***************************************************************** 12/12/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.288 ***************************************************************** 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] Israel Prepares Strike Force Against Iran 2 Guardian Unlimited: State Dept. Rules Out Guarantee on Iran 3 AFP: Iran does not have the right to enrich uranium - US official - 4 AFP: Iran needs US security guarantees in nuclear talks - IAEA chief 5 Guardian Unlimited: ElBaradei Urges Iran Security Guarantee 6 AFP: US cool to call for security guarantees for Iran 7 Korea.net: South, North Korea begin cabinet talks Tuesday 8 Korea.net: Korea, China join hands to break through nuclear impasse 9 Korea.net: IAEA chief expecting invitation from North Korea 10 US: FCNL: Nuclear Calendar 11 US: Lew Rockwell.com: Googling World Energy Reserves 12 IPS-English MIDDLE EAST-NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: Israel should not 13 Xinhua: ASEAN leaders sign declaration on ASEAN Charter 14 Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission: PRESS RELEASES 15 Guardian Unlimited: Gov't Report: $50-Plus Oil Here to Stay NUCLEAR REACTORS 16 US: Keep the Guard Posts at Three Mile Island 17 [NukeNet] Ukraine's Yushchenko Mulls Chernobyl D ump for 18 US: Crain's Detroit Business: CMS Energy to auction nuclear plant ne 19 AFP: Indian PM says nuclear facility separation at 'advanced stage' 20 Helsingin Sanomat: Russian environmental activist seeks asylum in Fi 21 US: Las Vegas SUN: Support for Utah nuke site wanes NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 22 US: [du-list] Radium 226 flowing from the Piketon/Portsmouth, Ohio 23 US: [NukeNet] PLUTONIUM LAUNCH ACCIDENT COULD HAVE GLOBAL 24 US: More on the DU Death Sentence 25 US: YubaNet.com: EPA To Expand Use of Human Chemical Experiments 26 US: Honolulu Advertiser: Irradiator planners feel heat - 27 US: Political Affairs Magazine: Bush's Veterans' Healthcare Budget NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 28 UKAEA: UKAEA seeks views of community on proposed disposal facility 29 US: Las Vegas SUN: BLM: PFS can make case for nuke storage in new 30 UKAEA: Dounreay seeks way forward on particles PEACE 31 Accepting Nobel Prize, UN Nuclear Agency Chief Lays Out Vision For P US DEPT. OF ENERGY 32 [NukeNet] Editorial Opposing Nuclear Expansion at Livermore Lab 33 Dallas Morning News: Los Alamos not a losing proposition, UT says 34 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Rocky 35 Deseret News: More disclosure of N-lab accidents? ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 [NYTr] Israel Prepares Strike Force Against Iran Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 10:35:30 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit The Sunday Times of London - 11 December 2005 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1920074,00.html Israel readies forces for strike on nuclear Iran By Uzi Mahnaimi, Tel Aviv, and Sarah Baxter, Washington ISRAEL'S armed forces have been ordered by Ariel Sharon, the prime minister, to be ready by the end of March for possible strikes on secret uranium enrichment sites in Iran, military sources have revealed. The order came after Israeli intelligence warned the government that Iran was operating enrichment facilities, believed to be small and concealed in civilian locations. Iran's stand-off with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) over nuclear inspections and aggressive rhetoric from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, who said last week that Israel should be moved to Europe, are causing mounting concern. The crisis is set to come to a head in early March, when Mohamed El-Baradei, the head of the IAEA, will present his next report on Iran. El-Baradei, who received the Nobel peace prize yesterday, warned that the world was "losing patience" with Iran. A senior White House source said the threat of a nuclear Iran was moving to the top of the international agenda and the issue now was: "What next?" That question would have to be answered in the next few months, he said. Defence sources in Israel believe the end of March to be the "point of no return" after which Iran will have the technical expertise to enrich uranium in sufficient quantities to build a nuclear warhead in two to four years. "Israel -- and not only Israel -- cannot accept a nuclear Iran," Sharon warned recently. "We have the ability to deal with this and we're making all the necessary preparations to be ready for such a situation." The order to prepare for a possible attack went through the Israeli defence ministry to the chief of staff. Sources inside special forces command confirmed that "G" readiness -- the highest stage -- for an operation was announced last week. Gholamreza Aghazadeah, head of the Atomic Organisation of Iran, warned yesterday that his country would produce nuclear fuel. "There is no doubt that we have to carry out uranium enrichment," he said. He promised it would not be done during forthcoming talks with European negotiators. But although Iran insists it wants only nuclear energy, Israeli intelligence has concluded it is deceiving the world and has no intention of giving up what it believes is its right to develop nuclear weapons. A "massive" Israeli intelligence operation has been underway since Iran was designated the "top priority for 2005", according to security sources. Cross-border operations and signal intelligence from a base established by the Israelis in northern Iraq are said to have identified a number of Iranian uranium enrichment sites unknown to the the IAEA. Since Israel destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981, "it has been understood that the lesson is, don't have one site, have 50 sites", a White House source said. If a military operation is approved, Israel will use air and ground forces against several nuclear targets in the hope of stalling Tehran's nuclear programme for years, according to Israeli military sources. It is believed Israel would call on its top special forces brigade, Unit 262 -- the equivalent of the SAS -- and the F-15I strategic 69 Squadron, which can strike Iran and return to Israel without refuelling. "If we opt for the military strike," said a source, "it must be not less than 100% successful. It will resemble the destruction of the Egyptian air force in three hours in June 1967." Aharon Zeevi Farkash, the Israeli military intelligence chief, stepped up the pressure on Iran this month when he warned Israel's parliament, the Knesset, that "if by the end of March the international community is unable to refer the Iranian issue to the United Nations security council, then we can say the international effort has run its course". The March deadline set for military readiness also stems from fears that Iran is improving its own intelligence-gathering capability. In October it launched its first satellite, the Sinah-1, which was carried by a Russian space launcher. "The Iranians' space programme is a matter of deep concern to us," said an Israeli defence source. "If and when we launch an attack on several Iranian targets, the last thing we need is Iranian early warning received by satellite." Russia last week signed an estimated $1 billion contract -- its largest since 2000 -- to sell Iran advanced Tor-M1 systems capable of destroying guided missiles and laser-guided bombs from aircraft. "Once the Iranians get the Tor-M1, it will make our life much more difficult," said an Israeli air force source. "The installation of this system can be relatively quick and we can't waste time on this one." The date set for possible Israeli strikes on Iran also coincides with Israel's general election on March 28, prompting speculation that Sharon may be sabre-rattling for votes. Benjamin Netanyahu, the frontrunner to lead Likud into the elections, said that if Sharon did not act against Iran, "then when I form the new Israeli government, we'll do what we did in the past against Saddam's reactor, which gave us 20 years of tranquillity". TEHRAN MINISTER MET MILITANTS BEFORE NEW OFFENSIVE Iran's foreign minister met leading figures from three Islamic militant groups to co-ordinate a united front against Israel days before a recent escalation of attacks against Israeli targets shattered fragile ceasefires with Lebanon and the Palestinians, writes Hugh Macleod in Damascus. The minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, held talks with leaders of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah in Damascus on November 15. Among those who attended the meeting were Khaled Meshaal, the Hamas leader, and a deputy leader of Islamic Jihad, which claimed responsibility for last Monday's suicide bombing of a shopping mall in Netanya that killed five Israeli citizens. Ahmed Jibril, leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine- General Command, was also present. "We all confirmed that what is going on in occupied Palestine is organically connected to what is going on in Iraq, Syria, Iran and Lebanon," said Jibril. Seven days after the talks, Hezbollah fired a volley of rockets and mortars at Israeli targets, sparking the fiercest fighting between the two sides since Israel's withdrawal from south Lebanon five years ago. * ================================================================ .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 Guardian Unlimited: State Dept. Rules Out Guarantee on Iran From the Associated Press [UP] Monday December 12, 2005 11:16 PM By BARRY SCHWEID AP Diplomatic Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration is ruling out a guarantee not to attack Iran to induce it to halt development of nuclear weapons. Iran must first act like a responsible member of the international community and stop violating its agreements, State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said Monday. ``That would represent a sea change in its behavior,'' Ereli said. ``Then maybe other kinds of notions might be more palatable.'' ``But right now, I don't think people should be asking the United States, 'Why don't you do this or why don't you do that?''' the U.S. official said. Ereli's remarks appeared to dismiss a suggestion by Mohamed ElBaradei, the head of the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency, who said Monday in Stockholm that he believed the United States would need to give Iran a security guarantee before a final agreement could be reached on Iran's atomic programs. ElBaradei also said the United States would need to become more involved in stalled negotiations between Iran and the European Union aimed at persuading Iran to permanent freeze nuclear enrichment. Last week, Undersecretary of State Robert Joseph said that step was the last ``red line'' Iran needed to cross to produce nuclear weapons. Negotiations, meanwhile, are stalled. In parallel talks designed to halt North Korea's nuclear weapons programs, the United States has offered written guarantees it would not be attacked. The assurances were offered by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her predecessor, Colin Powell. On Iran, President Bush, last February, said it was ``simply ridiculous'' to assume the United States had plans to attack and Rice has made similar statements. Unlike the negotiations with Iran, the United States is a participant in the negotiations, along with South Korea, Japan, China and Russia. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 3 AFP: Iran does not have the right to enrich uranium - US official - Mon Dec 12, 3:45 PM ET VIENNA (AFP) - Iran" /> Irandoes not have the right to enrich uranium since it is secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons, a senior US State Department official said in Vienna, disputing Iranian claims. "The whole premise of the question is that Iran has this right to enrich. Iran does not. No non-nuclear weapons state party to the NPT (Non-Proliferation Treaty) has the right to enrich if the purpose of that enrichment is for a weapons program," said the official, who asked not to be identified. Iran says its nuclear program is a strictly peaceful effort to generate electricity but the United States charges this civilian program is hiding weapons development. The US official was speaking with the European Union" /> European Unionand Iran expected to meet December 21 in an attempt to set the stage for re-starting formal talks on winning guarantees that Tehran will not make nuclear weapons. But Iranian Foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said in Tehran Sunday that Iran insists on its right to enrich uranium. Iranian officials have said the Islamic Republic is only suspending the activity as a confidence-building gesture. Enriched uranium can be fuel for civilian nuclear power reactors but also the raw material for atom bombs. EU-Iran talks collapsed in August when Tehran ended its suspension of uranium conversion, a first step towards enrichment. The UN nuclear watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) has still not ruled, after an almost three-year investigation, on whether Iran's nuclear program is peaceful or dedicated to making weapons. This is crucial as the NPT, which has been in effect since 1970, guarantees in its Article 4 "the inalienable right of all the parties to the treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes" but says this should be in conformity with Article 2, in which nations pledge "not to manufacture of otherwise acquire nuclear weapons." The EU, backed by the United States, wants Iran to permanently give up enrichment work as an "objective guarantee" it will not acquire weapons. The West wants to push for a compromise under which Iran's enrichment work would be carried out in Russia, although this has already been rejected by Tehran. Asefi said the only chance for the negotiations was if the European side compromises. But the US official said: "The red line of enrichment is just that, it is a bright red line and if Iran crosses it, I think the issue ought to go immediately to the ( United Nations" /> United Nations) Security Council," which could impose sanctions. The official said the United States was "working to broaden the international consensus on this . . . to try to get the Chinese and the Russians and others on board so that when it does go to the Security Council we have their support." Russia supports Iran's civilian nuclear program and is building the Islamic Republic's first nuclear power reactor. The IAEA has said Iran is not complying with the NPT due to almost two decades of hidden nuclear activities. This opens the door to taking Iran before the Security Council. But the IAEA last month put off such action after the EU-3 agreed to give time for Russian diplomacy to work. Recommend It: Not at All Somewhat Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 4 AFP: Iran needs US security guarantees in nuclear talks - IAEA chief - Mon Dec 12, 1:46 PM ET STOCKHOLM (AFP) - Mohamed ElBaradei, head of nuclear watchdog IAEA, called on the United States to use security assurances to stop Iran" /> from developing nuclear weapons, along the lines what had been offered to North Korea" /> . "I see security assurances provided by the US as part of the solution," ElBaradei, this year's Nobel peace prize winner, told reporters in Stockholm, two days after picking up his award in Oslo. "I hope that as the negotiations with the European Union" /> will resume that the US at some point will be more engaged," he said. Iran said Sunday that a planned meeting later this month with Britain, France and Germany on its disputed nuclear programme will be decisive for the future of diplomacy over the crisis. Foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi also reiterated that Iran would be sticking by its demand to conduct ultra-sensitive nuclear fuel work -- despite fears such activities could be diverted to make an atomic bomb. North Korea in September agreed to to dismantle its nuclear weapons programme in return for economic and diplomatic benefits, after two years of negotiations. Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 5 Guardian Unlimited: ElBaradei Urges Iran Security Guarantee From the Associated Press [UP] Monday December 12, 2005 5:16 PM By MATTIAS KAREN Associated Press Writer STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) - Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohamed ElBaradei said Monday he believes the United States will need to give Iran a security guarantee before a final agreement can be reached on the country's atomic program. ElBaradei, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency, also said the United States will need to become more involved in the stalled negotiations between Iran and the European Union aimed at making Tehran permanently freeze nuclear enrichment. That process can produce material for use in warheads or fuel for nuclear plants to generate electricity. ``I think part of the negotiations should be providing Iran with security assurances,'' ElBaradei said after meeting with Swedish Prime Minister Goran Persson to discuss the IAEA's work. ``I hope that as the negotiations with the European Union proceed that the United States at a certain point will be more engaged. We look at the United States ... to do the heavy lifting in the area of security.'' In September, North Korea agreed to abandon its nuclear program in exchange for security guarantees and energy aid, and ElBaradei said a similar package will be needed to reach a deal with Iran. Tehran temporarily froze its enrichment program in November 2004, but the Europeans want it permanently halted. ``I very much see (security assurances by the United States) as part of the final solution,'' ElBaradei said. The United States backs the Iran-Europe talks, which broke off in August but will resume Dec. 21 in Vienna, Austria. Tehran since has restarted uranium conversion, a precursor to enrichment. Concern that Iran may be pursuing a nuclear weapons program has strained relations between Tehran and Washington, and the United States has imposed unilateral sanctions on Iran, preventing American companies from doing business in the country. The United States also is pushing for Tehran to be hauled before the U.N. Security Council, where it could face economic sanctions for violating a nuclear arms control treaty. Iran maintains its nuclear program is designed only to generate electricity. On Sunday, Iran opened the door for U.S. help in building a nuclear power plant - a move designed to ease American suspicions about the program. In Israel, a close U.S. ally, officials said Monday they would not rule out a military strike if Iran advances in efforts to develop nuclear weapons. ElBaradei and the IAEA received the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, Norway, on Saturday, for their efforts to control the spread of nuclear weapons. When accepting the award, ElBaradei said the international community is ``losing patience'' with Iran over its nuclear program. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 6 AFP: US cool to call for security guarantees for Iran Mon Dec 12, 5:01 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States poured cold water on a call by the head of the UN nuclear watchdog to provide Iran" /> Iranwith US security assurances if Tehran forswears development of nuclear weapons. Deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said Washington backed efforts by EU members Britain, France and Germany to wean Iran off its suspected nuclear ambitions with economic and other incentives. Ereli told reporters that all dealings with Tehran should focus on "a consistent and established pattern of Iranian misbehavior and Iranian violation of its commitments and Iranian deception. "And before anybody asks the United States to do something, it's up to Iran to answer the questions, act like a responsible member of the international community, and stop violating its agreements with the EU-3 and others." Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) urged the Americans on Monday to put US security assurances on the table with Iran like they have done in similar talks with North Korea" /> North Korea. "I see security assurances provided by the US as part of the solution," ElBaradei told reporters in Stockholm two days after picking up this year's Nobel peace prize in Oslo. "I hope that as the negotiations with the European Union" /> European Unionwill resume that the US at some point will be more engaged," he said. ElBaradei spoke a day after Iran, which denies seeking a nuclear bomb, said a planned meeting later this month with Britain, France and Germany would be decisive for negotiations on the crisis. Analysts have suggested that US security guarantees could be crucial to Iran with American troops operating in two of its neighbors, Iraq" /> Iraqin the west and Afghanistan" /> Afghanistanin the east. The United States has said it was willing to provide written security assurances to North Korea to further six-party talks aimed at reining in Pyongyang's much-more-advanced nuclear arms program. But Ereli said that as far as Iran goes, "The question is not, 'Why does the United States do A, and why doesn't the United States do B?' and, 'Oh, gee whiz, if only the United States would do this, we wouldn't have a problem.' "Our response to security guarantees is ... let's see Iran do what Iran has steadfastly refused to do for almost half a dozen (IAEA) Board of Governors resolutions," he said. "Let's see Iran address the concerns and answer the questions of the international community." A senior State Department official, able to speak more bluntly on condition of anonymity, dismissed the entire issue of security assurances as a smoke screen for the Iranians. "Diplomatic niceties aside, these guys are bent on developing a nuclear weapon and they are going to stop at nothing to do it," he said. "And so us giving them security guarantees at this point is not going to change that." Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 7 Korea.net: South, North Korea begin cabinet talks Tuesday [Dynamic Korea, Gateway to Korea] [ ] Date--> December 12, 2005 A four-day inter-Korean ministerial-level meeting opens on Tuesday (Dec. 13) on the southern resort island of Jeju, as South Korea hopes to persuade the North to reaffirm unimplemented agreements reached during previous meetings. The South has also expressed hope that the talks will provide momentum for the six-nation talks on the North's nuclear programs predicted to resume in mid-January. ¡°We will call on North Korea to assess the inter-Korean achievements made so far and agree on detailed measures for further implementation of previous agreements,¡± Kim Chun-sig, the South's spokesman for the talks, told reporters in a briefing on Monday. ¡°Secondly, we will put forward our blueprint for further improving inter-Korean relations and pursuing peace and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula and discuss them sincerely with the North,¡± said Kim, who is also director of the Unification Ministry's inter-Korean exchanges and cooperation bureau. The agenda also includes humanitarian issues such as the repatriation of South Korean prisoners of wars (POWs) and abductees after the 1950-53 Korean War, and some issues regarding inter-Korean economic cooperation, Kim said. While refusing to reveal negotiation details ahead of the talks, Kim said that the South has some leverage to press the North to meet the South's demands. The ministerial talks, the 17th of its kind, follows the 15th last June in Seoul and the 16th in Pyongyang in September. Unification Minister Chung Dong-young leads the South's delegation to the talks. The Northern delegation is headed by Kwon Ho-ung, a senior Cabinet councilor who was chief delegate at previous talks. The North Korean delegates will fly directly from Pyongyang to Jeju Island. On the sidelines of the talks, South Korea hopes to push for the six-nation talks whose prospects seem to have clouded due to recent friction between North Korea and the United States over financial sanctions. Another pending issue is inter-Korean general-level military talks, which Kim said can be held within the year if the North agrees, as the two sides have already discussed the agenda during working-level meetings. webmaster@korea.net]--> Dynamic Korea Brand managed by Korea.net The official homepage of the Korean government provides daily news on South Korea, relations with North Korea, map of Korea, all about general korea information If you have any questions or comments about this website, please contact us at webmaster@korea.net Copyright ¨Ï 1999-2005 Korean Overseas Information Services by?KOREA.NET All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 8 Korea.net: Korea, China join hands to break through nuclear impasse [ ] Date--> December 12, 2005 [' '] KUALA LUMPUR _ In a meeting on the sidelines of the ASEAN+3 Summit that opened here Monday (Dec. 12), President Roh Moo-hyun and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao reaffirmed their close cooperation to break through the nuclear impasse. North Korea and the United States, along with South Korea, China, Japan and Russia, have held five rounds of talks in Beijing since 2003 to find a peaceful solution to the nuclear issue which surfaced in late 2002. But the last round of talks ended with little progress due to a couple of new stumbling blocks between the two main antagonists. ¡°The six-party talks have reached a very important juncture,¡± Wen was quoted as telling Roh during the 50-minute talks. ¡°We should try hard to see a good conclusion through close cooperation between the two countries.¡± Seoul's top diplomat expected the six-party nuclear talks would resume in January, although the proposed get-together of chief delegates from the six nations in Jeju, South Korea's scenic island resort, may be difficult to make happen. ¡°I hope the six-party talks will resume by the end of January at the latest,¡± Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ban Ki-moon told reporters before the Roh-Wen meeting. ¡°But the Jeju meeting seems to be technically impossible at the moment.¡± In the meantime, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's repeated visit to a war shrine was another major topic in the Roh-Wen talks, according to officials who were present at the meeting. Wen strongly accused Koizumi of endangering cooperation among East Asian nations with his visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, which prompted the South Korean and Chinese leaders to cancel a three-way meeting on the sidelines of the ASEAN+3 Summit. ¡°The repeated visits to the shrine hurt the feelings of Korean and Chinese people very much and put a lot of obstacles to China-Japan and South Korea-Japan relations,¡± Wen told Roh. The two leaders, however, displayed deep satisfaction at the rapid development in the South Korea-China ties. They agreed to strengthen relations in various fields from trade and joint economic projects to culture and other personnel exchanges, said Chung Woo-sung, Roh's foreign policy advisor. webmaster@korea.net]--> Dynamic Korea Brand managed by Korea.net The official homepage of the Korean government provides daily news on South Korea, relations with North Korea, map of Korea, all about general korea information Privacy Policy - Terms of Use This site managed by The Korean Overseas Information Services(KOIS). If you have any questions or comments about this website, please contact us at webmaster@korea.net Copyright ¨Ï 1999-2005 Korean Overseas Information Services by?KOREA.NET All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 9 Korea.net: IAEA chief expecting invitation from North Korea [ ] Date--> December 12, 2005 The head of a U.N. nuclear watchdog said North Korea is preparing to invite him to visit the country, three years after it threw out the agency's inspectors. ¡°North Korea said that it would invite me back at an appropriate time. They said that last month,¡± Mohamed ElBaradei, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told a news conference in Oslo, where he and the agency were to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. He did not give details. Any move by North Korea to bring back U.N. nuclear inspectors would be viewed as conciliatory at a time when Pyongyang is threatening to suspend talks on dismantling its nuclear weapons programs. webmaster@korea.net]--> Dynamic Korea Brand managed by Korea.net The official homepage of the Korean government provides daily news on South Korea, relations with North Korea, map of Korea, all about general korea information Privacy Policy - Terms of Use This site managed by The Korean Overseas Information Services(KOIS). If you have any questions or comments about this website, please contact us at webmaster@korea.net Copyright ¨Ï 1999-2005 Korean Overseas Information Services by?KOREA.NET All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 FCNL: Nuclear Calendar December 13, 2005 Week of Dec. 12 House-Senate conference committee completes the defense appropriations bill, H.R. 2863(tentative). Broadcast and webcast on C-SPAN. Week of Dec. 12 Missile Defense Agency conducts a flight test (FT-1) of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, but it will not include an intercept attempt. Reagan Test Site, Kwajalein Atoll, Marshall Islands (tentative) Week of Dec. 12 Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran meets with U.S. officials to discuss U.S.-Indian nuclear cooperation. Washington Dec. 13 10 a.m., Thomas Graham, Bipartisan Security Group; Michael Krepon, Stimson Center; Suzanne Spaulding, Harbour Group; and Jonathan Granoff, Global Security Institute, "Space Weaponization – Security and Proliferation Implications," 1537 Longworth House Office Building, Washington Dec. 13 House-Senate conference committee files the conference report on the defense authorization bill, H.R. 1815, which includes the nuclear weapons programs of the Energy Department (tentative). Dec. 14 9-10 a.m., Rep. David Hobson, "How Congress Changed Administration Policy on the Bunker Buster Bomb: A Case Study in Effective Oversight," Center for American Progress, 1333 H St., N.W., Tenth Floor, Washington. RSVP onlineor call (202) 741-6246. Dec. 14-15 Linton Brooks, National Nuclear Security Administration, and other speakers, "Nuclear and Non-Nuclear Forces in 21st-Century Deterrence: Implementing the New Triad," sponsored by Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis and Fletcher School, Tufts University. Grand Hyatt Washington Hotel, 1000 H St., N.W., Washington. RSVP online. Dec. 15 Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and Russian Atomic Energy Minister Alexander Rumyantsev submit to President Bush and Russian President Putin a second joint report on cooperation in nuclear security. Dec. 15 or 16 House floor action on the conference report on the defense authorization bill, H.R. 1815, which includes the nuclear weapons programs of the Energy Department. Broadcast and webcast on C-SPAN. Dec. 16 8:30-10:30 a.m., Charles Duelfer, Transformational Space, "Saddam's Relationship to WMD," Wilson Center, Reagan Building, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Fifth Floor, Washington. RSVP by email. Dec. 16 9:30-11 a.m., "The Six Party Talks and Beyond: Cooperative Threat Reduction and North Korea," Center for Strategic and International Studies, Room B1, 1800 K St., N.W., Washington. RSVP onlineor call (202) 457-8716. Dec. 16 Congress adjourns for the year (tentative). Dec. 18 35th anniversary of "Baneberry," the underground nuclear test at the Nevada Test Site which released a large cloud of radioactivity 10,000 feet above the ground Dec. 19 Noon, Rear Adm. Alan Hicks, Deputy Director for Combat Systems and Weapons U.S. Navy, "Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System," Army & Navy Club, Second Floor Ballroom, 901 17th St., N.W., Washington. RSVP by emailor call (202) 296-9655. Dec. 20 8:30-10 a.m., David Koplow, Georgetown Law, and Jared Silberman, Department of the Navy, "The Moscow Theater Incident and Other Uses of Chemical Incapacitants: What Is Permitted Under International Law?" Center for Nonproliferation Studies, 1111 19th St., N.W., 12th Floor, Washington. RSVP by emailor call (202) 464-6000, ext. 5133. Dec. 21 European Union-Iranian talks continue on Iran's nuclear program (possible). Dec. 25 Christmas Dec. 26 Christmas observed (holiday) and Hanukkah Dec. 31 Defense Department submits to Congress a final space posture review of national security space policy and strategy (Public Law 108-375, Sec. 911). Dec. Energy Department selects a contractorfor the Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM. 2006 An email version of the Nuclear Calendar is published every Monday morning when Congress is in session. To subscribe click here, or send an email to nuclearcalendar-subscribe@fcnl.org The editor is David Culp. The publication is made possible by generous contributions from the Colombe Foundation, the Compton Foundation, the Educational Foundation of America, the Steven and Michele Kirsch Foundation, the Ploughshares Fund, the Lydia B. Stokes Foundation, the Town Creek Foundation, and the individual contributors and supporters of the Friends Committee on National Legislation and the FCNL Education Fund. We encourage readers to copy and distribute the Nuclear Calendar. When doing so, please include the following credit: "Reprinted from the Nuclear Calendar, published by the Friends Committee on National Legislation and the FCNL Education Fund." ©1998-2005 FCNL | 245 Second Street NE, Washington, DC 20002 | 202-547-6000 | Toll-free: 800-630-1330 | Privacy Policy | Contact ***************************************************************** 11 Lew Rockwell.com: Googling World Energy Reserves by Bill Walker A lot of concerned people emailed me to say that we MUST be running out of energy, because so many authoritative-looking people say so on TV. Here’s the result of ten minutes of Googling (it will take longer if you beer-Google) on "World Energy Reserves": Conventional fossil fuels (from British Petroleum, "reserves available at existing economic and operational conditions," i.e. not oil shales or other more expensive petroleum ores): Oil: 161.9 billion tonnes (annual use 3.8 billion tonnes) Natural Gas: 179.5 trillion cubic meters (annual use 2.7 trillion cubic meters) Coal: 909 billion tonnes (annual use 2.8 billion tonnes) Nuclear fission (from DOEestimates): Uranium: ~11.5 million tonnes Thorium: ~34.5 million tonnes One metric ton (tonne) of uranium completely fissioned equals approximately 91 million tonnes of oil. So our 46 million tonnes of nuclear fuel is roughly equal to 4.186 trillion tonnes of oil, or 1101 years of world oil usage. (Or perhaps "hydrogen usage," or "beamed-energy usage" would be more accurate; while nuclear energy could be used to make gasoline out of coal or oil shale, if we do it for a thousand years we shall find ourselves running low on oxygen!) These are just the reserves available with our current technology at our current prices (actually, with 1970s technology… the US hasn’t started construction of any reactors since 1978). It does assume that we actually recycle the nuclear fuel efficiently, instead of continuing Jimmy Carter’s policy of forcing the power companies to declare the uranium and plutonium in fuel rods to be "waste." Currently, US nuclear power plants are forced to operate at 0.5 % fuel efficiency, and do not breed more fuel out of thorium. Then the enforced inefficiency (and potential danger, from piles of unrecycled fuel) is used to justify the 12-billion-dollar boondoggle called Yucca Mountain. It is just possible that nuclear power might get a teensy bit cheaper as time went on if some of the plants were allowed to be 150% efficient 21st-century fast-neutron breeders instead of 0.5% efficient 1970s relics. It is also possible that electric power might be cheaper if it were produced by competing free-market companies instead of government-granted monopolies. Of course this would lead to the inherent problems of unrestricted capitalism. For instance, if there had been competing electric companies in New Orleans during Katrina, it would have caused terrible inequalities. Not everyone’s power would have gone off and stayed off for months (in fact no one’s power would have stayed off for months, because they would have switched companies). The same would be true in wartime or other emergency; the inefficient duplications of capitalism would mean that not all power would be knocked out in a city at the same time. Unthinkable, of course (though in the early days of electric power, there were no monopolies, and users often owned the wires and bought power from competing power plants…). Fusion: ah, now the concerned emails start flowing in earnest. "We don’t know how to use fusion, and it’s impossible for mere humans to invent a way." Wrong. There is already an operational fusion reactor powering the global economy, and it produces 28 trillion times more raw energy than all man-made energy sources combined. So even if some future "UN NRC" forever bans the helium-3 + deuterium reactor, we can still expand our energy use by a factor of 28 trillion, and maintain it for the next five billion years or so. Yes, it would be incredibly inefficient compared to artificial fusion reactors, but using 1960s nuclear rocket technologywe could surround the Sun with orbiting solar collectors by the time we run out of uranium on the Earth (there’s the small problem of finding enough silicon for the solar cells, but the fusion reactors can make it out of Jupiter’s hydrogen… oh, right, we’re pretending that fusion can’t be done. We would have to settle for a few million times the present world energy output if we restrict ourselves to using the asteroid belt and minor planets. But only if the "Leif Erickson gene" is lost and we never leave this particular natural fusion reactor to visit others…). Even today a few percent of the world’s electric power comes from the sun’s fusion energy, at such sites as Three Gorges Damand European windmill farms. And much as I love to tease solar cell enthusiasts (especially at night), solar cells get better almost as fast as computers. They’ll be ready for prime time by the time we have to use the monoliths to make the silicon out of Jupiter… There are already thousands of cost-effective, mass-produced man-made fusion reactors as well; they are fueled by lithium deuteride. Unfortunately, they are all owned by governments (or perhaps government-funded "terrorist groups"), and they are sitting on top of missiles or in bombers, waiting to slaughter millions of people apiece at the whim of various politicians. But these fusion reactors (popularly know as "H-bombs") are not intrinsically evil. While they are not suited to steady production of electric power, they can be used for many valuable, even life-saving industrial purposes. One of the essential requirements for successful environmental stewardship is to keep the ecology from being blown up by asteroid impacts. The existing 25-megaton city-killers would be quite suitable for deflecting extinction asteroids. They would also be useful for forcing asteroids and comets to hit the CO2 polar caps of Mars and induce Global Warming there. If all the CO2 polar caps on Mars were sublimated, the little planet would have an atmosphere half as thick as Earth’s. That’s plenty good for green plants (which will quickly convert much of the CO2 to oxygen, of course), so you Luddites who don’t think that anyone can invent a fusion reactor will have somewhere to build your log cabins and plow behind your genetically-altered Mars Mules. (The Earth will long have been 99% powered by He-3 fusion reactors, so you’ll have to move to maintain your belief system.) But enough "no-technological-progress-ever" nonsense. The fact is that the world is full of young engineers, and new energy sources are being constructed all the time. The Russians are using new fuel designs to beat their nuclear swords into economic plowshares(and breed fuel out of abundant thorium at the same time). The Chinese, Indians, Koreans, Japanese, etc. etc. are all into improved nuclear power technologies. Almost the only nations not likely to build new-technology nuclear plants on a large scale are the US foreign-aid dictatorships in Africa, and the US itself. Even oil-rich Iran is moving into nuclear energy as fast as it can. The US political class can (and does) make energy vastly more expensive for Americans. They can invade oil-producing nations like Iraq and shut down their oil industry. They can (and have) prevent Americans from building any new oil refineries or nuclear reactors for decades. But they can’t alter the geology of the Earth, or the laws of physics, and they can’t stop people in rogue states that really do have WMDsfrom doing anything they damn well please. A quick look at the world’s nuclear research programsshows that there are many nations that have breeder reactor technology in commercial prototypes already… and several of these countries are fresh out of socialist economic nonexistence. A few more years of even the most tainted capitalism, and they’ll have nuclear reactors that are at least 60-70% fuel-efficient, compared with our 0.5% "Jimmy Carter Specials." The nations that want energy will get energy, whether the US political class approves or not. This all assumes, too, that no one ever invents any new energy sources. This assumes that we know everything about Physics, mining technology, transportation systems, nuclear reactor design, etc. After all, we’ve had nuclear power for… less than a human lifetime. Surely we know everything by now, right? The truth is that Googling can’t find most "World Energy Reserves." Energy reserves are created by human minds out of the raw materials of nature. Most of these reserves will be the creations of the minds of people that aren’t even born yet. All we can do on Google is find out the rock-bottom LOWER limit for our energy reserves. The lower limit is enough to build interstellar civilizations and go on to find the "World Energy Reserves" of the Milky Way. I wonder where the real upper limit is? December 12, 2005 Bill Walker [send him mail] works in HIV and gene therapy research in Rochester, Minnesota. Copyright © 2005 LewRockwell.com ***************************************************************** 12 IPS-English MIDDLE EAST-NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: Israel should not Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:51:01 -0800 AP IP=20 MIDDLE EAST-NUCLEAR PROGRAMME: Israel should not preach to others, says U= AE paper Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM) DUBAI, Dec. 12 (WAM) - A leading United Arab Emirates (UAE) daily has war= ned that Israel will be the loser if it refuses to eliminate its nuclear arsenal. =94Israel will be able to feel secure only if it eliminates its nuclea= r warheads and agrees to regional nuclear disarmament. Otherwise, every nat= ion in the region will try to acquire the technology one way or another and Israel will be one among the many losers of such a race,=94 argued the Dubai-based 'Gulf News' in an editorial on Monday. =94Israel's orchestrated campaign against Iran's nuclear capability ca= nnot gain any sympathy because those who call for chastity should not, at the same time, be the world's most adulterous. =94No one in the Middle East wants to see another nuclear power in the region, but no one also can accept lectures from Israel on this subject. Israel, which according to most conservative estimates has more than 250 nuclear warheads, and is capable of delivering them to places as far as Morocco and Uganda, cannot stop others from acquiring the technology.=94 The paper said since Israel has not signed the Non Proliferation Treat= y (NPT), hence it cannot be taken seriously when it talks about the morals = and ethics of complying with NPT. In the newspaper's view if Israel does not feel secure with Iran's ambitions to acquire the technology for uranium enrichment, no one in the Middle East, including Iran, feels secure with Israel denying internation= al inspection of its nuclear facilities. (WAM) =20 ***************************************************************** 13 Xinhua: ASEAN leaders sign declaration on ASEAN Charter www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-12-12 20:14:04 KUALA LUMPUR, Dec. 12 (Xinhuanet) -- Leaders of the 10 ASEAN members signed the Kuala Lumpur Declaration on the Establishment of the ASEAN Charter at their 11th summit held here Monday. The declaration says it recognizes the ASEAN Declaration (Bangkok Declaration) of 1967 "as the founding document of ASEAN that represents the collective will of the nations of Southeast Asia." It says that mutual respect for the independence, sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity and national identity of ASEAN members "has fostered a positive environment for the steady development of an ASEAN Community to meet the challenges of the future." It expresses the desire to realize the ASEAN Community as envisaged in the Declaration of ASEAN Concord II and its Plans of Action and Roadmap. While emphasizing the importance of having an appropriate ASEAN institutional framework to meet the challenges of realizing the ASEAN Community, the declaration says that the ASEAN Charter will "serve as a firm foundation for ASEAN in the years ahead and to facilitate community building towards an ASEAN Community and beyond." It says that the charter will reaffirm principles and goals contained in ASEAN's milestone agreements, which include promotion of community interest for the benefit of all ASEAN members, narrowing the development gaps among the member countries, and continuing to foster a community of caring societies and promote a common regional identity. They also include ensuring that countries in the region live at peace with one another and with the world at large in a just, democratic and harmonious environment; commitment to strengthen ASEAN's competitiveness to deepen and broaden ASEAN's internal economic integration and linkages with the world economy; and renunciation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction and avoidance of arms race. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission: PRESS RELEASES [Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission / Commission Canadienne de [Government of Canada] December 09, 2005 News Releases - CNSC Announces Decision on Amendment of Uranium Mine and Mill Operating Licence for COGEMA Resources Inc.’s McClean Lake Operation December 09, 2005 News Releases - CNSC Announces Decision on Renewal of Waste Facility Operating Licence for Rio Algom Limited’s facilities located at Elliot Lake December 07, 2005 Hearing & Meeting Documents - Record of Proceedings - Official Consolidation of Nuclear Installations Designated Under the Nuclear Liability Act and the Terms and Amounts of Basic Insurance Required (PDF) December 07, 2005 Hearing & Meeting Documents - SRB Technologies (Canada) Inc. - Transcript - Application for the renewal of Class IB Nuclear Substance Processing Facility Operating Licence in Pembroke (PDF) [Highlights] + Proposed amendments to the Class II Nuclear Facilities and Prescribed Equipment Regulations and Nuclear Substances and Radiation Devices Regulations + 2004-2005 Annual Report of the CNSC and 2004-2005 Annual Report of the Commission Tribunal Last Updated: 2005-11-08 [to top] ***************************************************************** 15 Guardian Unlimited: Gov't Report: $50-Plus Oil Here to Stay From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday December 13, 2005 12:01 AM By H. JOSEF HEBERT Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP)- Oil prices will persist near or above $50 a barrel for years and force a shift to more fuel-efficient cars and alternative fuels, the government said Monday, discarding earlier predictions that costs would drop to around $30 a barrel. The Energy Department forecast was more positive on natural gas prices. It said they would retreat from the recent spikes - to more than $14 per thousand cubic feet - and settle at under $5 in the long term as demand weakens, especially for electricity production. The analysis reflected a significant change from the department's projections a year ago when it predicted oil prices in constant dollars - not counting normal inflation - would retreat in the long term and settle at about $31 a barrel by 2025. The report issued Monday said oil prices will remain in the mid-$40 range or higher in coming years and average $54 a barrel by 2025, increasing to an average of $57 a barrel by 2030 when adjusted for inflation. Crude oil prices have been hovering around $60 a barrel, briefly soaring as high as $70 earlier this year. The long-term forecast, which attempts to gauge the nation's energy picture 20 years from now, assumed no major policy shift such as future restrictions on so-called ``greenhouse'' gases - including carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels - to combat climate change. Nor did it assume the government will allow oil development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, which supporters said would produce a flow of 1 million additional barrels of oil a day by 2025, adding substantially to domestic production. A proposal to open the refuge to drilling currently is being heatedly debated in Congress. Any major policy shift such as curbing fossil fuel use to counter global warming ``would change the picture dramatically,'' especially in the use of coal for generating electricity, said Guy Caruso, head of the Energy Information Administration, the Energy Department's statistical agency that issued the report. Demand for crude oil and natural gas is expected to continue to increase, but not as sharply as had been projected a year ago. And the report predicted a growth in electricity production from nuclear power plants with construction of at least six large reactors, beginning after 2014. A year ago the agency said it saw no new reactors on the horizon. At the same time, the agency said energy production would result in a steady 1.2 percent a year increase in the amount of heat-trapping carbon dioxide that will flow into the atmosphere. Annual carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels will be 28 percent higher in 2025 than they are today, the EIA said. With oil prices expected to remain high, the use of unconventional transportation fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel will grow in acceptance, the agency said. The EIA report also projected a sharp increase in the use of more efficient hybrid gasoline-electric cars and trucks and more fuel efficient diesel technology. ``We will see increases in fuel efficiency ... all directly related to the (new) price assumptions'' for oil, Caruso said at a news conference. U.S. demand for oil is expected to be 2 million barrels a day less than what the EIA projected a year ago, or about 26 million barrels a day, 6 million barrels more that what is used today. The EIA projected that U.S. reliance on oil imports will remain about the same as today with the country in 2025 projected to be importing about 60 percent of the oil and refined products it uses. A year ago, the EIA said these imports would grow to 68 percent by 2025. The agency said it added about $21 to the projected future price of a barrel of crude because analysts no longer believe today's tight global oil market would ease in the coming decades. This is primarily due to a belief that OPEC oil production, now 30 million barrels a day, is not expected to grow as much as had been expected. The EIA projects OPEC production at 44 million barrels a day in 2025, about 11 million barrels less than had been predicted a year ago. ``The oil is there,'' said Caruso, dismissing suggestions by some oil economists that global oil reserves may be peaking. But Caruso said, ``It appears the pace of investment in oil production is less than what was anticipated a year ago'' among OPEC countries. He did not name specific countries. The price projection used in the EIA report was for imported low-sulfur light crude, reflecting a slightly higher cost than for a variety of other types of crude used by U.S. refineries. However, the year-to-year trend lines are similar. The EIA's long-term energy outlook report also: -Scaled back the expected growth of liquefied natural gas imports into the United States. It said an increase of worldwide demand for LNG will reduce the amount coming to U.S. facilities. -Said coal would remain the primary fuel for producing electricity through 2030. -Predicted that despite higher oil costs and some increases in efficiency, overall U.S. energy demand would increase by 1.1 percent a year between now and 2030. --- On the Net: Energy Information Administration: http://www.eia.doe.gov Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 16 Keep the Guard Posts at Three Mile Island Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:53:50 -0800 Keep the Guard Posts at Three Mile Island December 12, 2005 Dear Editor: Exelon's decision to remove its security posts from the entrances at Three Mile Island (TMI) is ill-conceived and not in the best interest of employees or the local community TMI's assertion that the posts are vulnerable (which requires them to be removed) is a contradiction. If the posts are vulnerable, then so are the bridges. Why would anyone want to leave the front door to a nuclear power plant wide open like it was on 9/11? Does Exelon really believe that the loss of the North and South Bridges will not affect plant operations? Part of the Island¹s emergency plan is to use water from local fire departments to facilitate safe shutdown or put out a fire. In a security challenge, fire, or natural disaster situation, the security force is set up to rely on local, state and federal responses. On July 2, 2003 a fire in an active transformer yard required off-site emergency assistance. TMI's on-site fire brigade realized they needed help from local firefighters. Emergency responders from Dauphin, Lancaster, Lebanon and York counties were called to put out the transformer fire. According to Exelon spokesman Ralph DeSantis, "We had a tremendous response from local fire companies." How would those firefighters access the Island if the bridges were destroyed or merely blocked by a disabled vehicle that could take hours to remove? Abandoning these posts was initiated by costs. TMI is unique among reactors in the Exelon fleet because it has two entrances. This fact made Three Mile Island stick out like a sore thumb on the budget spread sheet. It¹s doubtful that more vehicle patrols will be added to ensure the gates are monitored. Manpower will most likely be reduced, while existing patrols will make periodic checks of the gates. But this can only occur if the Nuclear Regulatory Commission allows them to leave their assigned areas. This is a risky and unnecessary trade off. I hope the military does not do away with officers placed at the entrances of installations guarding nuclear weapons because they are vulnerable, as Exelon asserts they are at TMI. If the gate guards are vulnerable, the proactive approach would be to harden the positions and increase staffing. The existing posts monitor the bridges and provide an excellent early warning system. Their visibility sends a clear and distinct signal to both internal and external security threats. Sincerely, Eric Epstein Lower Paxton Township (717)-541-1101 ericepstein@comcast.net Mr. Epstein is the Chairman of Three Mile Island Alert, Inc., a safe-energy organization based in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and founded in 1977. TMIA monitors Peach Bottom, Susquehanna, and Three Mile Island nuclear generating stations - tmia.com Attachment Converted: "c:\program files\eudora\attach\Keep TMI guards" ***************************************************************** 17 [NukeNet] Ukraine's Yushchenko Mulls Chernobyl D ump for Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:59:04 -0800 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) ----- Original Message ----- From: Pamela S. Meidell To: Abolition-Global_Council@yahoogroups.com ; Abolition-Caucus@yahoogroups.com ; eu-abolition2000@lists.riseup.net Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 2:08 PM Subject: [abolition-caucus] Ukraine's Yushchenko Mulls Chernobyl Dump for World's Nuclear Waste http://mosnews.com/news/2005/12/09/chernobylwaste.shtml Photo from www.corium.blogspot.ru Ukraine's Yushchenko Mulls Chernobyl Dump for World's Nuclear Waste Created: 09.12.2005 14:31 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 14:31 MSK, 7 hours 35 minutes ago MosNews Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko is ready to analyze and make a political decision on burying nuclear waste from other countries in the Chernobyl zone after scientific approval and a public discussion of the matter, the RBC news agency reports. However, he underscored at a press conference in Chernobyl, the issue should first and foremost be approved by the people. The Ukrainian leader added that the second storage area for the Chernobyl station's nuclear waste would be put into operation in 2010. The catastrophe at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine (then a part of the Soviet Union) on April 26, 1986 is widely regarded as the worst in the history of nuclear power generation. 30 people were killed immediately after the fourth reactor of the plant suffered a catastrophic steam explosion that resulted in a fire, a series of additional explosions, and a nuclear meltdown. Most of the workers who went inside the reactor after the accident had no protective equipment which led to fatal radiation burns. The explosion produced a plume of radioactive debris that drifted over parts of the western USSR, Eastern Europe, and Scandinavia. Large areas of the Ukrainian, Belarusian, and Russian republics of the USSR were contaminated, resulting in the evacuation and resettlement of roughly 200,000 people. A concrete sarcophagus was later erected over the plant, but the area had already been severely polluted. Pamela S. Meidell Director Atomic Mirror P.O. Box 220 Port Hueneme CA 93044 tel: 805 985 5073 fax: 805 856 0341 pamela@atomicmirror.org www.atomicmirror.org Atomic Mirror Reflecting and Transforming Our Nuclear World through the Arts Since 1994 (A Project of the EarthWays Foundation) Official UN NGO Status Part of the Year of Awakening for a Nuclear Free World, August 6, 2005-August 9, 2006 www.abolitionnow.org _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 18 Crain's Detroit Business: CMS Energy to auction nuclear plant near South Haven CMS Energy Corp. (NYSE: CMS) said Dec. 5 it plans to take auction bids for its Palisades plant and hopes to complete a sale in 2007."> By Amy Lane December 12, 2005 Jackson-based CMS Energy Corp. (NYSE: CMS) said Dec. 5 it plans to take auction bids for its Palisades plant and hopes to complete a sale in 2007. The plant, which is owned by CMS utility subsidiary Consumers Energy Co., represents about 18 percent of Consumers’ electricity generating capacity. Located near South Haven, Palisades began commercial operation in 1971. CMS said that any sale will include a long-term agreement between Consumers and the plant’s new owner for the utility to continue purchasing the plant’s power. In 2000, Consumers turned operation of the plant over to Nuclear Management Co., a Hudson, Wis.-based organization formed to operate Midwest nuclear plants. Nuclear Management “has shrunk as other member utilities have sold their plants, and we believe our best course of action is to sell Palisades,” said David Joos, CMS president and CEO, in a news release. CMS has retained Marlborough, Mass.-based Concentric Energy Advisors Inc. to be the auction manager and financial adviser for the sale. Entire contents © 2005 Crain Communications, Inc. ***************************************************************** 19 AFP: Indian PM says nuclear facility separation at 'advanced stage' - Mon Dec 12, 3:20 AM ET NEW DELHI (AFP) - The separation of India's civilian and military nuclear plants, key to a July deal with the United States on nuclear technology sales, is at an "advanced stage," Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has said. Singh was quoted Monday in the Indian press as saying that New Delhi has made rapid progress on identifying those plants to be considered civilian and hence subject to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency" /> (IAEA). The exercise of designating nuclear plants as military or civilian is at "a fairly advanced stage," Singh told reporters flying with him Sunday as he headed to Malaysia to attend three days of meetings with Asian leaders. US President George W. Bush" /> agreed to give India, which is not a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), access to civilian nuclear energy technology under a deal he signed with Singh in July. But India has to first separate its civilian and military nuclear programs, which could mean an effective cap on nuclear weapons production. India tested nuclear weapons in May 1998 -- tests which were matched by rival Pakistan the same month, which sparked concerns of a nuclear arms race in South Asia. Under the US-Indian deal, the US Congress would amend proliferation laws that would allow India to buy advanced nuclear technology once the facilities are separated. "The separation plan must ensure, and the safeguards must confirm, that US-India civil nuclear cooperation does not in any way assist India in manufacturing nuclear weapons," Republican Senator Richard Lugar, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee" /> , said last week. "This is consistent with US obligations under the NPT and with US law." But some Indian security analysts have expressed unease over the move. "What is not clear is how and why the Manmohan Singh regime got into a position wherein New Delhi is ready to be hustled into delivering a plan to separate the civilian and military parts of a wholly-integrated Indian nuclear program that will permanently undercut India's military nuclear options in the future," Bharat Karnad, an analyst at the Center for Policy Research think tank, wrote in the Asian Age newspaper on Monday. Under the July deal, the United States also agreed to lobby allies in the Nuclear Suppliers Group, which controls sales of nuclear technology by advanced countries, for full civilian nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India. But Lugar hinted that if India decides to take a "minimalist" approach and designate only a few facilities as civilian, keeping the rest out of the purview of IAEA inspections, the deal could be affected. "A minimalist approach will likely only delay consideration of this initiative in the US Congress and in the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Or, at worst, it could result in unfavorable action by one or both bodies," he said. The United States and other countries placed sanctions on India and Pakistan after the May 1998 nuclear tests. Many of the sanctions were waived after the September 11, 2001, attacks in the United States as both countries pledged support to Washington in the so-called "war on terror". AFP Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 20 Helsingin Sanomat: Russian environmental activist seeks asylum in Finland International Edition - Foreign Tuesday 13.12.2005 Critic of Sosnovyi Bor power plant feels he is in danger in Russia Renowned Russian environmental activist Sergei Kharitonov is applying for political asylum in Finland. Kharitonov, who has made a reputation for himself by drawing attention to the safety problems at the Sosnovyi Bor nuclear power plant on the southern shore of the Gulf of Finland, says that he is in great danger in Russia. "My persecution is based on the fact that human rights are violated in Russia", Kharitonov says. "The real threat to my life stems from the fact that I have investigated issues of corruption linked with nuclear plants", he says. Helsingin Sanomat last met Kharitonov a year ago at an event sponsored by the environmental organisation Bellona, where he spoke about the shortcomings of safety measures implemented at the Sosnovyi Bor nuclear power plant. In January 2004 Kharitonov visited the Finnish Parliament and spoke to MPs about the matter. Kharitonov submitted his application for asylum in Finland to Finnish authorities in October this year. He spoke to Helsingin Sanomat about matters that he has discussed countless times before both in Russia and in Finland. The difference is that now he is afraid. "I was told that an accident could happen. Attempts were made to get rid of me unofficially - to kill me". Kharitonov also discusses the threats he has received and bribes that he has been offered. "There have been attempts to get documents and other information that I have collected." Kharitonov says that he is a dangerous man from Russia’s point of view, because he has criticised the safety measures in force at the country’s nuclear power plants, and he claims that extensive corruption is involved. Kharitonov, who has worked at the Sosnovyi Bor nuclear power plant, published an extensive report on the plant’s safety along with the environmental organisation Bellona. According to the report, the storage of spent fuel at the plant is haphazard. He worked at the plant for 27 years - most of the time as an operator. His last job there was at the storage site for spent fuel. He was fired in 2000. Under planned legislation, activities of environmental organisations and other civic groups, will come under closer scrutiny in Russia. The proposed law would place restrictions on activities of non-governmental organisations, and limit their right to receive financial aid from abroad. Kharitonov does not believe that the tougher line has had much of an effect on his activities. He is also criticical of the activities of Russian environmental groups, saying that they focus primarily on internal problems within the organisations. "The environmental organisations are restricting their own activities themselves, because they have lost their contact with the grass-roots level", Kharitonov ponders. "When civic groups start to take part in politics, they become marginalised. Getting political asylum in Finland is very difficult, as asylum is granted to fewer than one percent of applicants. Last year 29 people were given asylum, out of a total of 3,861 who applied. Ten of those who got asylum last year were Russian citizens, six were from Azerbaijan, and four were from Tajikistan. The number of asylum applicants has grown somewhat in recent years. In 2000, 3,170 people applied for asylum in Finland, and in 2003 there were 3,221. The applicants have to wait between six months to a year and a half for their applications to be processed. Kharitonov does not want to speculate on his chances of getting asylum in Finland. "It is undoubtedly a difficult decision. If Finland grants me asylum, it would be evidence that human rights are violated in Russia", he ponders. Russia wants to extend life of Sosnovyi Bor nuclear plant through 2026 (17.5.2006) --> Helsingin Sanomat 12.12.2005 - TODAY ***************************************************************** 21 Las Vegas SUN: Support for Utah nuke site wanes Today: December 12, 2005 at 9:50:5 PST By Benjamin Grove Sun Washington Bureau For weeks speculation has swirled around the comprehensive new national nuclear waste policy being drafted by the Energy Department, and for now, kept under wraps. But nuclear power companies seem to know all about it -- enough at least, to know that they won't be needing that proposed temporary nuclear waste dump site in Utah, after all. Seven nuclear companies have been investing in the Utah site for years, saying they need a place to dump their waste until the long-delayed, permanent repository at Yucca Mountain is built. But last week, two of the seven utilities unexpectedly withdrew their support for the Utah site. Southern Co. pulled out entirely; Minneapolis-based Xcel Energy, a one-third partner in the project, froze any future investment. Why the sudden change of heart? The two companies have had extensive meetings with Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, who opposes the Utah dump, it was revealed in a letter from Xcel to Hatch last week. But it's not clear what Hatch -- or perhaps, the Energy Department -- has been telling the company to convince it to drop its support for the Utah site. In the letter to Hatch, Xcel President Richard Kelly said the company was "encouraged" by the Energy Department's new plan to use a new waste container system that "will simplify the design of Yucca and should accelerate the process for acceptance and removal of used fuel from Minnesota." The letter also embraces the Energy Department's secretive new plan, calling it legislation that would promote a "new initiative to begin moving waste early in the next decade." "We are also pleased to note that Congress seems well disposed to quickly consider such legislation upon introduction," Kelly wrote. Support in Congress? For a plan that hasn't been made public yet? That's not a surprise, Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency Director Bob Loux said. The department won't unveil its plan until it is sure it has solid support in the House and Senate, Loux said. The Xcel letter concludes with the company's promise to Hatch to maintain its investment freeze in the Utah site as long as there is progress on the other waste initiatives under discussion, including waste recycling and, notably, "federally sponsored interim storage." In other words, people in high places have given reasonable assurance to Xcel that the company doesn't need to pay for the Goshute site because the government is pursuing a temporary federal dump site. Where? At Yucca? Or some other site or sites? The Energy Department won't say -- not publicly at least. Benjamin Grove can be reached at (202) 662-7436 or at grove@lasvegassun.com. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 22 [du-list] Radium 226 flowing from the Piketon/Portsmouth, Ohio Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:03:31 -0800 "Radium-226 in Creek Foam / Water from the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant," a new report by The RadioActivist Campaign (TRAC), is now available at www.radioactivist.org/new.html. Citizen activists collected foam and water flowing from the Portsmouth, Ohio Gaseous Diffusion Plant in November 2003. They identified radioactivity in the sample at 100 times the normal background level, using simple Geiger counter methods. That elevated radioactivity was confirmed by the Department of Energy's site operator, the United States Enrichment Corporation. TRAC has identified the radioactive source as radium-226. The new report provides TRAC's review methods, conclusions, and implications, including possible explanations for the elevated radium-226. Please feel free to re-distribute this e-mail. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to radioactivist@radioactivist.org with unsubscribe in the subject line. Moon Callison Outreach The RadioActivist Campaign 360.275.1351 www.radioactivist.org *************** Support The RadioActivist Campaign with a secure on-line donation at www.radioactivist.org/support.html. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 23 [NukeNet] PLUTONIUM LAUNCH ACCIDENT COULD HAVE GLOBAL Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 18:24:40 -0800 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) > Bruce Gagnon, its coordinator [ http://www.space4peace.org ], says "one thing we know is that space technology can and does fail and >when you mix deadly plutonium into the equation, you are asking for catastrophe." >NASA, he charges, is "playing nuclear Russian roulette with the public." >Indeed, NASA is planning a series of additional launches of plutonium-fueled space probes and other >shots involving nuclear material. And under its $3 billion Project Prometheus program, the agency is >working on nuclear reactors to be carried up by rockets for placement on the moon and the building and >launching of actual atomic-propelled rockets. >Indeed, accidents have already happened in the U.S. space nuclear program. Of the 25 U.S. space >missions using plutonium fuel, three have undergone accidents, admits the NASA EIS on New Horizons. >That's a 1-in-8 record. PLUTONIUM LAUNCH ACCIDENT COULD HAVE GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS By Karl Grossman NASA is again threatening the lives of people on Earth. On January 11, the window opens for a launch from Cape Canaveral of a rocket lofting a space probe with 24 pounds of plutonium fuel on board. Plutonium is considered the most deadly radioactive substance. Once it separates from the rocket, the probe, on what NASA calls its New Horizons mission, would move through space powered by conventional chemical fuel. The plutonium is in a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) that is to provide on-board electricity for the probe's instruments ­a mere 180 watts when it gets to its destination of Pluto. Until after the probe leaves the rocket and breaks from the Earth's gravitational pull, the plutonium endangers life on Earth. Because a fatal dose of plutonium is just a millionth of a gram, anyone breathing just the tiniest particle of plutonium dispersed in an accident could die. NASA has divided the sequence into four phases before what it calls "escape" of the probe from the Earth's gravity. It is most concerned about the launch phase. NASA's Final Environmental Impact Statement for the New Horizons Mission (EIS) says there is "about 6 percent probability" of an accident during launch. If plutonium is released in a launch accident­and NASA says there is a 1-in-620 chance that­ it could spread far and wide. Some could drift up to 62 miles from the launch site at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, says the EIS. And "a portion" of the plutonium could go well beyond that, says NASA, and "two-thirds of the estimated radiological consequences would occur within the global population." That's because "fine particles less than a micron in diameter" of the plutonium "could be transported beyond 62 miles and become well mixed in the troposphere, and have been assumed to potentially affect persons living within a latitude band from approximately 20-degrees North to 30-degrees North," says NASA. The troposphere is the atmosphere five to nine miles overhead. The 20- to 30-degree band goes through parts of the Caribbean, across North Africa and the Mideast and then India and China and Hawaii and other Pacific Islands and then Mexico and southern Texas. But life elsewhere on Earth could be impacted if the plutonium-fueled probe falls back to Earth before its "escape" and flight on to Pluto. NASA says the "probability of an accident" releasing plutonium "for the overall mission is estimated to be approximately 1 in 300." An "enormous disaster" could result with the spread of the plutonium, says Dr. Ernest Sternglass, professor emeritus of radiological physics at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine. The issue is how much plutonium is released in respirable particles, he explains. "The problem is it takes so little plutonium," says Dr. Sternglass. The NASA EIS acknowledges that in the event of plutonium release "costs may include: temporary or longer term relocation of residents; temporary or longer term loss of employment; destruction or quarantine of agricultural products.land use restrictions which could affect real estate values, tourism and recreational activities; restrictions or bans on commercial fishing; and public health effects and medical care." The EIS says the cost to decontaminate land on which the plutonium falls would range from "about $241 million to $1.3 billion per square mile." But, it notes, compensation would be subject to the Price-Anderson Act, a U.S. law first enacted in 1957. It sets a cap on how much people can collect for property damage, illnesses and death resulting from a "nuclear incident." Under the Energy Bill passed this year, the cap in the United States was increased to $10 billion. But the cap for damage from a "nuclear incident occurring outside the United States shall not exceed $100 million," the law stipulates. This is the limit in the original Price-Anderson Act. It has never been raised. And it is in violation of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, the basic international law on space ­which the U.S. has signed and was central in drafting­ which declares that "states shall be liable for damage caused by their space objects." Demanding that the New Horizons mission be cancelled is the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space (www.space4peace.org). Bruce Gagnon, its coordinator, says "one thing we know is that space technology can and does fail and when you mix deadly plutonium into the equation, you are asking for catastrophe." NASA, he charges, is "playing nuclear Russian roulette with the public." Indeed, NASA is planning a series of additional launches of plutonium-fueled space probes and other shots involving nuclear material. And under its $3 billion Project Prometheus program, the agency is working on nuclear reactors to be carried up by rockets for placement on the moon and the building and launching of actual atomic-propelled rockets. Disaster may or may not strike on the New Horizons mission but if these nuclear missions are allowed to proceeded, some will inevitably result in accidents dispersing radioactive material. Indeed, accidents have already happened in the U.S. space nuclear program. Of the 25 U.S. space missions using plutonium fuel, three have undergone accidents, admits the NASA EIS on New Horizons. That's a 1-in-8 record. The worst occurred in 1964 and involved, notes the EIS, the SNAP-9A RTG with 2.1 pounds of plutonium fuel. It was to provide electricity to a satellite that failed to achieve orbit and dropped to Earth. The RTG disintegrated in the fall, spreading plutonium widely. Release of that plutonium caused an increase in global lung cancer rates, says Dr. John Gofman, professor emeritus of medical physics at the University of California at Berkeley. After the SNAP-9A accident, NASA pioneered the development of solar energy in space. Now all satellites­ and the International Space Station­are solar-powered. But NASA keeps insisting on plutonium power for space probes­ even as the Rosetta space probe, launched this year by NASA's counterpart, the European Space Agency, with solar power providing all on-board electricity, now heads for a rendezvous with a comet near Jupiter. Along with the U.S. military, which for decades has been planning for the deployment of nuclear-energized weapons in space, NASA seeks wider uses of atomic power above our heads. In its New Horizons EIS, NASA maintains the risks to people from the mission are not so bad in view of a chart it presents titled "Calculated Individual Risk and Probability of Fatality by Various Causes in the United States." The chart lists the probability of getting killed by lightning or in a flood or by a tornado as higher than someone dying of cancer because of plutonium dispersed in New Horizons. Of course, we can't control lightning or floods or tornadoes. These are involuntary assaults. NASA's space nuclear gamble using tax dollars (the cost of New Horizons: $650 million) is being carried out by choice. An additional wrinkle: the Boeing machinists who were to install the New Horizons probe on the Atlas rocket that is to carry it up are on strike­and warning that the company's bringing in of replacement workers poses a safety risk. Because of the strike, other NASA missions at Cape Canaveral have been grounded. But NASA is continuing with the New Horizons launch. "If it's not safe to work on all the other projects with replacement workers, it's irresponsible to continue with New Horizons," says Robert Wood, a spokesperson for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. Gagnon says his organization is "building opposition to New Horizons and all missions that launch nuclear power in space. The public needs to know more about this issue and we need the grassroots to pressure Congress and NASA and others responsible. We say that NASA should be developing alternative, non-nuclear power sources for space travel." Paul Gunter of the Washington, D.C.-based Nuclear Information and Resource Services comments: "The fact that both the planet Pluto and the manmade isotope plutonium are named after the god of hell lends bizarre insight into NASA's fascination with launching this hideous stuff into the heavens at the risk of fouling the very nest of all humankind." New Horizons and the rest of NASA's deadly-dangerous nuclear space operations must be stopped. If space is to be explored, let that be done safely. To destroy a portion of life on Earth to explore space makes no sense. -30- Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, is the author of The Wrong Stuff: The Space Program's Nuclear Threat To Our Planet (Common Courage Press) and wrote and narrates the TV documentary Nukes In Space: The Nuclearization and Weaponization of the Heavens (EnviroVideo, www.envirovideo.com ). _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 24 More on the DU Death Sentence Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 12:15:09 -0600 (CST) Forwarded with Compliments of Government of the USA in Exile (GUSAE): Free Americans Resisting the Fourth Reich on Behalf of All Species. From: "Graham Jukes" Date: December 11, 2005 8:52:12 PM EST Subject: Franklin's Focus: Another Piece on Uranium Poisoning 12/7/05 San Francisco Bay View Depleted Uranium: Dirty Bombs, Dirty Missiles, Dirty Bullets A Death Sentence Here and Abroad By Leuren Moret At an April press conference, a group of New York Army National Guard vets raised their hands when asked if they have health problems. The soldiers, all from the 442nd Military Police Company, are complaining of headaches and fatigue after what they think is exposure to depleted uranium during their recent tour in Iraq. "Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." - Henry Kissinger, quoted in "Kiss the Boys Goodbye: How the United States Betrayed Its Own POW's in Vietnam" Vietnam was a chemical war for oil, permanently contaminating large regions and countries downriver with Agent Orange, and environmentally the most devastating war in world history. But since 1991, the U.S. has staged four nuclear wars using depleted uranium weaponry, which, like Agent Orange, meets the U.S. government definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Vast regions in the Middle East and Central Asia have been permanently contaminated with radiation. And what about our soldiers? Terry Jemison of the Department of Veterans Affairs reported this week to the American Free Press that "Gulf-era veterans" now on medical disability since 1991 number 518,739, with only 7,035 reported wounded in Iraq in that same 14-year period. This week the American Free Press dropped a "dirty bomb" on the Pentagon by reporting that eight out of 20 men who served in one unit in the 2003 U.S. military offensive in Iraq now have malignancies. That means that 40 percent of the soldiers in that unit have developed malignancies in just 16 months. Since these soldiers were exposed to vaccines and depleted uranium (DU) only, this is strong evidence for researchers and scientists working on this issue, that DU is the definitive cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Vaccines are not known to cause cancer. One of the first published researchers on Gulf War Syndrome, who also served in 1991 in Iraq, Dr. Andras Korinyi-Both, is in agreement with Barbara Goodno from the Department of Defense's Deployment Health Support Directorate, that in this war soldiers were not exposed to chemicals, pesticides, bioagents or other suspect causes this time to confuse the issue. This powerful new evidence is blowing holes in the cover-up perpetrated by the Pentagon and three presidential administrations ever since DU was first used in 1991 in the Persian Gulf War. Fourteen years after the introduction of DU on the battlefield in 1991, the long-term effects have revealed that DU is a death sentence and very nasty stuff. Scientists studying the biological effects of uranium in the 1960s reported that it targets the DNA. Marion Fulk, a nuclear physical chemist retired from the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab and formerly involved with the Manhattan Project, interprets the new and rapid malignancies in soldiers from the 2003 war as "spectacular" and a matter of concern." This evidence shows that of the three effects which DU has on biological systems - radiation, chemical and particulate - the particulate effect from nano-size particles is the most dominant one immediately after exposure and targets the Master Code in the DNA. This is bad news, but it explains why DU causes a myriad of diseases which are difficult to define. In simple words, DU "trashes the body." When asked if the main purpose for using it was for destroying things and killing people, Fulk was more specific: "I would say that it is the perfect weapon for killing lots of people." Soldiers developing malignancies so quickly since 2003 can be expected to develop multiple cancers from independent causes. This phenomenon has been reported by doctors in hospitals treating civilians following NATO bombing with DU in Yugoslavia in 1998-1999 and the U.S. military invasion of Iraq using DU for the first time in 1991. Medical experts report that this phenomenon of multiple malignancies from unrelated causes has been unknown until now and is a new syndrome associated with internal DU exposure. Just 467 U.S. personnel were wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are dead, and by 2000 there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. This astounding number of disabled vets means that a decade later, 56 percent of those soldiers who served now have medical problems. The number of disabled vets reported up to 2000 has been increasing by 43,000 every year. Brad Flohr of the Department of Veterans Affairs told American Free Press that he believes there are more disabled vets now than even after World War II. They brought it home Not only were soldiers exposed to DU on and off the battlefields, but they brought it home. DU in the semen of soldiers internally contaminated their wives, partners and girlfriends. Tragically, some women in their 20s and 30s who were sexual partners of exposed soldiers developed endometriosis and were forced to have hysterectomies because of health problems. In a group of 251 soldiers from a study group in Mississippi who had all had normal babies before the Gulf War, 67 percent of their post-war babies were born with severe birth defects. They were born with missing legs, arms, organs or eyes or had immune system and blood diseases. In some veterans' families now, the only normal or healthy members of the family are the children born before the war. The Department of Veterans Affairs has stated that they do not keep records of birth defects occurring in families of veterans. How did they hide it? Before a new weapons system can be used, it must be fully tested. The blueprint for depleted uranium weapons is a 1943 declassified document from the Manhattan Project. Harvard President and physicist James B. Conant, who developed poison gas in World War I, was brought into the Manhattan Project by the father of presidential candidate John Kerry. Kerry's father served at a high level in the Manhattan Project and was a CIA agent. Conant was chair of the S-1 Poison Gas Committee, which recommended developing poison gas weapons from the radioactive trash of the atomic bomb project in World War II. At that time, it was known that radioactive materials dispersed in bombs from the air, from land vehicles or on the battlefield produced very fine radioactive dust which would penetrate all protective clothing, any gas mask or filter or the skin. By contaminating the lungs and blood, it could kill or cause illness very quickly. They also recommended it as a permanent terrain contaminant, which could be used to destroy populations by contaminating water supplies and agricultural land with the radioactive dust. The first DU weapons system was developed for the Navy in 1968, and DU weapons were given to and used by Israel in 1973 under U.S. supervision in the Yom Kippur war against the Arabs. The Phalanx weapons system, using DU, was tested on the USS Bigelow out of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in 1977, and DU weapons have been sold by the U.S. to 29 countries. Military research report summaries detail the testing of DU from 1974-1999 at military testing grounds, bombing and gunnery ranges and at civilian labs under contract. Today 42 states are contaminated with DU from manufacture, testing and deployment. Women living around these facilities have reported increases in endometriosis, birth defects in babies, leukemia in children and cancers and other diseases in adults. Thousands of tons of DU weapons tested for decades by the Navy on four bombing and gunnery ranges around Fallon, Nevada, is no doubt the cause of the fastest growing leukemia cluster in the U.S. over the past decade. The military denies that DU is the cause. The medical profession has been active in the cover-up - just as they were in hiding the effects from the American public - of low level radiation from atmospheric testing and nuclear power plants. A medical doctor in Northern California reported being trained by the Pentagon with other doctors, months before the 2003 war started, to diagnose and treat soldiers returning from the 2003 war for mental problems only. Medical professionals in hospitals and facilities treating returning soldiers were threatened with $10,000 fines if they talked about the soldiers or their medical problems. They were also threatened with jail. Reporters have also been prevented access to more than 14,000 medically evacuated soldiers flown nightly since the 2003 war in C-150s from Germany who are brought to Walter Reed Hospital near Washington, D.C. Dr. Robert Gould, former president of the Bay Area chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), has contacted three medical doctors since February 2004, after I had been invited to speak about DU. Dr. Katharine Thomasson, president of the Oregon chapter of the PSR, informed me that Dr. Gould had contacted her and tried to convince her to cancel her invitation for me to speak about DU at Portland State University on April 12. Although I was able to do a presentation, Dr. Thomasson told me I could only talk about DU in Oregon "and nothing overseas. nothing political." Dr. Gould also contacted and discouraged Dr. Ross Wilcox in Toronto, Canada, from inviting me to speak to Physicians for Global Survival (PGS), the Canadian equivalent of PSR, several months later. When that didn't work, he contacted Dr. Allan Connoly, the Canadian national president of PGS, who was able to cancel my invitation and nearly succeeded in preventing Dr. Wilcox, his own member, from showing photos and presenting details on civilians suffering from DU exposure and cancer provided to him by doctors in southern Iraq. Dr. Janette Sherman, a former and long-standing member of PSR, reported that she finally quit some time after being invited to lunch by a new PSR executive administrator. After the woman had pumped Dr. Sherman for information all through lunch about her position on key issues, the woman informed Dr. Sherman that her last job had been with the CIA. How was the truth about DU hidden from military personnel serving in successive DU wars? Before his tragic death, Sen. Paul Wellstone informed Joyce Riley, R.N., B.S.N., executive director of the American Gulf War Veterans Association, that 95 percent of Gulf War veterans had been recycled out of the military by 1995. Any of those continuing in military service were isolated from each other, preventing critical information being transferred to new troops. The "next DU war" had already been planned, and those planning it wanted "no skunk at the garden party." The US has a dirty (DU) little (CIA) secret A new book just published at the American Free Press by Michael Collins Piper, "The High Priests of War: The Secret History of How America's Neo-Conservative Trotskyites Came to Power and Orchestrated the War Against Iraq as the First Step in Their Drive for Global Empire," details the early plans for a war against the Arab world by Henry Kissinger and the neo-cons in the late 1960s and early 1970s. That just happens to coincide with getting the DU "show on the road" and the oil crisis in the Middle East, which caused concern not only to President Nixon. The British had been plotting and scheming for control of the oil in Iraq for decades since first using poison gas on the Iraqis and Kurds in 1912. The book details the creation of the neo-cons by their "godfather" and Trotsky lover Irving Kristol, who pushed for a "war against terrorism" long before 9/11 and was lavishly funded for years by the CIA. His son, William Kristol, is one of the most influential men in the United States. Both are public relations men for the Israeli lobby's neo-conservative network, with strong ties to Rupert Murdoch. Kissinger also has ties to this network and the Carlyle Group, who, one could say, have facilitated these omnicidal wars beginning from the time former President Bush took office. It would be easy to say that we are recycling World Wars I and II, with the same faces. When I asked Vietnam Special Ops Green Beret Capt. John McCarthy, who could have devised this omnicidal plan to use DU to destroy the genetic code and genetic future of large populations of Arabs and Moslems in the Middle East and Central Asia - just coincidentally the areas where most of the world's oil deposits are located - he replied: "It has all the handprints of Henry Kissinger." In Zbignew Brzezinski's book "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives," the map of the Eurasian chessboard includes four regions strategic to U.S. foreign policy. The "South" region corresponds precisely to the regions now contaminated permanently with radiation from U.S. bombs, missiles and bullets made with thousands of tons of DU. A Japanese professor, Dr. K. Yagasaki, has calculated that 800 tons of DU is the atomicity equivalent of 83,000 Nagasaki bombs. The U.S. has used more DU since 1991 than the atomicity equivalent of 400,000 Nagasaki bombs. Four nuclear wars indeed, and 10 times the amount of radiation released into the atmosphere from atmospheric testing! No wonder our soldiers, their families and the people of the Middle East, Yugoslavia and Central Asia are sick. But as Henry Kissinger said after Vietnam when our soldiers came home ill from Agent Orange, "Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used for foreign policy." Unfortunately, more and more of those soldiers are men and women with brown skin. And unfortunately, the DU radioactive dust will be carried around the world and deposited in our environments just as the "smog of war" from the 1991 Gulf War was found in deposits in South America, the Himalayas and Hawaii. In June 2003, the World Health Organization announced in a press release that global cancer rates will increase 50 percent by 2020. What else do they know that they aren't telling us? I know that depleted uranium is a death sentence. For all of us. We will all die in silent ways. ------------------------------------------------------ To learn more Sources used in this story that readers are encouraged to consult: American Free Press four-part series on DU by Christopher Bollyn. Part I: "Depleted Uranium: U.S. Commits War Crime Against Iraq, Humanity," http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/depleted_uranium.html Part II: "Cancer Epidemic Caused by U.S. WMD: MD Says Depleted Uranium Definitively http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/cancer_epidemic_.html Part III: "DU Syndrome Stricken Vets Denied Care: Pentagon Hides DU Dangers to Deny Medical Care to Vets", http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/du_syndrome.html Part IV: "Pentagon Brass Suppresses Truth About Toxic Weapons: Poisonous Uranium Munitions Threaten World", http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/pentagon_brass.html August 2004 World Affairs Journal. Leuren Moret: "Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War," http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm August 2004 Coastal Post Online. Carol Sterrit: "Marin Depleted Uranium Resolution Heats Up - GI's Will Come Home To A Slow Death," http://www.coastalpost.com/04/08/01.htm World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference, Hamburg, Germany, October 16-19, 2004: http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de/speakers.htm International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan. Written opinion of Judge Niloufer Baghwat: http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Afghanistan-Criminal- Tribunal10mar04.htm "Discounted Casualties: The Human Cost of Nuclear War" by Akira Tashiro, foreword by Leuren Moret, http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.html Leuren Moret is a geoscientist who has worked around the world on radiation issues, educating citizens, the media, members of parliaments and Congress and other officials. She became a whistleblower in 1991 at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab after experiencing major science fraud on the Yucca Mountain Project. An environmental commissioner in the City of Berkeley, she can be reached at leurenmoret@yahoo.com. ======================================================================== ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 25 YubaNet.com: EPA To Expand Use of Human Chemical Experiments "I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell." - Harry Truman By: Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility Published: Dec 12, 2005 at 06:58 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is in the final stage of welcoming industry experiments using human subjects to test the effects of pesticides and other commercial toxins, according to comments filed today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) and a coalition of public health organizations. The proposed EPA rule, strongly supported by the chemical industry, allows experiments on humans to replace reliance on animal studies. "The good news is that EPA, for the first time, is pledging to abide by the Nuremberg Code, adopted after World War II to prevent a repetition of the horrific Nazi human experiments," stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, whose organization became involved after EPA gagged its own scientists from voicing objections. "The bad news is that EPA's proposal breaks this long overdue pledge by offering a plan peppered with loopholes that encourage unethical conduct and omit key protections for infants, pregnant women and other vulnerable populations." The agency's latest plan is the product of a Congressional ultimatum this summer to ban all future human tests until EPA finally adopted ethical safeguards. Congress acted after mushrooming controversy concerning an EPA study called "CHEERS" in which Florida parents would have been paid to spray pesticides in the rooms of their infant children. EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, who sponsored the CHEERS experiment (in partnership with the American Chemistry Council), reluctantly cancelled the study only when it became clear that his confirmation to the agency's top job would otherwise be blocked. In order to dissolve the Congressional human subject ban, this September EPA offered a grudging plan that imposes few absolute safeguards. For example, EPA's plan would allow - • Dosing experiments involving infants and pregnant women using any chemical (except pesticides). Thus, companies will be free to test toxic agents, such as perchlorate, on nursing mothers; • A repeat of the infamous (now canceled) CHEERS study because EPA pointedly omits any check against undue economic inducement, i.e., paying poor people enough to lure them into signing informed consent papers; and • Studies on orphans, mentally ill children and prisoners without informed consent. During the past decade, human testing has become central to the regulatory plans of the chemical industry. These companies are challenging the utility of animal studies and demanding that EPA use human subject tests as the new safety benchmark. Because human tests cannot use the same high concentrations used in animal tests, companies can argue that there is no definitive proof of harm from the introduction of chemicals based upon small-scale human studies of dubious probative value. "Any plan for human subject protections supported by the chemical industry should give pause," Ruch added. "The irony is that tests to develop medicines to benefit people have far more safeguards than EPA wants in experiments to see how chemicals harm people." Today marks the deadline for submission of public comments. After EPA reviews public comments, the agency will adopt final rules, a process that is expected to take a month. Copyright © 2005 YubaNet.com, all rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 26 Honolulu Advertiser: Irradiator planners feel heat - Monday, December 12, 2005 By Kevin Dayton Advertiser Big Island Bureau To the state Department of Agriculture, an irradiator proposed for a site near Honolulu International Airport is the key to expanding agriculture on O'ahu and Kaua'i by boosting Hawai'i exports of tropical fruits and other crops. But some residents who live in the Kalihi-Palama area are alarmed at the project, and say few people know about plans for a facility that would use radioactive cobalt-60 to treat papayas and other produce. Bernadette Young, chairwoman of the Kalihi-Palama Neighborhood Board, said the irradiator is another example of an undesirable project being dumped in the area. "They always come to areas where they think the community is poor and uneducated, and this is what gets me," she said. "We're not the only ones taking the risk now. It would be people that work in the area, people driving through the area. There's a lot of questions that are unanswered." Environmentalists also are challenging the Honolulu irradiator project before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with the environmentalist organization Earthjustice filing to request a formal hearing before the NRC. Earthjustice also wants Pa'ina Hawai'i LLC, the Hawai'i-based company that plans to build the irradiator, to do a federal environmental impact statement or environmental assessment to allow the public more opportunity to study and comment on the irradiator proposal. Pa'ina Hawai'i filings with the NRC contend the commission has ruled the project is exempt from any federal requirements for an environmental assessment or impact statement. David Henkin, staff attorney for the Honolulu office of Earthjustice, said the application by Pa'ina Hawai'i LLC before the NRC seeks to allow up to a million curies (units of radioactivity) of cobalt-60 in an irradiator planned for the airport industrial area. Henkin said the area is in a tsunami inundation zone, and the proposed irradiator site is next to the reef runway. "There are concerns here about accidents, and there are also concerns about the potential for sabotage or terrorism," Henkin said. "You've basically placed a huge source of radiation at the major gateway to Hawai'i, the international airport." As for the need for the facility, Henkin argued it is "not a matter of life and death. The goal is to get a fresh papaya to someone in California, and there's a limit to how much risk the people of Honolulu should be taking in order to allow the company to make a profit from selling its papayas on the Mainland." Pa'ina Hawai'i LLC's most recent filing before the NRC calls the project a "run-of-the-mill" irradiator. The filing notes that there was a cobalt-60 irradiator at the University of Hawai'i-Manoa for 40 years with no leaks, and points out that O'ahu is home to nuclear-powered submarines and bunkers designed to hold nuclear bombs. "In light of the above, it would seem that Pa'ina's irradiator is a very small part of the nuclear universe which characterizes present-day Honolulu," according to the company's Oct. 26 filing in the case. The requests for an environmental impact statement and formal hearings on the project are pending before the NRC. Michael Kohn, president of Pa'ina, said the irradiator is needed to allow tropical agriculture to grow in Hawai'i, and compared the facility to critical infrastructure such as the shipping capacity that allowed sugar cultivation to flourish in pre-statehood Hawai'i. Farmers need to be able to sell their produce outside of Hawai'i to prosper here, he said. As it is, farmers are extremely cautious today because if they grow too much for the local market, the price plummets, or the farmers are stuck with produce they cannot sell. "For that, we need to have export markets that will take the excess," he said. The irradiator is necessary because produce from Hawai'i cannot be shipped to the Mainland unless it is treated to prevent the spread of fruit flies. The Big Island already has an irradiator to treat produce for export, but a second point of export is needed to continue the growth in diversified agriculture, said Lyle Wong, administrator of the state Department of Agriculture's Plant Industry Division. Growers need assurances they can get their produce to market before they will expand production, and farmers on Kaua'i, Maui and O'ahu need to be able to ship from Honolulu, he said. "It's just impossible to conceive of a thriving, expanding diversified ag in the state with a single facility," he said. Eric Weinert, senior vice president for Hawai'i Pride, which runs the Big Island irradiator, said that facility is operating at less than 35 percent of capacity. However, Wong said, that is partly because of restrictions Hawai'i Pride placed on farmers who want to use the facility. Wong said Hawai'i Pride turns away fruit from farmers who cannot meet the facility's volume requirements. Kohn said the Honolulu project will cost "several millions" of dollars to develop, but declined to be more specific. He also declined to identify the investors involved in the project. Kohn hopes to put the irradiator on property he would lease from the state Department of Transportation in the industrial area near the airport. If that lease is approved, Henkin and state Sen. Suzanne Chun Oakland, D-13th (Kalihi, Nu'uanu) have asked state transportation officials to require a state environmental assessment or impact statement before the project is built. Scott Ishikawa, spokesman for the state Department of Transportation, said DOT officials are watching to see how the NRC handles the issue before deciding how to proceed. Kohn said the issues of safety and potential security risks are "strictly up to the NRC," which has the expertise to decide if the facility is safe. Young worries there could be an accident or explosion at the facility, or a plane crash at the irradiator that would contaminate the area. When Pa'ina made a presentation on the project at the neighborhood board in October, "they said it's not going to happen," Young said. "Excuse me, who died and made them God? How are they going to know things are not going to happen?" Similar plans to build a cobalt irradiator on the Big Island triggered widespread opposition in the late 1990s. Voters narrowly defeated a proposal to amend the county code to prohibit radioactive material in commercial irradiation facilities in a 1998 ballot initiative, and the plan for a cobalt irradiator was dropped. The Hawai'i Pride irradiator did open on the Big Island in 2000, but that facility uses X-ray technology instead of cobalt-60 to treat papayas and other produce for export. Reach Kevin Dayton at kdayton@honoluluadvertiser.com. © COPYRIGHT 2005 The Honolulu Advertiser, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. ***************************************************************** 27 Political Affairs Magazine: Bush's Veterans' Healthcare Budget Recipe for Disaster By: Larry Scott Published: 12/12/2005 09:54 12-12-05, 9:36 am On November 30, President Bush signed the "Military Quality of Life and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, 2006." Much was said about the military and little was said about veterans. The President’s only mention of veterans in his 474-word statement was, “The Act also provides funds to support the medical care and other needs of our Nation's veterans.” Why the deliberate lack of attention to the healthcare budget for the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA)? Because it is a cause of great embarrassment to the Bush administration. This VA healthcare budget is such political bad news that the Bush appointees who run the veterans’ agency won’t even comment on it. Numerous requests for interviews have been met with, “No one is available.” While President Bush claims to “Support Our Troops” in every speech, he hides the checkbook when it comes to supporting our veterans. The new VA healthcare budget, once again, leaves countless thousands of veterans in a life-and-death struggle for medical services. Administration officials brag of a “53 per cent increase in the VA budget in President Bush’s first five years in office.” What they forget to explain is that most of the VA budget is made up of components that are part of the mandatory budget process. The overall VA budget would have gone up no matter who was President. However, the healthcare portion of the VA budget must be hammered-out in Congress every year as part of the discretionary budget process. Republicans claim the VA healthcare budget for this fiscal year is a whopping $22.5 billion, a 17 per cent increase over last year. A closer look at those numbers shows a budget that is nothing more than a “shell game” according to veterans’ groups who have analyzed the figures. “…You never know where the pea is,” said Richard Fuller, national legislative director for Paralyzed Veterans of America. $1.5 billion of the budget is a promised carryover from last fiscal year. Except, no one knows if that money exists. If it does, no one knows where it is. And, there appears to be no mechanism to carryover funds into the new budget. So, we have to scratch that figure and now the budget is down to $21 billion. Then there is $1.2 billion stipulated as emergency funding. Those funds can only be released by President Bush if he declares a funding emergency at the VA. This won’t happen. Last fiscal year Republicans refused to admit there was a budget shortfall at the VA until the reality was forced on them by Democrats. VA Secretary Jim Nicholson said of the billion-plus dollar shortfall, “A crisis? I don’t agree.” So now we take out the $1.2 billion and the budget is down to $19.8 billion. At $19.8 billion, the VA healthcare budget is just 2.6 per cent larger than last fiscal year. This figure is immediately turned into a negative. Inflation in the healthcare sector supplying goods and services to the VA has averaged 5.6 per cent per year for the last five years. The negative becomes larger when we factor in a 3.1 per cent pay raise for VA employees. Now we have a VA healthcare budget with less spending power than it had the year before. For the last few years many VA hospitals have been so underfunded that they have instituted hiring freezes, closed patient wards and cut essential services to the point where they are turning away qualified veterans seeking necessary healthcare. Add to chronic underfunding a dramatic increase in the number of veterans seeking VA healthcare. There are three main groups. The first is middle-aged, qualified veterans who have never used the VA system and now find themselves, because of unemployment or under-employment, without healthcare benefits. The second is older veterans who have discovered that it is less expensive to use the VA pharmacy than it is to purchase medications through Medicare. The third group is veterans returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although the official Pentagon list of wounded stands at just over 15,000, the reality is eight times that figure. It depends on your definition of wounded. The VA’s latest figures (released in October) show that of 433,398 troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, 119,247 have sought medical treatment. Of those 119,247 veterans, 39 per cent have joint and back and connective system disorders, 30.9 per cent have mental problems, 30.1 per cent have diseases of the digestive system and 27.1 per cent suffer from diseases of the nervous system or sense organs. Also, 15.5 per cent have been poisoned and 15.1 per cent exhibit problems with metabolism, nutritional, thyroid, parathyroid, adrenal, pancreas, and pituitary gland diseases. The list continues with 12.9 per cent having diseases of the circulatory system and 12.8 per cent having skin diseases. Obviously, many of the veterans suffer from more than a single disease or condition. The above laundry list represents the tip of the iceberg when it comes to medical problems that will be experienced by Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. As they age many will experience acute PTSD symptoms. And, the effects of exposure to depleted uranium munitions, a subject on which the Department of Defense is eerily silent, may lead to catastrophic health conditions. The Bush administration harshly admonishes anyone who says there has been a cut in VA benefits. They point only to the increased dollar amount of the overall VA budget. But, as VA hospitals are closed and services cut back, it is safe to say that a CUT IN SERVICES is a CUT IN BENEFITS. The miniscule “real dollar” increase in the VA healthcare budget turns into “fewer usable dollars” when inflation and the increased number of veterans needing healthcare are factored-in. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a member of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, expressed concern and dismay over the VA healthcare budget. “I will not be surprised at all if we have, once again, short-funded vets,” she said last week. What will become of the veterans who are denied healthcare by the VA or who are put on waiting lists that can delay medical treatment for as long as 36 months? Some veterans will seek healthcare in the private sector and go into debt to pay for medical treatment that should have been provided by the VA. Other veterans will try to get help from state Medicaid programs if they can get accepted. And, some veterans will simply do without and hope…… From OpEdNews.com --Larry Scott (larry@vawatchdog.org)served four years in the U.S. Army with overseas tours as a Broadcast Journalist in Korea and the Azores and a stateside tour as a Broadcast Journalism Instructor at the Defense Information School (DINFOS). He was awarded DOD's First Place Thomas Jefferson Award for Excellence in Journalism. After the Army, Larry was a news anchor on WNBC Radio in New York City. He receives VA compensation for a service-connected disability. Larry is a regular on the Thom Hartmann show on KPOJ radio in Portland, Oregon. Today, Larry resides in Southwest Washington and operates the website VAWatchdog.Org. ***************************************************************** 28 UKAEA: UKAEA seeks views of community on proposed disposal facility for low level waste Press Releases 8th December 2005 Ref: 2005/60 Contact: Marie Mackay, 01847 806087 Decommissioning the former experimental reactor establishment at Dounreay is expected to generate between 64,000 cubic metres and 109,000 cubic metres of solid low-level radioactive waste that needs to be managed safely for future generations. This evening, Thursday 8th December 2005, UKAEA will be seeking the views of local residents about its plans for managing this waste. People living around the site and the nearby village of Reay have been invited to a drop-in meeting at the Victoria Hall, Reay, to see the plans and to speak with staff involved in the project. Over the last two years, UKAEA has assessed options and locations for managing the low-level waste and consulted extensively with stakeholders. In March 2005, UKAEA announced the outcome of the consultation that the best practicable environmental option (BPEO) was to dispose of this low level waste from Dounreay in a new facility at the site. The next stage, on behalf of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, is to prepare a planning application to Highland Council and undertake an environmental impact assessment, which is required to accompany the application. Also applications to the regulators, NII and SEPA, will be produced. If planning permission and the preliminary regulatory consents are granted, the current plan envisages construction commencing around 2008 and the first waste being placed into the facilities around 2013. This evenings drop-in meeting gives the community an opportunity to discuss the developing plans with the project team and raise any questions that they may have. Michael Tait, senior project manager, said: Local peoples views are particularly important to us. We feel at this stage in the project it is important to meet and discuss the project with them, while the impact assessment is being developed and before the application is submitted. Ends Notes to Editors: 1. Historically, when Dounreay was an experimental reactor establishment, approximately 33,000 cubic metres of solid low-level radioactive waste (equivalent in volume to 240 double-decker buses) was disposed of to a series of shallow pits. These pits are now full. 1. Decommissioning of Dounreay is expected to generate between 64,000 cubic metres and 109,000 cubic metres of new solid low level radioactive waste (which is equivalent in volume to between 450 and 750 double-decker buses). 1. In response to the 1998 audit by regulators, UKAEA undertook to identify the best practicable environmental option for managing all Dounreays waste in the long-term, and to dispose of some of this waste to the national disposal facility at Drigg, Cumbria, in the short-term. 1. In March 2005, following extensive public participation in the long-term options, UKAEA concluded that the best practicable environmental option for Dounreays LLW was the construction of a new disposal facility at Dounreay. More information about low-level waste at Dounreay, the views of stakeholders and UKAEAs strategy can be found at http://www.ukaea.org.uk/dounreay/low_level_waste.htm 1. In May 2005, the Scottish Executive ruled there was no need for waste to be transported to Drigg. The Executive said this reflected a widespread view that the best practicable environmental option was to deal with the waste at Dounreay. For more information, please contact Marie Mackay, Communications Department, Dounreay on 01847 806087. Copyright© UKAEA 2003 ***************************************************************** 29 Las Vegas SUN: BLM: PFS can make case for nuke storage in new comment period Today: December 12, 2005 at 15:41:30 PST By JENNIFER TALHELM ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal Bureau of Land Management official said Monday that Sen. Orrin Hatch's assessment that Private Fuel Storage was falling apart played a role in his decision to seek new public comments about the company's plans to build a temporary nuclear waste storage facility in Utah's Skull Valley. Private Fuel Storage, a coalition of eight utilities, plans to use the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation as a temporary way station for nuclear waste pending work at Yucca Mountain, the site of a proposed nuclear waste dump 90 miles northwest Las Vegas. The BLM must sign off on rights of way to access the Skull Valley site. Hatch, R-Utah, who wants to kill the proposed storage facility, had argued that seven of the eight utilities had agreed to suspend their funding for the project, calling into question the company's future. "The viability of the PFS proposal is now seriously threatened," he wrote Interior Secretary Gale Norton last week. The Interior Department oversees the BLM. But the company may be more stable than Hatch suggested. Two of the utilities Hatch said had dropped out told The Associated Press last week that they are still funding PFS and have no immediate plans to stop. Two others have not responded to requests for comment from The Associated Press. Three have said they decided to suspend their funding, largely because the storage facility no longer meets their needs. A Hatch representative said last week that the senator's staff must have misinterpreted the companies' intentions. In an interview Monday with The Associated Press, Jim Hughes, BLM deputy director for programs and policy, said "a small portion" of his decision to reopen the comment period for proposed rights of way was based on Hatch's description of PFS's financial stability. But he said the comment period will be a chance for the utilities - as well as the public - to make a case for why the proposal should be blocked or go forward. Hatch's other argument, that the government had not considered public opinion in light of the threat after Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was an important point, he said. "We thought it was proper to go out and get new comment, because there may be new information out there," Hughes said. "This would actually give some of the companies out there a chance to go out and publicly comment and say, 'Yes, we're all still out there.'" Utah officials have been trying for years to kill Private Fuel Storage's plans, but the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in September authorized a license for the site. Utah officials hope the BLM will decide to reject the rights of way applications if thousands of Utahns write in opposing the facility. The BLM considered public comments on the plan several years ago. Hughes said it is unusual - but not unheard of - to reopen the comment period. He made the decision in about a week after discussions with Hatch's office. People will have 90 days to comment. But it's unclear how long it will take the BLM to respond. Hughes said that the agency could receive tens of thousands of responses, which can take a long time to analyze. "There's a long way to go before we would ever approve this," Hughes said. "There's a lot of procedural things to go through." -- All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 30 UKAEA: Dounreay seeks way forward on particles 12th December 2005 Ref: 2005/56 Contact: June Love, 01847 806082 The largest consultation exercise ever undertaken by Dounreays operator was announced today to identify the Best Practicable Environmental Option for radioactive particles found in the seabed and beaches near the former experimental reactor establishment. A newsletter is being issued today to more than a thousand registered stakeholders, outlining the results of a £10 million research programme and inviting members of the public to participate in a preliminary phase of engagement. This will be augmented by a series of outreach meetings and public exhibitions next month to gather more feedback about the options that should be assessed and the criteria to be used. Two independent expert reports are due to be published in 2006 and the findings, together with feedback from the preliminary phase and ongoing technical studies should enable UKAEA to carry out a detailed assessment and consult widely on the options later in the year. This is expected to lead to recommendations in 2007 on the way forward. Norman Harrison, director of Dounreay, said: The purpose of the consultation is to find out, in an open and inclusive manner, if there is a better way to manage the legacy of particles than the current approach, which is to monitor beaches to criteria laid down by SEPA and remove those particles that can be detected when they come ashore. However much I and everyone at Dounreay today regrets the practices of old that gave rise to this legacy, we cannot turn back the clock. It therefore becomes very important to everyone that we do what is right today, so that those who are affected by this legacy can have confidence that the preferred way forward is the right one for safety, society and the environment. UKAEA has commissioned consultants Entec UK to facilitate the preliminary phase of public engagement and the transparency of the process is being overseen by a stakeholder consultation steering group chaired by Councillor Bill Fernie, who represents Wick West on Highland Council. He said: A considerable amount of work has gone into looking at how we might present information to the public that is clear and open. The Steering Group is looking forward to assisting everyone involved in making the choices that will decide the future of how we deal with the particles in the environment. From early in 2006 we will be working to ensure that anyone who wishes to can contribute their view and I encourage anyone with an interest to participate. Particles are fragments of irradiated nuclear fuel similar in size to grains of sand. They were created during the break-up of spent nuclear fuel for reprocessing and fires during its dissolution, and their release into the sea can be traced to historic waste management practices dating back to the late 1950s. The total number of particles discharged into the sea during Dounreays fuel reprocessing era is uncertain. In recent years, specialist divers and a robotic monitoring device have surveyed 340,000 m2 of the seabed around a disused discharge outlet. To date, 926 particles have been recovered by divers from the seabed, and almost 300 particles have been recovered from nearby beaches. Ends For more information, please contact June Love at Dounreay on 01847 806082 or 0776162400. Notes to Editors: 1. Dounreay was Britains centre of fast reactor research and development from 1955 until 1994. It is now being decommissioned by UKAEA on behalf of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. 2. More information about particles, including a copy of the newsletter being issued today, can be found at 3. Information about particles can also be found at and Copyright© UKAEA 2003 ***************************************************************** 31 Accepting Nobel Prize, UN Nuclear Agency Chief Lays Out Vision For Peace Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 10:01:23 -0500 Accepting this year’s Nobel Peace Prize, United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2005/ebsp2005n020.html">IAEA) Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei has laid out a three-point programme to save the world from self-destruction by ensuring that nuclear weapons have no place in the collective conscience and no role in security. “We must ensure - absolutely - that no more countries acquire these deadly weapons. We must see to it that nuclear-weapon States take concrete steps towards nuclear disarmament. And we must put in place a security system that does not rely on nuclear deterrence,” he declared at the award ceremony in Oslo, Norway, on Saturday. To realize these goals, Mr. ElBaradei, who shared the prize with the organization he heads, proposed three “urgently required” steps. First, nuclear and radiological material must be kept out of the hands of extremist groups by protecting nuclear facilities, securing powerful radioactive sources, training law enforcement officials and monitoring border crossings. In the past four years the IAEA has completed perhaps 50 per cent of the work, “but this is not fast enough, because we are in a race against time,” he declared. Second, control over operations for producing the nuclear material that could be used in weapons must be tightened by such operations multinational so that no one country can have exclusive control. “My plan is to begin by setting up a reserve fuel bank, under IAEA control, so that every country will be assured that it will get the fuel needed for its bona fide peaceful nuclear activities,” he said. Third, disarmament efforts must be accelerated. “We still have eight or nine countries who possess nuclear weapons,” he noted. “We still have 27 000 warheads in existence. I believe this is 27 000 too many,” he added, proposing that nuclear-weapon States reduce the strategic role given to these weapons. But even these concrete steps that can readily be taken are not enough. “The hard part is: how do we create an environment in which nuclear weapons - like slavery or genocide - are regarded as a taboo and a historical anomaly?” Mr. ElBaradei declared, calling on the world to embrace the mind-set of brotherhood, tolerance and sanctity of life that all religions expound. “Imagine what would happen if the nations of the world spent as much on development as on building the machines of war. Imagine a world where every human being would live in freedom and dignity. Imagine a world in which we would shed the same tears when a child dies in Darfur or Vancouver,” he concluded, referring to the murderous conflict in Western Sudan, one of the world’s poorest regions, and life in Western Canada, one of the most affluent. “Imagine a world where we would settle our differences through diplomacy and dialogue and not through bombs or bullets. Imagine if the only nuclear weapons remaining were the relics in our museums. Imagine the legacy we could leave to our children. Imagine that such a world is within our grasp.” 2005-12-12 00:00:00.000 ________________ For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news To change your profile or unsubscribe go to: http://www.un.org/news/dh/latest/subscribe.shtml ***************************************************************** 32 [NukeNet] Editorial Opposing Nuclear Expansion at Livermore Lab Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 18:24:42 -0800 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Hi. Here is the editorial from the December 8, 2005 Independent Newspaper in Livermore, CA. The text is below. The quote that is incorporated into the editorial is from Tri-Valley CAREs' staff attorney, Loulena Miles. Read on... Peace, Marylia Kelley INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER Editorials: December 8, 2005 Nuclear Expansion Okayed The National Nuclear Security Administration has approved increased plutonium and tritium limits at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Experiments at the National Ignition Facility using materials such as uranium and thorium have also been approved. All in all, the decision provides for a major expansion of nuclear activity at the Lab. Opposition groups are undertaking a detailed legal analysis of the decision, focusing on whether the impacts on nuclear proliferation and the environment were adequately addressed. They believe there [are] grounds for a lawsuit. "Today's decision puts the entire Bay Area at risk," said attorney Loulena Miles. "The DOE received 9000 public comments opposing increases in nuclear materials, as well as the new weapons activities these radioactive materials will support." The government cited national security as the rationale for the decision. In our opinion, this decision will serve to boost nuclear proliferation, not national security. The world is likely to be less secure in the long run. (c) Inland Valley Publishing Co. Marylia Kelley, Executive Director Tri-Valley CAREs 2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA 94551 Ph: (925) 443-7148 Fx: (925) 443-0177 Web: www.trivalleycares.org Email: marylia@trivalleycares.org or marylia@earthlink.net 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 ***************************************************************** 33 Dallas Morning News: Los Alamos not a losing proposition, UT says Nuclear aspect angers critics; officials argue benefits outweigh risks 12:00 AM CST on Monday, December 12, 2005 By HOLLY K. HACKER / The Dallas Morning News Los Alamos National Laboratory is best known as the birthplace of the atomic bomb. But lately, the New Mexico weapons lab has been known more for a string of safety and management problems, from missing classified data to employee credit card abuses. So why does the University of Texas System want to step in and help run Los Alamos? Any day now UT will learn whether it, together with aerospace giant Lockheed Martin, has won a contract to manage the lab. The University of California has run Los Alamos since 1943, when the lab was secretly created under the Manhattan Project. Recent security lapses and other troubles led the Department of Energy, which owns Los Alamos, to hold its first-ever competition for the contract. UC is fighting to keep the job. Just as UT has teamed with Lockheed, so UC has found an industrial partner, San Francisco-based Bechtel Corp. For the UT System, the potential benefits are Texas-sized. The system would gain prestige from co-managing a crown jewel of the nation's research laboratories. It would have a stronger voice in discussions on national science policy. Los Alamos would give UT an edge in recruiting scientists, professors and students, and UT could tap into millions more in federal research dollars. UT System officials call their pursuit of the Los Alamos contract a historic opportunity. "The work of Los Alamos is fundamental to our national security. As one of the finest institutions in the country, we have a duty to pursue this proposal," James Huffines, chairman of UT's governing Board of Regents, said in May, when the system decided to team up with Lockheed. But with the rewards come risks. The University of California's image has suffered from the run of problems at Los Alamos. Security breaches last year  including reports of two lost computer disks that, it turns out, never existed  led to a seven-month shutdown of the lab. The government gave UC an unsatisfactory rating, and, as a result, UC received only a third of its normal $9 million annual management fee. "It's still possible to receive those benefits of collaboration. However, the bottom line is that place is a mess," said Doug Roberts, a computer scientist who retired from Los Alamos in July. He runs a popular Web log, or blog, for employees called "LANL: The Real Story." Academic side UT officials say they would oversee the academic side of the lab, while Lockheed Martin would handle security and day-to-day operations, which have been the problem areas for UC. Some national lab experts, however, note that UT still faces risks because science and safety go hand in hand. For instance, a lab employee can be injured while doing research. There are also concerns about an industrial-academic team running a national lab. Corporate involvement is certainly nothing new to major universities  consider all the company-sponsored funding on campuses for research, buildings and the like. But some professors and students wonder how academic and scientific freedom  cherished values in higher education  would be respected by a for-profit partner. Also, corporate partnership or not, some professors, students and others say a university system shouldn't be in the nuclear weapons business at all. "We don't like the idea of the proliferation of nuclear weapons, and we attend a public university that wants to run one of the largest makers of nuclear weapons in the world," said Jim Spangler, a UT-Austin senior who is spokesman of a student watchdog group, UT Watch. The UT System says it would oversee the research side of Los Alamos, which does both classified and unclassified work. UT would be in charge of peer review  scrutinizing the research methods and findings of Los Alamos scientists  and doing some research itself. Toward that goal, the UT System has formed a network with 18 other universities and systems across the country to help with research. If Los Alamos had a project related to, say, metallurgy, it could ask the Colorado School of Mines (one of the university partners) to do the research. Such research could take place at the universities or at Los Alamos. UT campuses and other schools in the network would mentor junior scientists. Students, faculty and scientists would also have the chance to do research at Los Alamos. And scientists at Los Alamos might spend a few months at a campus to conduct research and teach. The work stands to benefit UT immensely, some say. "The University of Texas has a tremendous opportunity of having its name associated with, in my opinion, one of the greatest scientific institutions in the world," said Warren F. Miller, a former deputy director at Los Alamos who is now an administrator at the University of New Mexico. "I think it will definitely improve the science and research and prestige of the University of Texas." Money for research Then there's the money. The new managers will earn up to $79 million a year, almost nine times what UC now earns. (UT says its share of the fee would go back into research at Los Alamos.) UT would also have access to millions more dollars in federal research  something that big research universities rely upon. Government watchdogs say there's also a benefit to having different contractors run the nation's two nuclear weapons design labs  Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore. The UC System now runs both, although the Livermore contract will also be put out to bid in the future. However, the prestige would not come without hazards. Beyond the computer disks and unauthorized spending, UC has had to deal with many headaches, including the famous 1999 case involving scientist Wen Ho Lee, who was wrongly accused of selling secrets. Investigators in the case found management problems at the lab. Last year, a laser accident injured an intern. The research facility also needs environmental cleanup after its 60-plus years of operation. UT officials say the problems at Los Alamos concern areas that they wouldn't manage  the job would fall to Lockheed. Chancellor Mark Yudof has said: "Our legal liability is no more than we assume every day in the operation of our campuses. In contrast with these limited risks, the potential benefits are immense." Plus, UT is not entirely new in the nuclear arena. The flagship, UT-Austin, is home to a research nuclear reactor. UT has also done research at Los Alamos and Sandia National Laboratories, also in New Mexico. But Peter Stockton, an investigator with the Project on Government Oversight, a federal government watchdog group, says that just being associated with Los Alamos would be liability enough. "They do risk the fact they're taking over kind of a broken system there, and if they don't get it up and running, then they can get their reputation tarnished," said Mr. Stockton, who was an adviser to former Energy Secretary Bill Richardson. Mr. Roberts, the former Los Alamos employee, said the lab is "in dire need of an overhaul," at least on the operations side. But there's also a problem of low morale and high turnover, he said. Retirements are up at the lab, due to an aging work force and concerns about the lab's future, including the pension system and other benefits. Dr. Miller, the lab's former deputy director, said it's impossible to promise there will never be another accident or missing piece of classified data. "The risk is always associated as to whether some unknown, unpredicted controversy might come along," he said, adding, "I happen to think the benefit is greater than the risk." Some groups in Texas and California have protested any university involvement with a nuclear weapons lab. 'Immoral alliance' Universities should pursue research for the greater good, said Karen Hadden, chairwoman of Peace Action Texas. "This completely flies in the face of that more noble undertaking. It is inappropriate for a university to pursue research that leads to the building of nuclear bombs." The issue has been divisive within the University of California, and the subject of several forums and debates. UC's Academic Senate has polled members every few years. Last year, two-thirds said they favored UC competing for contracts at Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore. But most faculty did not want UC to delegate the business, security and environmental safety aspects of the labs to an industrial partner. Some politicians, professors and students question whether UT or UC could stay independent in a partnership with industry. "It's a totally unholy, immoral alliance," said state Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth, who has asked the UT System regents to abandon the bid. "University systems should not be going to bed as partners with the nuclear weapons complex." Case for universities The government is already using university/industry teams at national labs that do not focus on nuclear weapons. The thinking is that while universities excel at research, they're not experts in management and safety. This year, the contract to run Idaho National Laboratory went to a consortium led by Battelle Memorial Institute, a nonprofit company, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (The Texas A&M University System lost its bid for the contract and was on a team with Bechtel and two other companies.) There's a strong case for getting universities involved and not leaving the labs to contractors, said Michael Witherell, former director of Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois. "As a nation, do we really want the development of nuclear weapons to be done by those who have a financial interest in what is being developed? Do we want military contractors making those decisions?" Dr. Witherell added, "I think it actually is important for universities to maintain a relationship with the national laboratories. It's important for the nation." The growing trend of university/business partnerships  outside the national labs  is a hot potato on campuses, and has raised questions among academics and ethicists. One early controversial deal was UC-Berkeley's $25 million agreement in 1998 with Novartis, a biotechnology company. The company funded research in an entire biology department in return for first dibs on licensing promising inventions. Critics said the arrangement jeopardized the department's academic freedom and integrity. An external review found that the deal did not cause great harm but that similar ones should be avoided in the future. But a Berkeley/Novartis situation can't be compared to Los Alamos and its bidders, according to Sheldon Krimsky, a Tufts University professor who studies corporate research conflicts on campuses. With a national lab where there's federal oversight, Dr. Krimsky said, "It's such a different entity we cannot apply the same standards. It's truly difficult to know how the arrangement is going to work. Is this kind of partnership going to affect other aspects of the university?" That is, would the relationship with Lockheed encourage UT to take on other confidential research projects? Will a culture of secrecy seep into other areas of the university system? Daniel Levine, a psychology professor at the University of Texas at Arlington, said he's not familiar with the Los Alamos details, but that the issue raises more universal concerns. "Certainly, universities should not be apart from the world and need to be tied into other institutions," Dr. Levine said. "But if the corporations push them too far so they don't feel independent, and the researchers can't play an advisory role ... that's not good." Dr. Krimsky suggests that if UT wins the contract, it should build a firewall between the work at Los Alamos and the work on its campuses. That would give some protection, he said, so that "secrecy won't flow from [Los Alamos] to other parts of the university." Both the UT-Lockheed and UC-Bechtel partnerships have created new corporations that would run Los Alamos. UT's university network is also a separate entity and would not overlap with the other programs and departments within the UT System, officials say. "Those safeguards have been addressed very vigorously with Lockheed Martin," UT spokesman Michael Warden said. The man who would run Los Alamos for the UT-Lockheed team, C. Paul Robinson, has said he would seek assurance from Lockheed that science and the national interest, not corporate interests, come first. Dr. Robinson had such an agreement when he was the director of Sandia lab, which is also run by Lockheed Martin. Back in May, when UT decided to pursue the bid, Mr. Yudof, the chancellor, expressed deep confidence about the system's prospects. "We wouldn't be entering," he said, "if we didn't think we would be successful." [Los Alamos Lab Security ] Los Alamos Lab Security Security breaches at Los Alamos National Laboratory got the current operators in trouble, but the University of Texas System points out that Lockheed Martin would handle security. © 2005 The Dallas Morning News Co. ***************************************************************** 34 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Rocky FR Doc E5-7199 [Federal Register: December 12, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 237)] [Notices] [Page 73460-73461] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12de05-46] Flats AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Rocky Flats. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal Register. DATES: Thursday, January 5, 2006. 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. ADDRESSES: College Hill Library, Room L-211, Front Range Community College, 3705 W. 112th Avenue, Westminster, Colorado. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Korkia, Executive Director, Rocky Flats Citizens Advisory Board, 12101 Airport Way, Unit B, Broomfield, CO 80021; telephone (303) 966-7855; fax (303) 966-7856. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities. Tentative Agenda 1. Discussion on Ways to Visually Depict Areas of Residual Contamination at Rocky Flats 2. Other Board business may be conducted as necessary Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Ken Korkia at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received at least five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provisions will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. [[Page 73461]] Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying at the office of the Rocky Flats Citizens Advisory Board, 12101 Airport Way, Unit B, Broomfield, CO 80021; telephone (303) 966-7855. Hours of operations are 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Minutes will also be made available by writing or calling Ken Korkia at the address or telephone number listed above. Board meeting minutes are posted on RFCAB's Web site within one month following each meeting at: http://www.rfcab.org/Minutes.HTML. Issued at Washington, DC on December 5, 2005. Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E5-7199 Filed 12-9-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ***************************************************************** 35 Deseret News: More disclosure of N-lab accidents? [deseretnews.com] Monday, December 12, 2005 Groups call for access to all incident reports at the Idaho complex By Christopher Smith Associated Press BOISE — When a propane line sprang a leak last month at a federal nuclear research complex in the Idaho desert, hundreds of workers were evacuated and officials made regular announcements on the status of the danger until the problem was fixed hours later. ['Image'] Associated PressWorkers prepare to enter a controlled area at the Accelerated Retrieval Project at the U.S. Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory. But dozens of smaller, "near-miss" episodes occur each year without public notification at the Idaho National Laboratory, where the U.S. Department of Energy wants to begin producing plutonium-238 for the first time in decades and where Congress just appropriated $40 million to begin developing an experimental nuclear power reactor. Instead, details of those minor accidents or procedural oversights are logged in an Energy Department database, the records of which were recently obtained by The Associated Press through the Freedom of Information Act. In the past year alone, there have been 21 cases of INL workers accidentally contaminated with radioactive material; in all cases, the exposure was classified as negligible. In one case, an employee's car and home were searched after officials feared Europium-154 found on the person's overcoat had been carried off the high-security nuclear research compound. In one instance, a few bolts that anchored the seismic braces of a 38-foot-tall heat exchanger in the Advanced Test Reactor to stabilize it during an earthquake were found to have rattled out of their threads. All 180 bolts were found to be too short to properly secure the braces. And an analysis of the amount of uranium that could safely be stored in a lab failed to take into account that the radioactive material was in powder form, not solid, posing a much higher health risk if spilled than originally estimated. All of the incidents were minor and INL officials say none posed a grave risk beyond the boundaries of the 890-square-mile test compound, but they were documented and investigated in an effort to prevent more serious problems in the future. "The intent of the system is to find, report and fix problems while your problems are small," said Bob Stallman, senior operations and safety officer at INL. "That's one of the reasons there are so many reports in the system. Our threshold for reporting is quite low because we want to know the small problems that are occurring." But the public has a right to know about all accidents at the site, not just the big ones, say leaders of environmental groups who monitor the remote eastern Idaho facility. The Snake River Alliance, Environmental Defense Institute and Keep Yellowstone nuclear Free asked DOE in a Nov. 20 letter to put the so-called "occurrence reports" online for easy access by the public over the Internet instead of being released only in response to written requests. "Right now, the public operates with blinders on and only responds to incidents that the government thinks we need to know about," said Jeremy Maxand, director of the Snake River Alliance. "If you take one of these incidents and combine it with the right circumstances, you could have a serious situation." While DOE requires written requests from the public to disclose the reports, it sends copies to the state's Division of INL Oversight and Radiation Control each week. The federal government also notifies the state any time INL's radiological assistance team is deployed outside the boundaries of the nuclear reservation. "We try to strike a balance between the safety of having people well-informed versus having people who might want to do us harm well-informed," said Kathleen Trever, Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne's coordinator for INL oversight. "As you can imagine, the pendulum at the moment is more on the side of keeping information confidential or less readily available." J.D. Wulfhorst, a University of Idaho rural sociologist who surveyed Idaho residents' attitudes toward the nuclear site in 2003, said many people who live in eastern Idaho are tied to INL economically and socially and have a higher level of trust in the department and its contractors than people outside the immediate area. "That's not because they have sold out, but because they know and have experienced the different safety mechanisms that are in place," he said. "It's all very normal for people who live around large, complex installations like those operated by the military or Energy Department who deal with that risk on a daily basis and have familiarity with it." Other residents in Idaho may be more skeptical that the federal government would promptly alert the public to potential environmental contamination or health hazards because they've been influenced by critics and a Cold War legacy of the Energy Department neglecting public health. "There are special interest groups that have targeted the site and have educated the general population on certain elements, for better or worse, and that has created a distrust whether the agencies are disclosing all the information," Wulfhorst said. Lack of easy access to INL accident reports only adds to the skepticism some people have that the federal government may not be forthcoming about operations at the facility, said Maxand. "If they want to tout INL as the safest place on the planet for these programs, they should have as much transparency as possible," he said. "More people are paying attention to what's going on out there and there should be no reason why this kind of safety performance information is not made readily available." World & Nation + Utah + Sports + Business + Opinion + Front Page © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company [ /] ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************