 million for Hanford, Washington and $30 million for
the Mound, Ohio site. The President's budget included a large $500 million
cut in the EM budget. The restoration of funds will enable sites to adhere
to legally binding timetables for cleanup which are designed to protect the
public from environmental contamination.
We hope you agree that at this time of local crisis and fiscal hardship,
taxpayers do not need hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the
modernization of the nation's nuclear arsenal, as well as dangerous and
unproven nuclear waste plans. We urge you to instead prioritize nuclear
weapons dismantlement and cleanup of nuclear contamination, as well as
continued assistance needed by Gulf States coping with the aftermath of
hurricane Katrina.
Sincerely,
_______________________________
Jim Bridgman, Program Director
Alliance for Nuclear Accountability
322 4th Street, NE, WDC, 20002
202-544-0217 x3
FAX: 202-544-6143
jcbridgman@earthlink.net
www.ananuclear.org
xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
To sign on, please contact Jim Bridgman at the Alliance for Nuclear
Accountability at
202-544-0217, ext.3, or
jcbridgman@earthlink.net by COB Friday,
September 23
September XX, 2005
Attn: Appropriations Staff
Dear Energy & Water Conferee:
As you prepare to finalize negotiations on the Fiscal Year 2006 Energy &
Water Development Appropriations bill, we urge you to adopt cuts already
made by the House and Senate to unneeded and risky nuclear weapons and
energy programs while continuing to prioritize assistance for Gulf States
hit by hurricane Katrina. We also urge you to prioritize the cleanup of
contaminated past and present nuclear weapons sites and the dismantlement
of nuclear weapons slated for retirement.
Fiscal pressures are tight as the deficit is now over $330 billion Marylia
Kelley Executive Director Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a
Radioactive Environment) 2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA USA 94551 - is
our web site address. Please visit us there! (925) 443-7148 - is our phone
(925) 443-0177 - is our fax
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change
your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
25 Study Says Stalin Killed To Prevent Nuclear War
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:20:05 -0400
X-Spam-filter-host: smtp2.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
The March 5, 2003 NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com
Was Stalin killed to avert war?
Study concludes aides fed him rat poison as
he prepared for nuclear attack on U.S.
By DOUG SAUNDERS
Thursday, March 6, 2003 - Page A1
Terrified that Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin
was about to launch a full-scale nuclear attack on
the United States and a second mass-murder
campaign causing tens of millions of deaths, his
underlings secretly murdered him with rat poison,
a major study concludes.
When Stalin died on March 5, 1953, the
official explanation was that he had suffered a
brain hemorrhage after dining with senior Soviet
officials, including Lavrenti Beria, head of the
secret police.
The true cause of his death will likely
never be proven, unless an autopsy is performed on
his embalmed corpse. But the new study by Russian
and U.S. historians argues that he appears to have
ingested warfarin, a flavourless rat poison that
thins the blood and causes strokes and
hemorrhages.
"The circumstantial evidence is
overwhelmingly in favour of non-fortuitous death,"
said Yale University history professor Jonathan
Brent. "And to support this further, we now have
solid evidence, non-circumstantial evidence, of a
cover-up at the highest level."
The study is likely to cause a controversy
in Russia, where Stalin's legacy has deeply
divided the public. Some, such as Communist Party
leader Gennady Zyuganov, still call him a hero.
The view seems to have popular support: One
opinion poll of the Russian public last week found
53 per cent described Stalin's historical role as
"absolutely positive" or "more positive than
negative," and only 33 per cent took a negative
view.
Prof. Brent is also the director of the Yale
University Press and the editor of a 25-volume
series on the contents of the Soviet Union's
secret archives. He conducted his study with
Vladimir Naumov, a historian who works in Russia
and specializes in Soviet records.
To be published next month under the title
Stalin's Last Crime, the study shows that Beria
and his colleagues were terrified of the dictator,
who by 1953 had killed tens of millions and
imprisoned countless more. It found that his
dinner companions appear to have waited hours
before calling for medical help, and that they
altered his death records to make the event appear
innocuous.
"All of the indications are that Stalin was
intent on launching a massive purge of Soviet
society. They all knew it," Prof. Brent said. This
"second terror" would likely have killed tens of
millions of Jews and other Russians, including
many of Stalin's colleagues. Aside from fearing
for their own lives, Prof. Brent said, the Soviets
also feared that Stalin had become dangerous
enough to destroy the world.
"It wasn't simply that they were afraid for
their own lives, and they were, but it was . . .
the fear of a larger nuclear holocaust that drove
them."
The study includes new, documentary evidence
that Stalin was attempting to fabricate enough
evidence to accuse the United States of planning a
nuclear attack on the Soviet Union. Among those
who were aware of this plan, and feared its
results, was Nikita Khrushchev, who succeeded
Stalin.
Stalin himself said in public speeches at
the time that there was a plot to assassinate him
and other Soviet leaders, known as the doctors'
plot because his initial accusations were directed
at Jewish doctors. His version of the plot grew to
incorporate most of the Soviet Jewish population
and the leadership of the United States.
Two weeks before his death, Stalin had
ordered the building of vast prison camps in
remote Soviet regions, and many believed that he
planned to launch a second campaign of terror
against Jews.
As a result, Stalin's assassination
conspiracy theory, as a justification for mass
murder, may itself have led to his assassination.
"One of the most suggestive pieces of
evidence we have is that Beria's first act, after
being appointed head of the ministry of internal
affairs after Stalin's death, was that he
abolished the doctors' plot. Now, why would he
make something like that his first act? The only
explanation for that was that the doctors' plot
represented a huge threat against the Soviet
Union."
Prof. Brent's study includes a copy of
Stalin's original death certificate, which shows
he fell ill shortly after dinner on March 1,
vomited blood that night and suffered a brain
hemorrhage on the morning of March 2, shortly
after doctors arrived.
That copy of the certificate has never been
seen or published before; the "official" death
certificate shows him falling ill on the night of
March 2, and doctors arriving shortly afterward.
The Jewish doctors were due to go on trial
later in March of 1953, and construction of the
camps was to begin shortly afterward. After Mr.
Khrushchev took office, the trials were cancelled,
the doctors exonerated, the camps were never built
and nuclear tensions with the United States were
reduced. According to Prof. Brent, the
assassination likely saved tens of millions of
lives.
*****************************************************************
26 KSDK: Callaway Plant Shut Down To Replace Steam Generators
NewsChannel 5 - Where The News Comes First -
9/18/2005 7:38:19 PM
ST. LOUIS (AP) -- A nuclear plant that produces more than ten
percent of Missouri's electricity is going off-line for ten
weeks.
The Callaway plant near Fulton is having four steam generators
replaced at a cost of about 200 million dollars. Company
officials say the change will increase the amount of energy the
12-hundred megawatt plant can produce.
Ameren-U-E, which owns the plant, won't say if the improvements
mean it will try to re-license the plant beyond its October
18th, 2024 decommissioning date.
Officials say it's too early to tell how the expensive project
will affect customers or their rates, which are frozen through
June
30th, 2006.
(Copyright 2005 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
AP
*****************************************************************
27 gainesvilletimes.com: Georgia utilities exploring wind energy -
News - Monday, September 19, 2005
EMCs disappointed by Green Power participation
By DEBBIE GILBERT The Times
Two years ago, a coalition of Georgia electrical membership
cooperatives began offering customers the option of paying a
little extra each month to support renewable forms of energy.
But the response has been underwhelming.
"We're a bit disappointed," said Michael Whiteside, president of
Green Power EMC.
"When we did surveys prior to starting the program, 25 to 30
percent of members said they were interested in renewables and
would be willing to pay more for it. But we've sold only about 5
percent of our available energy blocks."
Some diehard environmentalists declined to participate because
they felt that the power source, methane gas captured from
landfills, generated pollution and wasn't truly "green."
"Wind and solar power are the only completely nonpolluting
renewables," said Colleen Kiernan, spokeswoman for the Georgia
chapter of the Sierra Club. "They're also the forms of energy
that need the most help in order to take off economically and
become competitive."
But tree-huggers may take heart at Green Power's latest project.
In July, the coalition launched a yearlong test of wind power in
northwest Georgia's Floyd County.
Atop a hill at Oglethorpe Power Corporation's Rocky Mountain
Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Plant, a 200-foot tower has been
erected to collect data on wind speed and direction.
The North Georgia mountains are the only areas of the state
where wind power is considered feasible.
"I hope the test shows we have enough wind in Georgia to
generate some power," said Susan Baker, spokeswoman for
Clarkesville-based Habersham EMC. "But a lot of the mountains
are in the (Chattahoochee) national forest or they're already
privately owned."
Whiteside said there are only a couple of sites in Georgia where
a wind turbine conceivably could be built. The Floyd County
location is one of them, if the test results are favorable.
Even if wind power is added, it would be only a small part of
the overall energy mix used by the 28 EMCs involved in Green
Power.
Baker said currently about 33 percent of the electricity comes
from coal-fired plants, 26 percent from nuclear plants, 14
percent from hydroelectric dams and 27 percent from other
sources, including natural gas.
As for renewable sources, Green Power has expanded its program
beyond landfill gas. A "low-impact" hydroelectric plant, which
uses passive underwater turbines with no dam, recently began
operating on a tributary of the Oconee River near Athens.
Whiteside said the hydro project will generate 7 million
kilowatt-hours of electricity per year, giving Green Power a
total of 42 million kilowatt-hours available next year.
Green Power members subsidize these sources by paying an extra
fee, usually $4 to $5, on their monthly bill.
In truth, their households are receiving the same electricity as
regular EMC members, but by purchasing a "block" of renewable
energy, they help support research into alternative power
sources.
"The more people who sign up, the more the cost will go down,"
said Blake House, spokesman for Sawnee EMC in Cumming.
"We've had hundreds of phone calls (about the program), but when
people find out it's going to cost them an extra $4.50 a month,
they don't want to sign up."
Kiernan said the dilemma about renewable power is that it's very
expensive, but only initially. "The cost is up front," she said.
"Once you install the wind turbine or the solar panel, the
'fuel' is free."
Whiteside said Green Power plans to start a marketing campaign
next month to educate customers about the program.
There is no statewide total for how many people are enrolled in
Green Power, because each EMC keeps its own data. But Baker said
about 150 of Habersham EMC's 32,000 members have signed up.
Sawnee has about 500 Green Power members out of 128,000 total.
And at Jefferson-based Jackson EMC, 567 out of 188,000 customers
are enrolled.
Kiernan said the numbers may grow as Green Power continues to
pursue cleaner sources of energy.
"The inclusion of wind power should be enough to get more people
excited about signing up," she said.
Originally published Monday, September 19, 2005
Copyright ©2004 The Times. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
28 Reuters: Bulgaria thwarts smuggling of nuclear material
19 Sep 2005 11:04:27 GMT Source: Reuters
SOFIA, Sept 19 (Reuters) - Bulgarian police have arrested four
men trying to smuggle into Romania a substance scientists say
can be used to make powerful explosives or "dirty bombs".
The men, three Romanians and a Bulgarian, were caught as they
tried to cross into Bulgaria's northern neighbour at the Danube
river town of Rousse on Saturday, police said on Monday.
"Police found a bag with 3.4 kg (7.5 lb) of hafnium in the car.
The substance was transported as a metal, and in this condition
it is not radioactive and is not dangerous," the national police
said in a statement.
The substance is on a list of substances that cannot be
transported across borders without official clearance.
Studies from the University of Texas at Dallas have shown that
hafnium, if bombarded by high-energy protons, could act as an
explosive without involving nuclear fission or fusion but whose
energy would be thousands of times greater than that of
conventional chemical explosives.
In the theory, which still under dispute in scientific circles
and has not been reproduced, one gram of fully charged hafnium
isomer could store more power than 50 kilograms of TNT.
By itself hafnium, which is also used to develop nuclear fuel
rods for power plants and submarines, also has the potential to
be used in so-called "dirty bombs", as people who inhale its
particles can get radiation poisoning.
"It can be used as a material for rockets and even for a bomb,
but also for radio tubes and televisions, so it is dual-usage,"
said Marina Nizamska, head of the accident planning department
for Bulgaria's Agency for Nuclear Regulation.
Police said Bulgaria had no facilities capable of producing
hafnium in the metal form in which it was seized. They suspected
elements of the country's powerful organised crime world to be
involved in the case.
Former communist states in eastern Europe are under heavy
pressure to prevent dangerous atomic material from falling into
the hands of extremists.
Bulgarian authorities have seized weapons grade plutonium and
uranium at the country's borders at least twice last decade and
are now trying to tightening its frontiers ahead of expected
European Union membership in 2007 or 2008.
*****************************************************************
29 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria Busts Materials for Radioactive Synthesis
Politics: 19 September 2005, Monday.
Bulgaria's police in the northeastern Danube city Russe have
nabbed more than 3 kg of materials that could be used for
radioactive synthesis.
At a special press conference held in Russe it was explained
that the operation is of great importance for Bulgaria's
national security. The material busted is hafnium and it is the
first time that such a material is found in Bulgaria.
The hafnium was found in a car traveling to Romania with one
Bulgarian and three Romanian nationals.
The material is on the list of the goods with double usage,
organized-crime fight chief Gen. Valentin Petrov said in an
interview for private bTV channel. He also explained that the
materials could be used in the military industry.
Hafnium is a ductile metal with a brilliant silver luster. Its
properties are considerably influenced by the impurities of
zirconium present. Because hafnium has a good absorption cross
section for thermal neutrons, has excellent mechanical
properties, and is extremely corrosion resistant, it is used for
reactor control rods. Hafnium has been successfully alloyed with
iron, titanium, niobium, tantalum, and other metals.
Hafnium carbide is the most refractory binary composition known
and the nitride is the most refractory of all known metal
nitrides.
novinite.com
All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2005 - Copyright
*****************************************************************
30 Salt Lake Tribune: Navajos still reeling from effects of last
uranium boom
Article Last Updated: 09/19/2005 01:07:26 AM
Tom Atene (left), a Navajo, worked uranium mines in the
Monument Valley area, as did Gregory Holiday (center). Like
Walter Atene, a Monument Valley sheep herder, they would welcome
the good paying jobs only if the mines could be made safer. All
of them have lost family members to diseases and injuries blamed
on uranium mining. They are standing in front of a mesa that
contains the Moonlight mine. (Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune)
THIS IS A SIDEBARBy Judy Fahys
The Salt Lake Tribune
MONUMENT VALLEY - There was a time when Navajos welcomed
uranium mining. It brought good jobs to people left to scratch
out a living herding sheep in the desert and, in these scenic
parts, to play bit parts in Hollywood Westerns and pose for
postcards.
Not anymore.
Last spring the Navajo Nation's governing council banned
uranium mining on the sprawling reservation, part of which is in
Utah.
"Lives and more lives - that's what's at stake," said Navajo
President Joe Shirley Jr., explaining the prohibition. "I've
lost hundreds already."
Navajos living in uranium-rich Monument Valley welcome the
new law. They lived near the mines and sent their men into them.
Here, the damage from uranium lives among them, like a nasty
neighbor.
Mary Cly Holiday raised her family at the foot of a tall,
redrock mesa just below the Moonlight Mine, a few miles up the
road from the Gouldings Lodge. Her husband, Billy Boy Holiday,
hauled uranium from it, and she earned money cooking for miners
and cleaning their dusty clothes.
Ore poured down to the valley floor, where gondola cars
hauled it past their traditional hogan house to the road. The
fine yellow sand left over from mining helped make an excellent
mortar for the hogan.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was in the area four
years ago when it tested the hogan for radiation. It found
penetrating gamma radiation 25 times higher than the level that
triggers emergency action by the EPA.
It measured cancer-causing radon levels 44 times higher than
EPA's standard for homes. Soon after, men in white protective
gear came in with a bulldozer and razed the house.
But the tale of Holiday's hot hogan did not end there. Her
niece's son, who had lived in the round-top home for several
years, died a couple of years ago of lung cancer, a disease
often blamed on too much exposure to radon. He was 38.
Did she know the dust was bad for her? She shakes her head,
"no."
That is the same story told by many Navajos, who, while they
would welcome big paychecks, fear for their lives if uranium
mining returns.
Down at the Oljato Senior Center, about 10 miles from
Holiday's home, one-time miner Tom Atene shares his views through
an interpreter, a cousin who kept to sheepherding to stay out of
the mines. Atene suffers from lung problems because of his 15
years of working with uranium.
He has been wrangling for years with the federal compensation
program for uranium workers and their families. Like many
Navajos, he has struggled to come up with the job and health
records required for the $100,000 compensation checks.
Will he support mining again?
"Only if he gets compensated. Otherwise, no."
Gregory Holiday sounds amazed at how ill-informed his
community was about the danger surrounding the Navajos all those
years.
As a child, he and other kids would drink the cool water
found in the mines and swim in it. The mining waste was sandy
and soft, fun to play in, and they never realized there was a
danger.
As an adult, he took radiation safety classes while working
the Navajo's abandoned mine program.
"Really," he said, "they weren't informed of the hazard."
He agrees health and safety controls would have to be better
before uranium mining is again allowed on the reservation.
Last week, Shirley was lobbying members of Congress in hopes
that the ban remain intact. Several uranium companies have
expressed interest in mining state-owned lands within Navajo
boundaries. He's worried about another "genocide" from uranium
mining if non-Navajos snub his nation's new law.
fahys@sltrib.com
© Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
31 Reuters: Letters to the Editor:Strategic Advice for the Cancer Battlefield
Tuesday 20 September 2005, 2:06am
I must disagree with much of Sharon Begley's Aug. 26 "Science
Journal" column "Early Cancer Detection Doesn't Always Give
Patient an Advantage."
Richard Bloch was indeed a medical success story and one of hope
and inspiration to thousands, but he didn't receive an early
diagnosis of his lung cancer. On the contrary, Mr. Bloch was
misdiagnosed three separate times before proper diagnosis was
made. When finally he was diagnosed with stage IV non-small cell
adenocarcinoma of the lung, he underwent drastic and debilitating
treatments because his cancer wasn't caught early enough.
What helped him survive was a proper diagnosis, faith in a doctor
willing to provide prompt and aggressive treatment and a stubborn
determination to live. His bout with colon cancer wasn't as
debilitating as the lung cancer because it was discovered in a
very early stage during a medical examination. Out of this came
his lifelong desire to help people. Through the R.A. Bloch Cancer
Foundation's Bloch Cancer Hotline, 500 cancer survivors provide
peer-to-peer counseling to persons diagnosed with cancer. Some of
these cancer survivors know that without early detection the odds
would have gone against them. Those others who were diagnosed at
advanced stages all indicate that early detection would have
provided a better prognosis from the beginning.
From our experience with volunteers and callers, it is a rare
cancer of which you can say, "Left to its own devices, the tumor
might well have left you alone until you died of something else
entirely." Who is willing to take that cavalier attitude with a
tumor growing in their body? But the saddest part of Ms. Begley's
article is that it discounts the importance of the
five-year-and-more survival rates.
Vangie Rich
Executive Director
R.A. Bloch Cancer Foundation
Kansas City, Mo.
---
Ms. Begley has outdone herself again. Her article reads loud and
clear. Rather than depending solely on detection methods and
diagnostics, we should be concentrating on lifestyle behaviors
that are the cause of 75% to 85% of all chronic illnesses and
diseases. Combining a healthy lifestyle with detection methods
will provide a more prudent approach to the management of cancer
and tumors.
Ms. Begley clearly lays out the reason why consumers need to
become more educated rather than trusting in the medical
establishment's judgments and statistics. Are we really winning
the war on cancer? Hardly.
Cindy A. Krueger, M.P.H.
President
Preservion Inc.
Tampa, Fla.
---
As a practicing oncologist, I worry that this column could give
patients just the excuse they need to put off necessary, and very
critical, cancer-screening tests. The fact is that the U.S.
Preventive Services Task Force, the primary U.S. authority on the
topic of screening, leaves no doubt that screening for colorectal
cancer, cervical cancer and breast cancer is necessary for many
groups of patients and well supported with sound evidence. Ms.
Begley would have us believe that most cancers are "indolent,"
even though one in four deaths in the U.S. is caused by cancer!
Individuals ignore these guidelines at their own risk.
Dr. Bernard W. Taylor Jr.
Longview Cancer Center
Longview, Texas
Copyright (c) 2005 Dow Jones &Company, Inc.
© Reuters 2005. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
32 [shundahaialert] Skull Valley Nuclear Dump Approved. Please
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:48:50 -0700
X-Spam-filter-host: newton.ctyme.com - http://www.junkemailfilter.com
Dear Friends,
We are all in critical times.
We recently received bad news on a high-level nuclear waste dump that has
been resisted for eight years in Indian country. The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission finally approved it on Friday September 9th, 2005.
On a 4-1 vote, the NRC approved a license to site an unprecedented
high-level nuclear waste dump on the small Goshute Indian reservation in
Utah. This is a fight that we have been involved in for eight years now,
and there are still avenues available to stop this project from moving any
further.
There is still a lot that can be done to stop this project. All the latest
news is attached at the end of this email.
Shundahai Network needs your help. We are still having hard times. Though
we also continue to work hard to maintain our critical efforts to oppose
nuclear projects and to support Indigenous environmental justice struggles
in the Great Basin, times are hard for everyone.
We have been able to keep basic bills paid for the past two months due to
two very generous donations from Tribal and allied sources and several
smaller, though also very generous and well-appreciated, donations from
friends who have responded to our email appeals.
However, there is still much support needed to get things back to full
capacity, and to move with strength into a future that we all know needs to
happen, though is not getting any easier for any of us.
Currently we are focusing our efforts on this rapidly-escalating struggle
to stop the nuclear dump in Skull Valley. The attached links will bring
you up-to-date on this issue.
Even despite our current funding shortfall, Shundahai Network is in a
position to serve a very critical function in the fight that remains.
Everyone knows we will not give up- even when times get hard. It simply
cannot happen. And ultimately, we always need your help to do this.
We do apologize for the slight delay in getting all this info out, but with
our funding crunch we have had some related technical problems, including
problems maintaining our website and getting the news out quickly- but here
is the latest.
Please read the following news articles and review our website. We are in a
crazy time, but together we can stop this from moving forward.
Please feel free to contact our office, using the contact information
listed at the bottom of this email, and know that you are always in our
thoughts and prayers.
In peace, love and solidarity,
Pete Litster
Director
Shundahai Network
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alert!! September 9th 2005- Nuclear Dump Approved!
After an eight-year fight, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved
the license for an unprecedented high-level nuclear dump On The Skull
Valley Goshute Indian reservation in Utah. Please help oppose this project!
Latest News: From www.shundahai.org
9-17-05 New York Times Offends Utah on Nuke Waste- Deseret News
http://www.shundahai.org/091705_DesNews_NYTimes_Offends_Utah.htm
9-16-06 Goshute Nuclear Fight Similar to Navajos'- Deseret News
http://www.shundahai.org/091605DesNews_Navajo_fight_Like_Goshute.htm
9-16-05 Homeland Security Investigates Skull Valley Nuke Dump- Salt Lake
Tribune
http://www.shundahai.org/091605_US_HomelandSec_Checks_PFS.htm
9-15-05 UT Governor Will "Stand on Tracks" To Stop Nuke Dump- Ogden
Standard Examiner
http://www.shundahai.org/091505_OgdenSE_Huntsman_NVDA_vs_PFS.htm
9-13-05 Editorial: On a dangerous path- Skull Valley and Yucca Mountain
nuke dumps both wrong- Las Vegas Sun
http://www.shundahai.org/091305LasVegasSun_PFS_Yucca_bad.htm
9-12-05 Heavy Hitter: Mormon Church Comes Out Against Skull Valley Nuke
Dump- Deseret News (UT)
http://www.shundahai.org/091205DesNews_LDS_Church_Opposes_PFS.htm
9-11-05 Nuclear Waste Storage Plan Approved for Utah Indian Reservation
Washington Post
http://www.shundahai.org/091105WashPost_PFS_approved.htm
9-10-05 Feds say 'yes' to waste storage Salt Lake Tribune
http://www.shundahai.org/091005SLTrib_NRC_Approves_PFS_Dump.htm
9-10-05 UTAH RESERVATION TO GET NUKE WASTE Pittsburg Post-Gazette
http://www.shundahai.org/091005PittsburgPostGazette_on_PFS.htm
9-9-05 Approval of Private Fuel Storage Means Dangerous and Unnecessary
Storage of Highly Radioactive Waste in Utah Statement of Wenonah Hauter,
Director, Public Citizen's Energy Program
http://www.shundahai.org/090905PubCitizen_NO_PFS.htm
Shundahai Network
www.shundahai.org
P.O. Box 1115
Salt Lake City, UT 84110
Phone- 801.533.0128
Fax- 801.533.0129
shundahai@shundahai.org
Online Fundraising Store- www.cafepress.com/shundahainet
If you are a Myspace user, you can now add us! www.Myspace.com/shundahai
Shundahai is a Newe (Western Shoshone) word meaning "Peace and Harmony with
all Creation"
*****************************************************************
33 Deseret News: Utah isn't a nuke dump
[deseretnews.com]
Monday, September 19, 2005
Deseret Morning News editorial
Contrary to a recent New York Times editorial, which
chides Utah leaders for using every tool at their disposal to
block a private storage facility for spent nuclear rods in the
western desert, we say, take any and all necessary means to keep
the stuff out.
It's difficult to comprehend — in the post-Sept. 11
world—why anyone would conclude that shipping spent nuclear fuel
cross-country is a good idea. Worse yet is the proposed Private
Fuel Storage facility in Tooele County, where casks of the
nuclear material would be stored above ground. The airspace
above the proposed facility is frequented by jet fighters from
Hill Air Force Base that train over the nearby Utah Test and
Training Range.
But what is most unsettling is the "temporary" nature of
the disposal site. "Temporary" means at least 40 years. If and
when the nation's only designated permanent disposal repository
goes on line at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, 40 years worth of
additional waste will have been generated and require disposal.
Will there be space available at Yucca to relocate waste from
the PFS site? Yucca Mountain, an underground facility, will have
finite storage capacity. If the U.S. energy policy increases the
demand for nuclear power, the supply of spent fuel rods will
grow exponentially.
Although much is made of nearly a decade of review that
has gone into the PFS proposal, Utah can ill-afford to become
Yucca Mountain by default.
Instead, the Bush administration needs to permit the
reprocessing of spent fuel rods where they were produced rather
than risk shipment of this material to a single site.
Presently, the Department of Homeland Security is
reviewing the safety aspects of the PFS site, which would be
located on the Goshute Indian Reservation in Skull Valley, about
50 miles from Salt Lake City. Other avenues of redress include
asking the Bureau of Land Management to block the placement of a
rail spur on public lands to transport the materials to the PFS
site. A proposal to designate the area as wilderness also is
before the Senate.
To Easterners who naively — or arrogantly — consider the
entire West a vast wasteland, there seems little harm in placing
high-level nuclear waste in Utah's western desert. People who
have lived in the West for generations, however, see things
differently. They have legitimate concerns about becoming the
nation's nuke waste dump. Despite any assurances government
agencies might provide, Utah's history with above-ground nuclear
tests and weapons testing at Dugway provide ample reason for
skepticism. This history should add energy to the fight.
© 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
34 Salt Lake Tribune: The third uranium boom, or just a simmer?
Article Last Updated: 09/19/2005 11:25:34 PM
By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune
Based on geology he taught himself, Jimmy Walker
prospected for uranium in this redrock along the Colorado River
outside of Moab. James Tibbetts, Walker's son-in-law, has staked
more than two dozen uranium claims in hopes of being part of a
new uranium boom that many are now predicting for eastern Utah.
(Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune)
MOAB - Young Jimmy Walker was pumping gas at his uncle's service
station here a half-century ago when he caught uranium-hunting
fever. He taught himself geology in one of nature's best-endowed
classrooms anywhere, the red rock Colorado Plateau. He became a
prospector in time for a second uranium boom two decades later.
Now 77, Walker leans forward over his breakfast. It must be
cold, the syrup-drenched pancakes and eggs, but he is oblivious.
Eyes sparkling, he takes off again on the uranium boom he sees
on the horizon, coming fast.
"Let me tell you," he says, "there's no thrill bigger than
the thrill of discovery."
Signs of a new boom have people all over southeastern Utah
just as stirred up.
But this won't be another bonanza like Charlie Steen's. Not
the 1952 uranium boom that sprouted rags-to-riches stories and
put Moab on the map as "The Uranium Capital of the World" and
transformed sleepy Salt Lake City into the "Wall Street of
Uranium Stocks."
Uranium has become an enterprise for corporations, not
upstarts. The government has become more impediment than
inspiration. And, for some, a half-century of uranium cleanups
and lives ruined by radiation exposure have tarnished the glow
of the metal used for nuclear-reactor fuel.
"I don't think [a uranium boom] could possibly be like that
[first] one," says Salt Lake City author Raye Ringholz.
She examines "the fever" in Uranium Frenzy: Saga of the
Nuclear West. A onetime "women's page" writer for the defunct
Salt Lake Telegram newspaper, she began the book to put flesh on
the incredible tales of prospectors, like Steen, and Salt Lake
City's penny stock promoters.
Then she decided to include the darker stories: about
uranium workers toiling in cancer-causing radiation, their
families living around it. She later added a chapter on
Downwinders, who blame their cancers on fallout from atomic
bombs made from the uranium.
"This is a two-faced animal," she says. "It has two sides to
it, and you can't put just one face on it."
That's been tough lately. The price of uranium has jumped to
$30 a pound, up from $7 just four years ago. So, it's easy to
let uranium's virtues overshadow its hazards.
County clerks' offices in southeastern Utah have fielded
thousands of new claims since last fall, not the usual dozens.
Idle mills in White Mesa, south of Blanding, and Ticaboo, south
of Hanksville, might soon groan back into action.
Reports like these make lots of people twinkle-eyed. It is a
reflection, perhaps, of the near-mythic times that began in
1952, after Charlie Steen happened on an unlikely bonanza in an
unlikely spot southeast of Moab.
The Texan was drawn to the area by a federal program under
the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) that offered top dollar for
uranium, more than other metals fetched. As part of an effort to
provide a domestic supply of uranium, the AEC paid a bonus of
$10,000 - roughly $70,000 in today's dollars - for significant
finds.
When Steen's drill tapped into uranium-rich deposits in the
Lisbon Valley's Big Indian Wash, a California gold-style rush
began.
Four Utah counties saw 309,380 claims between 1946 and 1959.
Even shepherds and farmers would set out on family picnics with
the AEC's how-to prospect pamphlet and a Geiger counter.
People pulled trailers onto lawns in Moab for living space.
Some slept on the courthouse lawn. Schools swelled with
prospectors' children. The town's population ballooned from
1,000 to 8,000 in a matter of months.
Steen moved his young family from their tar paper shack into
a $250,000 mansion on a bluff overlooking Moab, swimming pool
and servants' quarters included. His legendary parties drew
thousands, and he created a sensation by flying to Salt Lake in
his private airplane for weekly rumba lessons.
Mark Steen, Charlie Steen's son, foresees a resurgence. He
and a partner have staked about 2,500 claims since last fall.
He wrote this summer in the Canyon Country Zephyr
An abandoned out building near the sealed and abandoned
entrance to this Uranium mine may get some new life outside of
Moab, Utah on Tuesday, September 7, 2005. As the price of
Uranium goes up, getting land for mines will be essential, and
some claims have already been staked on existing, but sealed
mines, now that the price of Uranium has made it profitable once
again. (Gilberto Bronstein/Special to the Salt Lake City
Tribune)
that AEC bought more than 40 million pounds of uranium
concentrate from the processing mill his father started in Moab
- a quantity worth $325 million between 1948 and 1971. The same
concentrate at $110 a pound - where many believe the price of
uranium is headed - would be worth $4.4 billion. Steen is among
those who wouldn't be surprised to see it reach $200 a pound.
"Brace yourself, Moab," he warns, "the third uranium boom on
the Colorado Plateau is on the way."
That sort of conviction has driven old-timers, their younger
kin and fortune seekers to revisit old claims and search out new
ones.
One is Moab resident James Tibbetts, a stonemason and father
of four who has staked a few dozen claims. The son of a
boom-time prospector, he has been researching uranium on the
Internet. He also attended an industry forum in Grand Junction,
Colo., a few months ago with Walker, his father-in-law.
Electricity demand in India and China keeps growing and
"OPEC's got us by the throat." Hydropower, coal, oil - they've
all got limitations and hydrogen, he says, "that's like putting
a bomb in your car."
"I think uranium's going to come back," says Tibbetts.
And then there is International Uranium Corp.'s White Mesa
mill south of Blanding.
There is talk about getting the mill running and again,
bringing jobs to San Juan County. Opened the year after the
Three Mile Island nuclear-plant accident in 1979 but mostly idle
for the past six years for a lack of material to process, it is
now one of just two operating uranium mills in the United
States.
Still, uranium is not the romantic business it used to be
for some. Big business overtook the little guy decades ago.
Conventional wisdom has it that the easy uranium already has
been mined. New deposits are bound to be deeper, out of
Geiger-counter range. So, most exploration would cost too much
for casual prospectors.
Old-timer Earl D. Shumway also blames environmentalism and
red tape. Staking and maintaining a claim used to cost about
$10. Nowadays it's $165, plus the yearly expenses involved in
keeping claims active.
At 79, he is not deterred. He has made his way into the Grand
County Clerk's Office a few weeks ago with the needed paperwork
for an old quarry claim.
"All of these things are making the uranium boom quite
complicated," he says. "And there's no guarantee of the
[selling] price" as when the AEC was the buyer.
"It's a fiasco."
For some people, an even greater fiasco is the widespread
willingness to overlook all the damage left in uranium's wake.
Once people really think about it, says former Grand County
Commissioner Bill Hedden, they won't be so enthusiastic. It
would be different if they talked about uranium trucks rolling
through downtown Moab again and rebuilding the mill.
"Then, if it's not just hypothetical but it's got a face on
it, then you'll see people go, 'Wait a minute.' " he said.
Cleaning up Utah's uranium mills is costing taxpayers nearly
$1 billion, by current estimates. The tab for treating people
made ill by working in the mines, moving uranium, milling it -
and, in some cases, those who just lived around it - cannot be
tallied.
The AEC knew about the radiation in the uranium ores could
be dangerous, even fatal. Yet, eager to ensure its uranium
supplies, it had allowed miners, millers, transporters and their
families to be exposed to high levels of radiation throughout
the '50s and '60s. Exposure standards were not set until 1969,
and then, many say, poorly enforced.
In 1990, Congress passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation
Act (RECA) to partly address the government's responsibility for
these health problems. Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch and the
late Democratic Rep. Wayne Owens were two of its strongest
advocates.
So far, the fund has distributed nearly $1 billion to
Downwinders and uranium workers, including about 858 Navajos.
And efforts are under way to expand the program to cover a
broader range of illnesses suffered by people in a broader
geographical area.
Once thriving on an economy of Uranium mining, Moab, Utah
still has remnants of its long forgotten mining history, such as
the Uranium Building in the downtown region that now caters to
Moab's newest economy -- tourism. (Gilberto Bronstein/Special to
the Salt Lake City Tribune)
Even today's enthusiastic prospectors acknowledge this health
toll.
Shumway, for instance, lost a brother and a son to radiation
disease. And his own compensation check went largely to caring
for his dying son.
"Very few miners got rich out of mining," he says. "We got
more money out of the [compensation] payments."
Former San Juan County Commissioner Bill Redd is among the
3,651 Utahns who has gotten RECA payment. He worked in uranium
from age 16.
He married into a uranium family, too. All six of his wife's
brothers, including Shumway, and her father were miners. One
died in a mine accident. Two succumbed to mine-related
illnesses, says Redd.
He now has "lung problems," silicosis. A respirator sits on
his desk. A box of inhalers sits among the stacks of such books
as the Wisdom Paradox and The Portable MBA. He sometimes uses an
oxygen tank.
"Personally, I was completely ignorant of silicosis and
radiation," says Redd, who, like most miners, did not wear a
respirator while working with uranium.
Meanwhile, the environmental toll is still being tallied,
too. Cleaning up the 130-acre pile left behind by the bankrupt
Atlas Corp. remains one of the biggest challenges.
Utah already has seen more than $446 million in uranium
cleanups. Atlas, built in Grand County and later sold by Charlie
Steen, is expected to cost at least $475 million. Meanwhile,
uranium waste faces no special regulation either at the state or
federal level.
"We're planning a boom," says Grand County Councilwoman Judy
Carmichael. "We're planning a 100-person boom" to deal with
cleanup workers over the next decade.
Down the highway in Monticello, they continue dealing with
the fallout from uranium booms past. Fritz Pipkin - not an
environmentalist but "a normal Joe Humbug who was raised in this
town" - is pushing the government to study the health problems
that have plagued his community because of ore-processing.
The Vanadium Corp. of America built the Monticello mill -
called Madame Curie's mill because of the radium it processed
for the Nobel scientist - in 1941 and sold it to the federal
government in 1948. It produced uranium and metal-strengthening
vanadium for 12 years before being shuttered, leaving behind 2.5
million cubic yards of sand-like uranium tailings that released
radioactive radon gas and tainted a creek running through the
mill site.
Although $250 million has been spent cleaning up the
community, the site continues to affect those who live around
it, says Pipkin. More than 400 residents have detailed illness
they blame on the site. And, in a place that ought to expect
just one case of leukemia in three decades, locals count 21.
Pipkin played on the tailings as a kid. Today, he is
preparing for another round of leukemia treatments.
"We gotta have it," he says of the uranium now being
prospected. "It just has to be done right."
Mark Steen agrees. He foresees modern mines with better
attention to health and environmental safety. He doubts the
stories of kids playing in tailings and workers toiling in
unhealthy mills and mines.
"My old man used to say atomic bombs saved more lives than
they ever took."
fahys@sltrib.com
© Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
35 EPA: Public Hearings on Amended Yucca Mountain Standards -
Programs (EPA's Radiation Protection Programs: Yucca Mtn. Stds.)
Printable Version (1pp, 234 Kb) [about pdf format]
Federal
Register Notice(3pp, 60.87 Kb) [about pdf
format] [HTML]
The EPA will hold public hearings on the recently proposed
amendments to the Public Health and Environmental Radiation
Protection Standards for Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Meetings will
be held in three locations: Amargosa Valley, NV; Las Vegas, NV;
Washington, DC.
+ Three Types of Meetings
+ Information Sessions
+ Roundtable Dialogues
+ Public Hearings
+ Commenting at Upcoming Meetings
+ Speaking at Formal Public Hearings
+ Visiting Comment Stations at Meetings
+ If You Cannot Attend
+ Meeting Schedule
+ Amargosa Valley, NV
+ Las Vegas, NV
+ Washington D.C.
+ Staying Up-to-Date
Three Types of Meetings
The speaking events will provide opportunities for both informal
exchanges of information and formal comments. These will
include:
Information Sessions
Information sessions offer an informal opportunity to learn
about the standards, meet EPA staff, ask questions, and provide
comments on the record in writing or on audio tape.
return to: [top] [ Click quotBackButton" for previous location]
Roundtable Dialogues
Roundtable dialogues offer a group conversation with EPA staff
to discuss the standards and to allow opportunities for the
public to ask questions of EPA staff, and for EPA to respond. A
summary of key points and questions will be recorded for the
record.
return to: [top] [ Click quotBackButton" for previous location]
Public Hearings
Public hearings offer a formal opportunity to make verbal
statements that will be recorded for the public record. In order
to allow for the maximum number of comments, individuals and
organizations should schedule a specific time to make their
comments.
return to: [top] [ Click quotBackButton" for previous location]
Commenting at Upcoming Meetings
Speaking at Formal Public Hearings
Individuals or organizations may speak at public hearings with
or without out scheduling a specific time. EPA encourages you to
schedule a specific time for greater convenience (note deadlines
below):
1. Schedule a time slot to speaking by calling the Yucca
Mountain toll-free information line:
1-800-331-9477
1. Operator available Monday-Friday, 8:30 am.- 5:00 pm. EST
(6:30 am.- 3:00 pm. MST).
2. At all other times leave a message containing the
following information:
+ Name
+ Daytime telephone number (including area code). We will
call you back no later than the next business day to schedule a
speaking time.
2. Attend the public hearing of choice and wait for an
available time slot for speaking.
Note: Deadline for requesting time slots:
Requests for speaking times must be received by EPA no later
than September 30, 2005 for the hearings in Amargosa Valley and
Las Vegas, NV; and October 7, 2005 for the hearing in
Washington, DC. return to: [top] [ Click quotBackButton" for
previous location]
Visiting Comment Stations at Meetings
Individuals can record spoken comments or submit written
comments at individual comment stations at any of the public
events listed below. return to: [top] [ Click quotBackButton"
for previous location]
If You Cannot Attend
If you cannot attend one of the speaking events, you can still
submit comments to the public record via fax, surface mail, or
Internet.See "How to Comment on the Proposed Amendments." return
to: [top] [ Click quotBackButton" for previous location]
Meeting Schedule
Amargosa Valley
Amargosa Valley Community Center
821 East Farm Road
Amargosa Valley, Nevada 89020
Monday, October 3, 2005 4:00 pm 9:00 pm
(deadline to schedule a speaking time, September 30)
+ Information Session 4:00 pm 5:30 pm
+ Roundtable Dialogue Session 5:30 pm 6:30 pm
+ Public Hearing 7:00 pm 9:00 pm return to: [top] [ Click
quotBackButton" for previous location]
Las Vegas
The Cashman Center
850 North Las Vegas Blvd.
Las Vegas , NV
Tuesday, October 4, 2005 4:00 pm 9:00 pm
(deadline to schedule a speaking time, September 30)
+ Information Session 4:00 pm 5:30 pm
+ Roundtable Dialogue Session 5:30 pm 6:30 pm
+ Public Hearing 7:00 pm 9:00 pm
Wednesday, October 5, 2005 10:00 am 12:00 pm
+ Information Session 10:00 am 11:00 am
+ Public Hearing 11:00 am 12:00 pm
Thursday, October 6, 2005 10:00 am 12:00 pm
+ Information Session 10:00 am 11:00 am
+ Public Hearing 11:00 am 12:00 pm return to: [top] [ Click
quotBackButton" for previous location]
Washington, DC
EPA East Building , Room 1153
1201 Constitution Avenue, NW
Tuesday, October 11, 2005 1:00 pm 4:00 pm
(deadline to schedule a speaking time, October 7)
+ Information Session 1:00 pm 2:00 pm
+ Public Hearing 2:00 pm 4:00 pm
Note: Please use the Constitution Avenue entrance and bring a
photo ID. return to: [top] [ Click quotBackButton" for previous
location]
Programs Home WIPP Oversight Yucca Mtn. Standards Mixed Waste
Federal Guidance Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials Radon
Radionuclides in Water SunWise Rad NESHAPs Regional Programs
MARSSIM MARLAP Cleanup: Technologies & Tools Risk Assessment
Radiological Emergency Response Clean Materials Laboratories
*****************************************************************
36 Bostone Globe: Board travels south for hearing on dry cask storage -
Boston.com
+ Vt.Board travels south for hearing on dry cask storage
Associated Press The state Public Service Board is inviting
comments from the public on Vermont Yankee's plan to store
high-level radioactive waste on the grounds of the plant in
Vernon.
September 19, 2005 --> [The Associated Press]
BRATTLEBORO, Vt. --The state Public Service Board is inviting
comments from the public on Vermont Yankee's plan to store
high-level radioactive waste on the grounds of the plant in
Vernon.
The board has scheduled a site visit for Tuesday at the plant to
view the area where Entergy Nuclear, Vermont Yankee's owner,
hopes to install concrete and steel dry casks for storing the
waste.
On Tuesday at 7 p.m., the board has scheduled a public hearing
on the proposal at Brattleboro Union High School.
Vermont Yankee officials say they are running out of room to
store the highly radioactive waste in the plant's spent fuel
storage pool, and that the plant will be forced to shut down in
2007 or 2008 if it is not allowed to expand its storage to the
dry casks.
The need for additional storage arises because federal plans for
a permanent waste disposal site at Yucca Mountain in Nevada have
been tied up in litigation.
Vermont Yankee has said its plan is to take the oldest and least
radioactive waste from the storage pool and move it to the dry
casks, making more room for newer waste in the pool.
The dry casks have been billed as a temporary solution until a
permanent waste site is opened. The spent fuel storage pool also
was described as being for temporary storage of the waste when
the plant opened 33 years ago.
The Public Service Board is a three-member, quasi-judicial board
that reviews all matters energy and ratepayer related. The board
will decide whether the dry cask storage plan is in the best
interest of the state.
The board's chairman, James Volz, will not be involved in the
decision. He announced last week he would step aside from the
case to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest. Until
March, Volz was director of public advocacy in the Department of
Public Service, which has strongly backed the dry cask storage
plan.
------
Information from: Brattleboro Reformer[ /] © Copyright 2005
*****************************************************************
37 Brattleboro Reformer: Public Service to hold hearing on cask storage
Brattleboro, VT
Article Published: Monday, September 19, 2005 -
By K. CECCAROSSI Reformer Staff
BRATTLEBORO -- Their power is often felt but their presence is
rarely seen in this part of the state.
For one day this week that will change when the state's Public
Service Board holds a local hearing on a proposal that would put
on-site nuclear waste storage at Vermont Yankee.
At 7 p.m. on Tuesday in the Brattleboro Union High School
auditorium, the Public Service Board will take comments from the
public. They want to know how the people most directly affected
by the plant feel about the so-called dry cask storage plan.
The Public Service Board is a three-member, quasi-judicial
board that reviews all matters energy and ratepayer related.
It's up to them to decide if installing steel and concrete
containers to hold high-level nuclear waste at the Vernon plant
is in the best interest of the state.
The board will hold hearings on the proposal in the next few
months, taking testimony from plant owners Entergy Nuclear, the
state's Department of Public Service and nuclear watchdog groups.
As part of that process, they've scheduled Tuesday's meeting.
Public Service Board members will also get a tour earlier in the
day of the site where Entergy officials would like to setup dry
cask storage.
Sue Hudson, clerk of the Public Service Board, said this type
of local visit and public hearing is a requirement in any
proposal that includes construction of or related to power
plants.
Dave McElwee, an engineer at Vermont Yankee, will make a
presentation on the dry cask plan at Tuesday's meeting. After
that, Public Service Board members may ask him questions before
opening the floor to residents, Hudson said.
A representative from the Department of Public Service, which
advocates for ratepayers, and Raymond Shadis, advisor for
nuclear watchdog New England Coalition, will also be available
for questions.
Nuclear waste at the plant is currently stored in a 40-feet
deep pool in the reactor building. It will reportedly be filled
to capacity by 2007 or 2008, if Vermont Yankee wins federal
approval to increase its power output by 20 percent. That
approval is still pending.
The dry casks would be used to store the older -- less "hot" --
fuel assemblies stored in the pool, making way for newer ones
that will be taken from the reactor's core.
Entergy's application to the state for permission to construct
the containers describes them as "temporary" storage. But plans
to build a permanent nuclear storage facility for the country
have been tied up for years in Congress and critics say the dry
casks could remain in Vernon indefinitely.
Earlier this year, the state Legislature debated the dry cask
proposal. After much debate, lawmakers passed a bill allowing
Vermont Yankee officials to apply to the Public Service Board
for permission to install the containers.
Copyright ©1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc.,
*****************************************************************
38 AU ABC: SA Opposition to lobby Vic Govt over waste dump
19 September 2005. 10:02 (AWST)
South Australia's Opposition will appeal directly to the
Victorian Government to abandon plans for a toxic waste dump
near the River Murray.
Protesters blocked main roads of the north-west Victorian town
of Mildura over the plan on Friday.
SA Opposition Leader Rob Kerin is concerned the Nowingi dump
could contaminate South Australia's water supply and impact on
the image of Riverland produce.
He says he will take the argument directly to Victorian Premier
Steve Bracks.
"Really hypocritical for the Rann Government, after all the
noise they made about the radioactive waste repository, to
ignore this particular toxic waste repository," Mr Kerin said.
"Basically it comes down to the fact that it's a Labor
Government in Victoria that is proposing it versus a Liberal
Government in Canberra that proposed the other."
*****************************************************************
39 DOE: Secretary of Energy Advisory Board; Notice of Open
FR Doc 05-18560
[Federal Register: September 19, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 180)]
[Notices] [Page 54910-54911] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19se05-45]
Teleconference Meeting AGENCY: Department of Energy.
SUMMARY: This notice announces an open teleconference meeting of
the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board. The Federal Advisory
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770), requires that
agencies publish these notices in the Federal Register to allow
for public participation. The purpose of the teleconference is to
discuss the interim findings and recommendations of the Secretary
of Energy Advisory Board's Nuclear Weapons Complex Infrastructure
Task Force.
Note: Copies of the draft final report of the Nuclear Weapons
Complex Infrastructure Task Force may be obtained from the
following Internet address http://www.seab.energy.gov/news.htm or
by contacting the Office of the Secretary of Energy Advisory
Board at (202) 586-7092.
Name: Secretary of Energy Advisory Board.
DATES: Tuesday, October 4, 2005, 1:30 p.m.-3 p.m., Eastern
Daylight Standard Time.
ADDRESSES: Participants may call the Office of the Secretary of
Energy Advisory Board at (202) 586-7092 to reserve a
teleconference line and receive a call-in number, or to
preregister for public comment.
Public participation is welcome. However, the number of
teleconference lines are limited and are available on a first
come basis.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard Burrow, Deputy
Director and Acting Executive Director, Secretary of Energy
Advisory Board (AB- 1), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-7092 or
(202) 586-6279 (fax).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the Secretary of Energy
Advisory Board (The Board) is to provide the Secretary of Energy
with essential independent advice and recommendations on issues
of national importance. The Board and its subcommittees provide
timely, balanced, and authoritative advice to the Secretary of
Energy on the Department's management reforms, research,
development, and technology activities, energy and national
security responsibilities, environmental cleanup activities, and
economic issues relating to energy. During the open
teleconference meeting the Board will discuss the interim
findings and recommendations of the Nuclear Weapons Complex
Infrastructure Task Force. The Nuclear Weapons Complex
Infrastructure Task Force, a subcommittee of the Secretary of
Energy Advisory Board, was formed to provide the Board and the
Secretary of Energy with an independent assessment leading to
options and recommendations to modernize, consolidate, and, where
possible, to reduce costs of the infrastructure and facilities
across the nuclear weapons complex based upon recent stockpile
reductions and new security Design Basis Threat requirements.
On October 4th, the Board will conduct a teleconference to
discuss the findings and recommendations contained in the draft
final report of the Nuclear Weapons Complex Infrastructure Task
Force.
Tentative Agenda Tuesday, October 4, 2005.
1:30 p.m.-1:40 p.m. Welcome & Opening Remarks--Mr. M. Peter
McPherson, Chairman of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board.
1:40 p.m.-2 p.m. Overview of the Nuclear Weapons Complex
Infrastructure (NWCI) Task Force's draft Findings and
Recommendations--Dr.
David O. Overskei, NWCI Task Force Chairman.
2 p.m.-2:30 p.m. Public Comment Period. 2:30 p.m.-3 p.m. Board
Review & Comment and Action--Mr. M. Peter McPherson, Chairman of
the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board.
3 p.m. Adjourn. This agenda is tentative and subject to change.
Public Participation: In keeping with procedures, members of the
public are welcome to observe the business of the Secretary of
Energy Advisory Board and submit advance written comments or
comment during the scheduled public comment period. The Chairman
of the Board is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion
that will, in the Chairman's judgment, facilitate the orderly
conduct of business.
During its open teleconference meeting, the Board welcomes public
comment. Members of the public will be heard in the order in
which they have registered for public comment at the beginning of
the meeting.
The Board will make every effort to hear the views of all
interested parties. You may also submit written comments in
advance of the meeting to Richard Burrow, Deputy Director,
Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, AB-1, U.S. Department of
Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585.
Advance written comments should be received by the Board no later
than September 27, 2005.
Minutes: A copy of the minutes and a transcript of the open
teleconference meeting will be made available for public review
and copying approximately 30 days following the
[[Page 54911]] meeting at the Freedom of Information Public
Reading Room, 1E-190 Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday except Federal holidays. Further information on
the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board and its subcommittees may
be found at the Board's Web site, located at
http://www.seab.energy.gov/. Issued at Washington, DC, on
September 13, 2005.
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05-18560 Filed 9-16-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
*****************************************************************
40 Tri-Valley Herald: Secret laser experiments proposed
Article Last Updated: 09/19/2005 02:55:08 AM
If approved, Livermore lab could conduct the weapons research
By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER
U.S. weapons scientists want to fire the worlds largest laser at
targets resembling miniature atom bombs in experiments aimed at a
deeper understanding of the physics in thermonuclear weapons.
Critics say the experiments could lead to new, low-yield nuclear
explosives.
Details of the proposed experiments and their purposes are
classified, though weapons scientists say they are not pursuing
new kinds of nuclear bombs.
If approved by federal weapons authorities at the U.S. Department
of Energy, the laser shots would mark an unprecedented use of
weapons-grade plutonium and uranium in a U.S. fusion facility.
Shots on the new targets could begin in 2010 at the National
Ignition Facility, a massive laser complex at Lawrence Livermore
nuclear weapons lab.
In the 1990s and again in a recent environmental study, weapons
scientists and federal defense officials said the experiments
could fill gaps in understanding of critical aspects of weapons
physics.
But Clinton administration weapons officials called the
experiments highly speculative and told a 1995 panel of
scientists studying NIFs implications for development of new
weapons that there is no intention on the part of the Department
to pursue these experiments.
At $4 billion, the giant laser is the most expensive scientific
construction project in the nation and one of the more
controversial. Critics say the laser wont achieve its defining
purpose of igniting fusion burn andhas dubious relevance to
maintaining nuclear weapons.
The new, classified targets could answer both questions.
When complete in 2008, NIF would be scientists best shot in a
half-century of ion guns, magnetic chambers and other big lasers
at creating a tiny star inside a laboratory through pure fusion —
that is, without using a fission bomb as a lighting match, as in
H-bombs.
But with the new, classified targets, weapons scientists would be
departing from pure fusion and exploring thermonuclear explosions
on targets very similar to an atom bomb, with concentric shells
of beryllium and weapons-grade plutonium — just a gram or two of
each — containing a mix of two heavy hydrogen gases, tritium and
deuterium.
Thats almost identical to the first stage of a thermonuclear
weapon, a grapefruit-sized hollow ball of beryllium and plutonium
surrounded by high explosives that serve as a fission match to
touch off fusion.
The experiment and the bomb differ in size and shape — modern
primaries tend to be oblong, shaped like eggs or watermelons —
and they differ in the means of detonation: imploding high
explosives for nuclear bombs versus a crushing fist of X-rays
created by 192 beams of intense laser light inside the Rose
Bowl-sized National Ignition Facility.
What theyre doing is trying to make a miniature H-bomb, not a
pure fusion explosion. Theyre on a totally different page than
the rest of the fusion community, said Ray Kidder, a former
senior manager over laser research at Lawrence Livermore and a
nonproliferation advocate.
The reason, he said, is obvious to anyone in the weapons world.
The answer is to design new weapons, weapons that have different
characteristics and are based on a different way of making the
weapon detonate, Kidder said. This is an absolutely whole new
ball game.
Some other fusion scientists are also concerned that the
classified experiments could taint the international pursuit of
fusion energy.
Stefan Atzeni, a physicist at the University of Rome and
co-author of a definitive textbook on laser fusion, said he
understands the need of U.S. scientists to learn more about
weapons physics. But he opposes the use of weapons-grade
plutonium in fusion experiments.
Personally, I see these experiments as politically risky, he
wrote in an e-mail last week. They certainly would not have a
positive impact on public perception of fusion: They may be
viewed as supporting weapons proliferation.
The Clinton and Bush administrations concluded that NIF posed no
proliferation risks in part because of the lasers enormous size
and cost — it could not be replicated into a feasible weapon —
and because experiments on NIF could yield rare insights into
physics at the extreme temperatures, energies and pressures found
only in stars and nuclear weapons.
Some physicists, including the late Theodore Taylor, a weapons
designer turned arms-control advocate, warned that the giant
laser might open the door to novel fusion weaponry, driven by
high explosives or magnetic fields.
Such experiments could make it harder for the United States to
persuade the United Nations to limit other nations nuclear
research, said Christopher Paine, a senior weapons analyst for
the Natural Resources Defense Council.
How does the United States look objecting to the nuclear energy
programs of other countries while it injects weapons research
functions into its search for fusion energy? Paine said. It puts
us in a frightfully hypocritical position.
This new class of weapons would turn the operation of existing
H-bombs inside out. Since the 1950s, virtually all nuclear
weapons in the arsenals of advanced nuclear powers have been
boosted designs. They inject fusion fuel into detonating
atom bomb
of plutonium and use the fusion reactions to split even more
plutonium atoms. That dramatically raises the efficiency of the
atom bomb, allowing weapons designers to shrink their size and
weight as fission triggers for thermonuclear weapons.
A possible new class of weapons is closer to fusion bombs, using
nuclear fission as a booster.
In some of the classified experiments proposed for the National
Ignition Facility, scientists would fire at a pellet that looks
rather like an atom bomb but is 100 times smaller. If the target
works — if it implodes perfectly and doesnt squirt out to the
sides — the pellet would be crushed smaller still, and the
hydrogen fusion fuel inside would fuse, releasing trillions of
neutrons.
Some neutrons will shatter the atomic nuclei of the plutonium
and produce hot fragments that deliver scads of energy back into
the fusion fuel, making it burn more efficiently. The plutonium
becomes an explosive to boost a tiny fusion bomb.
Its 100 percent about new nuclear weapons that are just what
people are looking for because theyre low-yield weapons with
reduced residual radiation, said Kidder, the retired Livermore
laser physicist.
Weapons scientists would not discuss the experiments in detail,
saying they are classified. But in response
to written
questions, scientists at Livermore who declined to be identified
stressed that the experiments strictly were intended to improve
the understanding of ordinary H-bombs. The classified shots are
not relevant to any new design, they wrote.
It is narrowing uncertainties in weapons physics, not exploring
new weapons, that is the rationale for the classified
experiments, according to Livermores scientists.
If so, Kidder asks, why the secrecy?
You put fission into it, and the world has to be kept out,
Kidder said. I would prefer they did not do any fusion
experiments with fission that were classified. But the whole
idea of doing things in a dark corner and doing things that
could lead toward proliferation, I dont favor that.
© 2005 ANG Newspapers
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************