***************************************************************** 11/07/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.259 ***************************************************************** 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 Daily Yomiuri: U.S. Iraq vet warns DU a threat to SDF troops 2 Xinhua: IAEA praises Nigeria's peaceful use of nuclear power 3 AFP: US intel on Iraq-Qaeda ties 'intentionally misleading' - docume 4 FPIF News | India & the IAEA Iran Vote 5 [PR] Nukes, Oil, Trade, Aid, India/Iran, Bush's PR Problems 6 Intl. Herald Tribune Op-Ed: "Iran's Nuclear Program: Put the Mulla 7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran calls for new nuclear talks with EU countri 8 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Protests Illegal U.S. Overflights 9 Guardian Unlimited: Blair: Iran Preventing Mideast Progress 10 AFP: UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran must be more transparent 11 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Nuclear Chief Sees Progress on Iran 12 Xinhua: DPRK promises "sincere efforts" in six-party talks 13 AFP: NKorea talks to last three days, new round by year end - Chines 14 AFP: Modest expectations for NKorea nuclear talks - 15 Guardian Unlimited: Beijing Nuclear Talks to Go Three Days 16 US: Victory Over New Nuclear Weapon! 17 US: [DU-WATCH] Nuclear bunker-busters: don't be fooled , they are 18 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Diplomacy Means Settling for Less 19 FT.com: US and Russia back nuclear fuel bank 20 Slovenia Business Week: IAEA Experts Propose Tweaks to NEK Decommiss 21 UPI: Intl. Intelligence - IAEA to set up nuclear fuel bank NUCLEAR REACTORS 22 Chernobyl +20: An International Conference in Kyiv, Ukraine April 23 23 US: NRC: NRC Seeks Public Comment on Revisions to Security Requireme 24 US: NRC: RIN 3150-AH60: Design Basis Threat NUCLEAR SECURITY 25 Australia ill-prepared for nuclear terrorist attack - Carr 26 UPI: Security & Terrorism - EU warns Iran on nukes NUCLEAR SAFETY 27 [NukeNet] Chernobyl +20: An International Conference in Kyiv, 28 [DU-WATCH] DU expose' film "Blowin in the Wind" nominated for 29 US: Rocky Mountain News: Program to aid sick workers going faster, b 30 US: Deseret News: Are Utah fallout stories grossly exaggerated? 31 US: GAZETA.KZ: Govt to start paying compensations to victims of nucl NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 32 AU ABC: Crossin to seek nuclear waste laws probe 33 AU ABC: Dump plan raises tourism threat worries 34 AU ABC: NT Senator backs dump deal 35 US: Business Journal: West Valley, DOE in new deal - 36 AU ABC: Indigenous people appeal against nuclear waste dump 37 AU ABC: Commonwealth going it alone on waste dump 38 AU ABC: Inquiry expected to delay nuclear dump laws. 39 US: PittsburghLIVE.com: State DEP waste plan concerns officials - 40 US: PittsburghLIVE.com: Worries follow contaminated ash to landfill 41 NEWS.com.au: Pressure mounts to oppose nuke dump - PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 42 Rocky Mountain News: Extended benefits for Flats workers rejected 43 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Fire alarm sounds at Hanford site 44 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Second Hanford downwinder trial begins 45 ABQJOURNAL: Decision Looms on Los Alamos Nuclear Lab Contract 46 lamonitor.com: State said to be hobbling cleanup progress 47 Business Journal: Stanford moves on $400 million laser project - 48 UPI: Security & Terrorism - Energy Secretary: The future is nuclear ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Daily Yomiuri: U.S. Iraq vet warns DU a threat to SDF troops The Yomiuri Shimbun Self-Defense Forces troops serving in southern Iraq could be at risk of exposing themselves--and their families--to illness and physical disability caused by depleted uranium (DU) contained in several types of munitions used by U.S. forces in Iraq, a U.S. veteran of the Iraq war said Monday. Gerard Matthew, a former U.S. Army National Guard specialist, transported equipment including shot-up tanks and destroyed vehicle parts back and forth mostly in and around the southern part of Iraq, where Japanese troops are carrying out their reconstruction and humanitarian mission. As time went on, he began suffering from severe headaches, which he initially attributed to a lack of water and the oppressive heat in Iraq. But when the headaches and other symptoms continued after he returned home, he suspected something more serious was wrong. Just over nine months later, his wife gave birth to a daughter. She was born with three fingers and most of her right hand missing. He then had his urine tested and it was found positive for DU. "I came all the way to Japan...to convey the message because you have some soldiers out there as well and they may be susceptible to it," he said at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan in Tokyo. DU is a by-product of the process used to enrich uranium for use in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons. Its high density, low cost and ability to penetrate vehicle armor make it an attractive choice for use in antitank weapons, but on impact DU particulate is dispersed in the air inside and outside the targeted vehicle. Exposure to uranium particulate, either inhaled or ingested, can lead to serious health problems including leukemia, cancers and neurocognitive effects, as well as birth defects in the children of those exposed, according to Sandia National Laboratories, a laboratory operated by Lockheed Martin that completed a two-year study for the U.S. Energy Department on the potential health effects associated with exposure to DU during the 1991 Gulf War. "I'm suffering not only those same problems from before, but now I have...a tumor in my pituitary [gland], I have neuropathy in my hands and my feet, I have trouble waking up in the morning at times and I have post-traumatic stress disorder. "[Our governments] are using cheap stuff and they are hurting us. And...we're hurting innocent civilians and we don't need to do that," said Matthew, 31. However, the U.S. State Department says on its Web site that "accusations that depleted uranium has caused cancer in Iraqi newborns are groundless," and claims "rumors" of adverse health effects caused by DU ordinance have "proved inaccurate." The Japanese government also denies that DU poses a risk. Matthew said he met two Japanese troops and took pictures with them along the so-called Highway of Death in Iraq. Matthew is part of a class-action lawsuit against the U.S. Defense Department filed in January that is now in the 2nd Circuit Court in New York. "Yes, [the military] has paid for my education, but I would give all of that up to have my daughter with five fingers on her hand and being able to do something like everybody else," Matthew said. His wife, Janise, who has two healthy children from previous relationships, also spoke at the press conference, giving a word of warning to families of SDF members stationed in Iraq. "Don't fall asleep on your people, your Japanese soldiers, when they actually come back because they might not show exactly symptoms that they are sick. If you have any family members in the military, just watch over them, make sure that they are OK," she said. Matthew added that he felt "a connection" with the people of Hiroshima when he visited Peace Park on Thursday because "I was exposed to radiation, just like them." (Nov. 8, 2005) Copyright © The Yomiuri Shimbun. [DAILY YOMIURI ONLINE | THE DAILY YOMIURI ***************************************************************** 2 Xinhua: IAEA praises Nigeria's peaceful use of nuclear power www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-11-08 02:23:45 LAGOS, Nov. 7 (Xinhuanet) -- The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has commended Nigeria's commitment to deploy nuclear facilities for peaceful uses, the official News Agency of Nigeria reported on Monday. Djermouni Belkacem, leader of an IAEA mission team to Nigeria, gave the commendation in the capital Abuja while undertaking an audit of nuclear regulatory infrastructure and accessing Nigeria'slevel of preparedness to deploy nuclear facilities in electricity generation. Nigeria, the most populous nation in Africa, has indicated its willingness to establish nuclear power plants to augment its electricity generation, currently put at about 3,000 mw compared to the 6,000 mw domestic demand. The proposed nuclear plant is expected to contribute more than 25,000 mw to the national grid on completion, according to the news agency. Belkacem said that the weeklong audit was a fundamental function of the IAEA to ensure that radioactive sources were not misapplied in view of its harmful effect on human and other organisms. The team is expected to undertake a facility tour of major users of radioactive sources in Lagos, Port Harcourt and Abuja, the report said. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 AFP: US intel on Iraq-Qaeda ties 'intentionally misleading' - document 07/11/2005 12h03 Colin Powell addresses the United Nations Security Council ©AFP/File - Henny Ray Abrams WASHINGTON, (AFP) - US military intelligence warned the Bush administration as early as February 2002 that its key source on Al-Qaeda's relationship with Iraq had provided "intentionally misleading" data, according to a declassified report. Nevertheless, eight months later, President George W. Bush went public with charges that the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein had trained members of Osama bin Laden's terror network in manufacturing deadly poisons and gases. These same accusations had found their way into then-secretary of state Colin Powell's February 2003 speech before the UN Security Council, in which he outlined the US rationale for military action against Iraq. "This newly declassified information provides additional, dramatic evidence that the administrations pre-war statements were deceptive," said Democrat Carl Levin, the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who pushed for partial declassification of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) document. The report provides a critical analysis of information provided by Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, an Islamic radical and bin Laden associate, who served as senior military trainer at a key Al-Qaeda camp in Afghanistan before it was destroyed by US forces in late 2001. In captivity, al-Libi initially told his DIA debriefers that Al-Qaeda operatives had received training from Iraq in manufacturing poisons and deadly chemical agents. But the DIA, according to its assessment, did not find the information credible. US President George W. Bush ©AFP - Jim Watson US military intelligence officers concluded that al-Libi lacked "specific details on the Iraqis involved, the... materials associated with the assistance and the location where training occurred," the report said. "It is possible," the document went on to say, "he does not know any further details; it is more likely this individual is intentionally misleading the debriefers." The DIA suggested al-Libi, who had been under interrogation for several weeks, "may be describing scenarios to the debriefers that he knows will retain their interest." Just the same, president Bush insisted during an October 2002 trip to Cincinnati, Ohio, that his administration had learned that "Iraq has trained Al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases." He repeated the same charge in February 2003. The administration's drumbeat over alleged Iraq-Qaeda ties reached a crescendo that same month when Powell went before the United Nations to accuse Iraq of hiding tons of chemical and biological weapons and nurturing nuclear ambitions. His speech, according to congressional officials, even contained a direct reference to al-Libi's testimony, albeit not his name. "I can trace the story of a senior terrorist operative telling how Iraq provided training in these weapons to Al-Qaeda," insisted the secretary of state, who now says he regrets voicing many of the charges contained in that speech. Carl Levin holds a copy of an Intelligence Committee report during a press conference with John Rockefeller ©AFP/File - Brendan Smialowski The unveiling of the documents came as Senate Democrats are stepping up pressure on their Republican colleagues, trying to force them to complete a second report on pre-war intelligence that would focus on whether members of the Bush administration had misused or intentionally misinterpreted intelligence findings. The first report on the role of US intelligence agencies in the run-up to the war was released in June 2004. Jay Rockefeller, the top Democrat of the Senate intelligence committee, said the case of al-Libi illustrates the need to look into how pre-war intelligence was used. "He's an entirely unreliable individual upon whom the White House was placing substantial intelligence trust," the senator said of al-Libi Sunday. "And that is a classic example of a lack of accountability to the American people." Al-Libi formally recanted last year, according to congressional officials. Àðàáñêèé Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005 ***************************************************************** 4 FPIF News | India & the IAEA Iran Vote Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 01:36:07 -0600 (CST) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ New at FPIF Working to make the United States a more responsible global leader and partner http://www.fpif.org/ November 1, 2005 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Introducing the latest policy analysis from Foreign Policy In Focus India and the Iran Vote in the IAEA By Ninan Koshy Indias vote in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) against Iran in September came as no surprise to anyone who has followed closely the recent course of Indias foreign policy. It is a safe guess that support for U.S. actions on Iran was one of the conditions of Indias nuclear deal with the United States, which was given the final seal of approval by President Bush during the July 2005 visit of the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Washington. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice during her visit to New Delhi in March, 2005 openly raised objections to Indias proposal for a gas pipeline from Iran, and dropped a broad hint that the Indian aspirations for a greater role in international affairs would be better served not through reform of the UNand a permanent seat for India in the Security Councilbut through ad hoc U.S-led multilateral initiatives. The message was clear. Indias relations with countries, which were against the United States were subject to approval by Washington. By the time of the Indian Prime Ministers visit to Washington this summer the military alliance of India with the United States had reached hitherto unimaginable and unprecedented levels of cooperation to use the wording of the Defense Framework Agreement signed in Washington this past June. The commitment demanded from India was clear: Behave as a nuclear power which has the closest military alliance with the United States. The vote against Iran was only a natural corollary. Dr. Ninan Koshy knkoshy@vsnl.com is a political commentator based in Trivandrum, Kerala, India, author of The War on Terror: Reordering the World (DAGA Press, 2002), and a regular analyst for Foreign Policy in Focus (online at http://www.fpif.org). See new FPIF commentary online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/2907 With printer-friendly pdf version at: http://www.fpif.org/pdf/0510iaea.pdf ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ For media inquiries: Emily Schwartz Greco, emily@ips-dc.org 202-297-5412 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Produced and distributed by FPIF:A Think Tank Without Walls, a joint program of International Relations Center (IRC) and Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). For more information, visit http://www.fpif.org. If you would like to add a name to the Whats New At FPIF list, please email: communications@irc-online.org, giving your area of interest. Please consider becoming an IRC member or donor. You can join the IRC and make a secure donation by visiting http://www.irc-online.org/donate.php. Thank you. Also see our Progressive Response newsletter at: http://www.fpif.org/progresp/index.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ International Relation Center (IRC) http://www.irc-online.org/ Siri D. Khalsa Outreach Coordinator Email: communications@irc-online.org P.O. Box 2178 Silver City, NM 88062 ***************************************************************** 5 [PR] Nukes, Oil, Trade, Aid, India/Iran, Bush's PR Problems Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 01:45:20 -0600 (CST) The Progressive Response Volume 9, Number 23 November 2, 2005 Editor: John Gershman, IRC Available online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpifzines/pr/2917 We Count on Your Support! Foreign Policy In Focus www.fpif.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FPIF Media Training session: Messages, Media and Momentum Wednesday, November 16, from 8:45 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. AFL-CIO headquarters at 815 16th St. NW, Washington, DC 20006 Run by media experts and prominent journalists, the Foreign Policy In Focus media training workshop will cover techniques for effectively pitching and conducting interviews for print and online media, television, radio, and talk shows. Speakers include: - Daniel Sagalyn, (PBS) The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer - Paul Magnusson, Business Week - Pamela Constable, The Washington Post - Ken Silverstein, Los Angeles Times - Alex Walker, TomPaine.com - Ted Clark, National Public Radio - and many others Training is open to anyone working on foreign policy issues, as well as communications staff helping foreign policy experts get media exposure. Complete information is available here: http://www.ips-dc.org/fpif-media-training/index.htm Register online now or mail a check for $60 to FPIF Media Training, c/o IPS, 733 15th Street NW Suite 1020, Washington, DC 20005. Space is limited, enroll today! For more information: mediatraining@ips-dc.org or call the Institute for Policy Studies, (202) 234-9382. Contact Emily Schwartz Greco, x226, or Saif Rahman, x254. Foreign Policy In Focus is a network for research, analysis, and action that brings together more than 600 scholars, advocates, and activists who strive to make the United States a more responsible global partner. The International Relations Center (IRC) in Silver City, New Mexico and the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) in Washington, DC jointly manage FPIF, http://www.fpif.org . Thanks again for your support and as always, we appreciate your feedback, comments, suggestions, and criticisms, which can be sent to the editor at http://www.fpif.org/form_feedback.html. Best Wishes, John Gershman Co-Director, Foreign Policy In Focus -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table of Contents I. Updates and Out-Takes Waiting to ExhaleThe Six-Party Talks Agreement | Wade Huntley As U.S. Energy Sources Decline, Caspian Sea Oil Won't Solve Supply Problem | Michael Klare TALKING POINTS #3Free Trade Agreements: CAFTA and AFTA | International Relations Center Tragedy in South Asia: The Earthquake and the U.S. Response | Shehzad Nadeem Sleight of Hand: India, Iran, & the United States | Conn Hallinan India and the Iran Vote in the IAEA | Ninan Koshy Karen Hughes' Indonesia Visit Underscores Bush Administration's PR Problems | Stephen Zunes -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. Updates and Out-Takes Waiting to ExhaleThe Six-Party Talks Agreement By Wade Huntley Some observers of developments in Korea in recent years have called upon the Bush administration to put forward a bold initiative, beyond a simple amalgam of carrots and sticks, to reverse the trajectory that has seen North Korea move ever closer to becoming a full-fledged nuclear-armed state. Whether or not Kim Jong-il is prepared to fully and permanently give up nuclear weapons capability--that core question may not be answered until the day the deal is before him--that goal becomes ever more difficult the further the existing efforts advance. A breakthrough overture would aim not only to achieve a negotiated denuclearization of the Korean peninsula and a comprehensive peace settlement, but also to utilize the six-party talks process to substantively bolster regional security cooperation and initiate a meaningful regional security community. Not least among the benefits of such a broader effort would be to mitigate the impact if a negotiated solution to North Korea's nuclear weapons ambitions is not forthcoming. The six-party talks agreement falls well short of this mark. But the agreement at least acknowledges the relevance of addressing the wider context of the nuclear crisis. No final resolution of any sort will happen quickly. The next small steps, which negotiators will confront when the fifth round of talks begins in November, will be arduous enough. But a genuine negotiation has now begun. The world, with bated breath, will be watching its progress carefully. Hopefully, our lungs will be strong enough for the wait. Wade Huntley is the Director of the Simons Centre for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Research at the Liu Institute for Global Issues, University of British Columbia and a frequent contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus ( http://www.fpif.org ). See new FPIF commentary online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/2903 As U.S. Energy Sources Decline, Caspian Sea Oil Won't Solve Supply Problem By Michael Klare The United States now stands at a critical juncture in the evolution of its energy policy, particularly with respect to petroleum and natural gas consumption. The growing worldwide need for primary energy has been translated into increased demand for every conceivable source of energy, including the newly independent republics of the Caspian Sea basin. Even with massive involvement and investment by Western firms, the exploitation of these fields will prove costly and arduous. None of the Caspian regimes is entirely stable, and when (and if) they are swept away by opposition forces, we do not want be made persona non grata, as occurred in Iran after the overthrow of the Shah in 1980. Michael T. Klare is a Foreign Policy In Focus scholar, a professor of peace and world-security studies at Hampshire College, and the author of Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependency On Imported Petroleum (Metropolitan Books, 2004). Adapted from testimony he delivered to the U.S. Senate subcommittee on International Economic Policy, Export and Trade Promotion on Sept. 27, 2005. See new FPIF policy report online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/2888 TALKING POINTS #3Free Trade Agreements: CAFTA and AFTA By International Relations Center A central component of the U.S. trade strategy is using bilateral and subregional trade agreements to leverage increased liberalization of trade and investment flows at the regional and global levels. The Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and the current negotiations to establish an Andean Free Trade Agreement (AFTA) are regarded as the building blocks of the proposed Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA). These Talking Points were prepared by Laura Carlsen, director of the Americas Program of the International Relations Center (IRC), online at www.irc-online.org . Carlsen is the author of numerous essays and book chapters on globalization, and speaks widely on trade and development. See new FPIF talking points online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftp/2896 Tragedy in South Asia: The Earthquake and the U.S. Response By Shehzad Nadeem The massive earthquake of October 8, 2005 in South Asia has assumed truly horrific proportions, killing upwards of 40,000 people, leaving 50,000 injured, and affecting more than four million people. In keeping with its slow and lackluster response to the Asian tsunami and Hurricane Katrina, the U.S. government initially offered a paltry $100,000 in aid to earthquake victims in Pakistanthe same amount of aid Afghanistan sent to the United States after Katrina. But since then, U.S. aid for rescue and reconstruction has been ratcheted up to $50 million. With this increase, the United States is behind only Kuwait and the UAE, who have pledged $100 million each. While it is true that enlightened self-interest may have inspired the Bush administration to increase its aid offering to Pakistan, what is needed now more than ever is a recasting of global security in human terms; a recognition that the human implications of such tragedies impinge directly upon the political consequences and cannot be neatly separated. Shehzad Nadeem is an analyst for Foreign Policy In Focus (online at www.fpif.org ) and a Ph.D. candidate at the University of California, San Diego. See new FPIF commentary online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/2884 Sleight of Hand: India, Iran, & the United States By Conn Hallinan This is a tale about a vote, a strike, and a sleight of hand. For the past six months the United States and the European Union (EU) have led a full court press to haul Iran before the UN Security Council for violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NNPT) by supposedly concealing a nuclear weapons program. Last month, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) voted to declare Iran in non-compliance with the Treaty, but deferred a decision on referral to the Security Council until Nov. 25. Why was India lining up with the United States and the EU against Iran, especially since it risked alienating essential domestic allies? Why would India jeopardize its relations with Iran while it is engaged in high stakes negotiations with Teheran over a $22 billion natural gas deal, and a $5 billion oil pipeline from Iran to India via Pakistan? To sort this out one has to go back to early this year when CIA Director Porter Goss and U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld testified before Congress that China posed a strategic threat to U.S. interests. Both men lobbied for a containment policy aimed at surrounding and isolating China. One key piece on this new Cold War chessboard is India, which under the previous right-wing government saw itself as a political and economic rival to Beijing. But there was an obstacle to bringing India into the ring of U.S. allies stretching from Japan in the East, to Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan in Central Asia. Conn Hallinan is a foreign policy analyst for Foreign Policy In Focus (online at www.fpif.org) and a lecturer in journalism at the University of California, Santa Cruz. See new FPIF commentary online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/2890 India and the Iran Vote in the IAEA By Ninan Koshy India's vote in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) against Iran in September came as no surprise to anyone who has followed closely the recent course of India's foreign policy. It is a safe guess that support for U.S. actions on Iran was one of the conditions of India's nuclear deal with the United States, which was given the final seal of approval by President Bush during the July 2005 visit of the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Washington. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice during her visit to New Delhi in March, 2005 openly raised objections to India's proposal for a gas pipeline from Iran, and dropped a broad hint that the Indian aspirations for a greater role in international affairs would be better served not through reform of the UNand a permanent seat for India in the Security Councilbut through ad hoc U.S-led multilateral initiatives. The message was clear. India's relations with countries, which were against the United States were subject to approval by Washington. By the time of the Indian Prime Minister's visit to Washington this summer the military alliance of India with the United States had reached hitherto unimaginable and unprecedented levels of cooperation to use the wording of the Defense Framework Agreement signed in Washington this past June. The commitment demanded from India was clear: Behave as a nuclear power which has the closest military alliance with the United States. The vote against Iran was only a natural corollary. Dr. Ninan Koshy ( knkoshy@vsnl.com is a political commentator based in Trivandrum, Kerala, India, author of The War on Terror: Reordering the World (DAGA Press, 2002), and a regular analyst for Foreign Policy in Focus (online at www.fpif.org ). See new FPIF commentary online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/2907 Karen Hughes' Indonesia Visit Underscores Bush Administration's PR Problems By Stephen Zunes It is doubtful that the Bush administration will be very successful advancing America's image in the Islamic world as long as its representatives have such trouble telling the truth. A case in point took place on October 21, when U.S. Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy Karen Hughes was talking before a group of university students in Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim country. She spoke of the U.S. invasion of Iraq and one of the justifications she gave involved Saddam Hussein's brutalization of Iraqis. While a strong case could have been made for military intervention in Iraq under the genocide convention during Saddam's Anfal campaign against the Kurds in the late 1980s, this is no justification for an invasion fifteen years after the fact. Ironically, the United States was actively supporting Saddam Hussein's government during this period, supplying his regime with military aid and generous loans. As a result, the Bush administration's justification of the U.S. invasion of Iraq on humanitarian grounds is as disingenuous as the claims that it was an act of self-defense. Indeed, the number of violent civilian deaths in Iraq in the two and a half years since the U.S. invasion is much greater than in the two and a half years prior to the invasion and is a major source of anti-American sentiment in Iraq and throughout the Islamic world. It is ironic that Ms. Hughes attempted to justify the invasion on the brutality of the Iraqi regime while she was in Indonesia, a country which suffered for more than three decades under an even more brutal dictatorship. General Suharto, who was ousted in a largely nonviolent popular uprising in 1998, was responsible for a far greater number of civilian deaths than was Saddam Hussein. Stephen Zunes is Middle East editor for Foreign Policy In Focus, a professor of Politics at the University of San Francisco, and the author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism (Common Courage Press, 2003). See new FPIF commentary online at: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/2908 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please consider supporting Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF). FPIF is a new kind of think tankone serving citizen movements and advancing a fresh, internationalist understanding of global affairs. Although we make our FPIF products freely available on the Internet, we need financial support to cover our staff time and expenses. Increasingly, FPIF depends on you and other individual donors to sustain our bare-bones budget. Click on http://www.irc-online.org/donate.php to support FPIF online, or for information about making contributions over the phone or through the mail. We Count on Your Support. Thank you. Published by Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF), a joint project of the International Relations Center (IRC, online at www.irc-online.org) and the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS, online at www.ips-dc.org). )2005. All rights reserved. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe to The Progressive Response! To manage your subscription log in at http://www.irc-online.org/lists/ To unsubscribe go to: http://www.irc-online.org/lists/unsubscribe?action=unsubscribe&mailing= &id= &email= The Progressive Response aims to provide timely analysis and opinion about U.S. foreign policy issues. The content does not necessarily reflect the institutional positions of either the International Relations Center or the Institute for Policy Studies. We're working to make the Progressive Response informative and useful, so let us know how we're doing, via email to irc@irc-online.org. Please put "Progressive Response" in the subject line. Please feel free to cross-post the Progressive Response elsewhere. We apologize for any duplicate copies you may receive. Contact the IRC's webmaster with inquiries regarding the functionality of this website. Copyright ) 2001-2005 IRC. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 Intl. Herald Tribune Op-Ed: "Iran's Nuclear Program: Put the Mullahs on Probation" Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 03:22:06 EST X-Fingerprint: Bennettramberg@aol.com-69.50 International Herald Tribune Iran's Nuclear Program: Put the mullahs on probation By Bennett Ramberg International Herald Tribune SATURDAY-SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 5-6, 2005 LOS ANGELES President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, who declared on Oct. 26 that Israel should be "wiped off the map," has added to the urgency of curbing the nuclear ambitions of the revolutionary regime. But the United States and its allies remain rudderless. True, the International Atomic Energy Agency adopted a resolution at its September 2005 meeting that clears the way for IAEA to turn the matter to the UN Security Council. But with economic interests at stake, Russia and China will oppose sanctions unless there is clear evidence that Tehran has a dedicated nuclear weapons program. What is required now is an approach that smokes out Iran's atomic weapons capacity or caps its capability to develop them. "Nuclear probation," as defined below, promises a novel approach. A review of the promise and the limits of current compliance mechanisms demonstrates its merits. Apprehension about Tehran's nuclear nonproliferation commitment emerged in 2002 when London-based Iranian dissidents revealed a secret nuclear enrichment program. Embarrased by the failure of safeguards, the IAEA took five measures: declarations of concern, inspections of suspect facilities, searches for documents, public accounting and reprimands. At first, the Iranians were unrepentant. While acknowledging that they had not reported sensitive activity to the IAEA, the mullahs argued that the failure was not material. When the IAEA refused to buy the excuses, Iran grudgingly provided documents and opened sites for inspection. At the same time, Iran argued that it had the right to continue enrichment under the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Washington took another view: Tehran had forfeited the right by violating safeguards. Fearing that the Bush administration would push the issue to an international crisis, France, Germany and Britain tried to give diplomacy a chance. For nearly two years, they offered Iran diplomatic and economic carrots to halt suspicious activities. At first, the cajoling bore fruit: Tehran intermittently suspended its suspect enterprises to show good faith. Then, on Aug. 8, 2005, it balked and resumed processing uranium. The IAEA board of governors promptly called on Iran to "reestablish full suspension of all enrichment related activities." The board also requested the IAEA director general to provide an evaluation in early September. Still the mullahs refused to budge. So on Sept. 24, the IAEA adopted a resolution bringing Iran's actions "within the competence" of the Security Council while still urging Tehran to implement transparency measures, suspend enrichment-related activity, reconsider its heavy water reactor and adhere to the Additional Protocol, which allows unimpeded inspections. What are we to make of this process? First, it rallied international opposition to Iran's ambitions. Second, it prompted Tehran to reveal much hidden activity. Third, it retarded the program. Finally, the clerics accepted international monitoring of known sites. Still, the question remains: How should the nuclear nonproliferation regime treat countries that violate nuclear safeguards, rhetorically repent when caught and then demand the right to continue suspect activities? Nuclear "probation" offers a solution. It would concede Iran's right to develop a nuclear fuel cycle. But given Tehran's historic noncompliance on safeguards, it would place resident international inspectors at all atomic sites indefinitely. In addition, Iran would be required to ratify the Additional Protocol and to expand access to personnel, procurement documentation, dual-use equipment and military workshops and research and development locations. Failure to comply would prompt immediate, specified punitive measures. The proposal recognizes the reality that Iran remains determined to get nuclear fuel facilities. Without assured sanctions, it will do so. Probation has additional advantages. It does not let the clerics off the hook for past transgressions. It provides a far more reliable tripwire to discourage a nuclear weapons breakout than IAEA sensors, seals and periodic limited inspections do today. It also offers a means of resolving the ongoing stalemate, establishing a new and important nuclear nonproliferation compliance mechanism. (Bennett Ramberg served in the State Department in the administration of George H.W. Bush. ) Copyright © 2005 The International Herald Tribune | www.iht.com ***************************************************************** 7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran calls for new nuclear talks with EU countries Robert Tait in Tehran Monday November 7, 2005 The Guardian Iran moved yesterday to lessen its international isolation by offering to reopen talks about its nuclear programme with the European Union. The proposal, by Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's supreme national security council, was clearly designed to ease diplomatic pressures that had been mounting since a call by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to "wipe Israel off the map". However, the move did not appear to represent a significant shift in Iran's position on its nuclear programme. It continued to insist yesterday on its determination to pursue a "peaceful" nuclear programme. Mr Larijani's call for renewed talks came in a letter addressed to the foreign ministers of the EU trio of Britain, France and Germany, who had been spearheading long-running negotiations before they were suspended in August after Iran resumed uranium conversion. Quoted by the semi-official Fars news agency, the letter "assessed the past exchanges and welcomed rational and constructive negotiations in the framework of international regulations". The olive branch appeared to be part of a concerted effort to head off the possibility of Iran being referred to the UN security council at a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency this month. Yesterday, Iran announced it had allowed IAEA inspectors to tour the Parchin military complex, 20 miles south of Tehran. The Bush administration, which suspects Iran of trying to develop an atomic bomb, has claimed Parchin has been used to develop high explosives compatible with nuclear weapons. In a clear sign of Iran's increasingly lonely international status, the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, has cancelled a visit to Tehran scheduled for next week. Iran's need to address its growing isolation will be highlighted at a meeting of European foreign ministers in Brussels today, at which the EU's policy of engagement with Tehran will be reviewed. The meeting is expected condemn Mr Ahmadinejad's anti-Israel tirade and demand Iran lift ad hoc trade sanctions against Britain. The embargo was imposed last month in protest at Britain's stand against Iran's nuclear programme. The Italian foreign ministry yesterday responded to accusations by its Iranian counterpart that Italy was trying to isolate Iran after pro-Israel demonstrations in Rome and other cities. "No one wants to isolate Iran," an Italian foreign ministry spokesman said. "On the contrary, we all hope that Tehran, adopting responsible conduct, wants to play a role of stabilisation. But it is Iran which inevitably isolates itself the moment it denies to exist another people and another state." Mr Ahmadinejad's comments, together with a need to act ahead of today's EU meeting, had acted as a "catalyst" to yesterday's conciliatory move, a Tehran-based political analyst told the Guardian. "Iran has the lower hand now," the analyst said. "These remarks were definitely not helpful ... Quite apart from giving Israel an opportunity to attack and launch a propaganda offensive, they put Iran in a vulnerable position. Now, in any conversation in which Iran tries to defend its goodwill and honest nature, the other side can say, your president called for the annihilation of Israel, a member of the UN. How do you expect us to trust you?" [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 8 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Protests Illegal U.S. Overflights From the Associated Press [UP] Monday November 7, 2005 11:01 PM By EDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press Writer UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Iran sent letters protesting illegal overflights by two unmanned American aircraft that crashed in Iran in recent months, documents circulated at the United Nations on Monday showed. Iran's deputy U.N. ambassador Mehdi Danesh-Yazdi asked the U.N. Security Council on Oct. 26 to circulate two letters protesting ``the violation of the territory and airspace of Iran by two American unmanned aircrafts.'' The two letters, which were circulated Monday, warned that ``the government of the United States of America will be responsible for the consequences of any recurrence of its unlawful acts.'' According to the letters, during illegal overflights an American Shadow-200 aircraft crashed on July 4 about 38 miles inside Iranian territory in the province of Ilam, and an American Hermes aircraft crashed 125 miles inside Iranian territory in the Khoram Abad area on Aug. 25. Defense Department spokesman Lt. Col. Barry Venable said the Pentagon had not yet seen Iran's complaint and declined to comment further. The United States and Iran have not had diplomatic relations since shortly after the Iran hostage crisis began in 1979. The letters were sent from Iran's Foreign Ministry to the Swiss Embassy in Tehran, which represents the United States in the Islamic country. One letter, dated Aug. 9, said Iranian authorities reported the crash of ``an alien unmanned aerial vehicle'' at sunset July 4 in Ilam province. It said ``investigations on the wreckage ... indicate this is an American Shadow-200 (RQ-7) aircraft.'' The other letter, dated Sept. 13, said Iranian authorities investigating the Aug. 25 crash of ``an alien unmanned aerial vehicle'' in the Khoram Abad area found that it was ``an American Hermes aircraft.'' ``The government of the Islamic Republic of Iran strongly protests against such unlawful acts and emphasizes the necessity to observe the principles of international law concerning the sanctity of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states, and calls for an end to such unlawful acts,'' both letters said. The United States has become increasingly concerned about Iran's nuclear ambitions. But Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has quieted fears in Europe and elsewhere that the U.S. planned a second-term invasion or air strike to eliminate what it sees as a looming nuclear threat from the Islamic republic. Although Rice has said the military option remains on the table, she has embraced European-led diplomacy. European negotiations with Tehran had stalled, leading to calls for tough U.N. sanctions, but Iran offered Sunday to resume talks on its nuclear program. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 9 Guardian Unlimited: Blair: Iran Preventing Mideast Progress From the Associated Press [UP] Monday November 7, 2005 2:01 PM LONDON (AP) - British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Monday that Iran's support of terrorism was preventing political progress being made in the Middle East and elsewhere. Blair, addressing a monthly news conference Monday, said: ``We know Iran supports terrorism around the Middle East it should stop it; until it stops it, there will be a deep dismay about the Iranian regime right 'round the world. They've just got to accept that,'' Blair said. ``What they do with this terrorism is that they prevent political progress being made whether it's in the Middle East or elsewhere.'' Last week, Blair said military action against Iran was not being considered, but warned that the international community would not stand for continued breaches of Tehran's obligations. A week earlier, at a European Union summit, Blair made comments that were interpreted as threatening military action. Responding to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's call for the destruction of Israel, he said regarding Iran's leaders: ``If they carry on like this, the question people are going to be asking us is: 'When are you going to do something about this?''' Blair said Monday the only thing that could force Iran and Syria to change was a stable and democratic Iraq. ``There is a reason why Iran and Syria do their best to destabilize the situation in Iraq because they know that if Iraq is allowed to develop as a strong, Muslim state but with secular democratic government, then it's the best argument you can possibly have for people in Iran and in Syria to say 'Why don't we have some of that democracy? Why don't we have proper civil and human rights, too,''' Blair said. He said the international community must present a unified stance and find ways of letting Iran know the strength of opposition to their actions. ``This is not aimed at Iran, or the Iranian people or even the regime except to the extent that the regime is doing things that are completely unacceptable in the international community - like supporting terrorism, like meddling in Iraq, like trying to have a nuclear weapons program when you are not supposed to have one.'' Blair also repeated calls for Iran to do more to meet international demands meant to ease concerns over its suspect nuclear program. ``Iran's got to face up to its responsibilities; its got to abide by the strictures and obligations of the of the atomic energy authority,'' he said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 10 AFP: UN nuclear watchdog chief says Iran must be more transparent 07/11/2005 18h57 Mohamed ElBaradei ©AFP - Tim Slaon WASHINGTON (AFP) - UN atomic watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei called on Iran to be more transparent about its actions to ease international fears that it is aiming to obtain a nuclear weapon. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency spoke as European negotiators studied a new Iranian offer to resume talks over its disputed nuclear programme, while the Islamic Republic also moved toward more work on uranium enriched fuel. In remarks prepared for an international conference here for the 60th anniversary of the first official nonproliferation proposal, ElBaradei said Tehran must come clean on its nuclear intentions. "Over the past two and half years, we have compiled a detailed picture of most aspects of Iran's past and current nuclear program," ElBaradei said, according to the transcript. Iranians of the People's Mujahadeen organization demonstrate against Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime ©AFP - Thierry Monasse "But given that the program was concealed for nearly 20 years, and that a number of open questions remain, the responsibility rests with Iran to provide, if needed, additional transparency measures," ElBaradei said. ElBaradei added however that he was heartened by some recent moves toward greater openness. "We are making progress," he told the audience. "We are getting access." But he insisted: "The ball is in their court" The UN's nuclear watchdog chief, winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize, is to meet US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Tuesday. The United States -- which views Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism -- has long accused the Islamic state of seeking to develop nuclear weapons, although it has backed European efforts to engage Tehran. Iran insists that its nuclear program is peaceful and that it has the right to civilian nuclear energy. Satellite image shows the Bushehr nuclear reactor site in Iran ©AFP/DIGITALGLOBE/File ElBaradei said that improved transparency from Tehran would "enable the (UN) agency to resolve these questions, and to provide the required assurance about the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program." Iran on Sunday asked Britain, France and Germany to reopen stalled nuclear talks, which broke off in August when Tehran resumed uranium conversion in defiance of international calls to maintain a suspension. The European Union said Monday it was studying Iran's new offer to resume talks on Tehran's disputed nuclear programme. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, one of three foreign ministers who have led the European Union initiative to engage Iran by offering benefits in return for a nuclear freeze, said Britain, France and Germany will reply shortly to Tehran's offer. Speaking in Brussels before a meeting of EU foreign ministers, Straw confirmed that "informal discussions" are continuing with the Iranians. Two Iranians work at the zirconium production plant at Isfanhan ©AFP/File - Henghameh Fahimi The IAEA board is to meet on November 24 and could theoretically refer Iran to the UN Security Council for sanctions. Britain, France and Germany have attempted to persuade Iran to permanently suspend uranium enrichment as a watertight guarantee that its nuclear programme is peaceful. But Iran insists its right to enrichment is enshrined in the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and its additional protocol. Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki on Monday reaffirmed his country's claim that its programme is peaceful and legal. "We insist on Iran's undeniable right in the (NPT) and international law, which is our right to peaceful nuclear technology," said the minister. Iran refuses to go back on conversion and says it is only ready to negotiate as long as its right to enrichment is recognized. ElBaradei's keynote speech was issued as a statement at the opening of the Carnegie International Non-Proliferation Conference Monday. + Àðàáñêèé Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005 ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Nuclear Chief Sees Progress on Iran From the Associated Press [UP] Monday November 7, 2005 10:31 PM By BARRY SCHWEID AP Diplomatic Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - As Europeans mull an Iranian offer to resume negotiations, the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said Monday that his inspectors were making progress in their effort to probe the country's nuclear weapons intentions. ``We are moving in the right direction,'' Mohamed ElBaradei, winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize, said at a conference sponsored by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. However, he said his inspectors were eager to take a look at the Lavizan facility, where Iran conducts high-explosive tests that could have a bearing on developing weapons. Overall, he said, ``we are making good progress with Iran.'' Iran has offered to reopen negotiations with Britain, France and Germany. There has been no formal response, but British Prime Minister Tony Blair said in London that ``Iran's got to face up to its responsibilities, it's got to abide by the strictures and obligations of the atomic energy authority.'' At the State Department, spokesman Adam Ereli said Iran should agree to stop its enrichment program before any new talks with the Europeans. The board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, of which ElBaradei is director general, has held back from referring its criticism of Iran to the U.N. Security Council, where economic and political penalties would be considered. ElBaradei offered no recommendation in his remarks at the conference, attended by officials, scientists and academicians from 17 countries. Iran's determination to pursue enrichment of weapons material is the primary concern of the Europeans, the United States and the U.N. agency. ElBaradei said he was hopeful that, within a year, a nuclear fuel reserve could be established to provide countries like Iran with technology for civilian nuclear reactors while they would agree to a moratorium in enriching nuclear fuel. ``We are very close,'' he said. He said Iran and North Korea, whose nuclear program also is of concern, need to be made to feel secure, with economic and other concessions, in the event they give up nuclear weapons. In a report released Monday, the General Accounting Office praised the IAEA as a cornerstone of U.S. efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and for increasing its efforts to combat nuclear terrorism and helping countries to safeguard nuclear and radioactive material. The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, also suggested that the agency is stretched thin and should consider eliminating or reducing its oversight in countries with small quantities of nuclear material. And, the GAO said, despite success in uncovering some countries' secret nuclear activities, ``a determined country can still conceal a nuclear weapons program.'' Negotiations on North Korea's program are due to resume on Wednesday in Beijing, with the United States, China, South Korea, Japan and Russia all pressing for a plan to implement North Korea's pledge to end its program. Last month, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman told the IAEA in a videotaped message that the United States would establish a nuclear fuel reserve for countries that forgo the ability to make their own nuclear fuel. And Russia has offered to make nuclear material available to Iran through the IAEA. ElBaradei said Monday that ``once you have that assured supply, you have taken away the justification for countries to say, 'I'd like to make my own fuel,' and that's 80 percent of the problem.'' ElBaradei was praised by several delegates to the two-day conference for his findings in early 2003, before President bush went to war with Iraq, that there was no evidence Saddam Hussein had hidden arsenals of weapons of mass destruction, a claim that was pivotal to Bush's war policy. The administration opposed a third term for ElBaradei as head of the U.N. agency, but it had to relent when other countries could not be swayed to line up with the United States against the Egyptian diplomat. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 12 Xinhua: DPRK promises "sincere efforts" in six-party talks www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-11-08 08:45:26 PYONGYANG, Nov. 8 (Xinhuanet) -- Kim Gye-gwan, head of the delegation of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) to the six-party talks, said here Tuesday his country cherishes the joint statement issued during the fourth round of talks and is willing to make "sincere efforts" during the fifth round talks. Kim was speaking at Pyongyang Sun-an Airport before traveling to Beijing to attend the talks concerning the nuclear issue of the Korean Peninsula, which is scheduled to start on Wednesday. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 13 AFP: NKorea talks to last three days, new round by year end - Chinese Mon Nov 7, 1:34 AM ET TOKYO, (AFP) - This week's talks on ending North Korea" /> North Korea's nuclear program will last three days and are unlikely to reach a breakthrough, although negotiations will resume by the end of the year, Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei said. Wu downplayed expectations of progress in the six-nation talks starting Wednesday, noting there was still a gap between the United States and North Korea. "It will be for three days," Wu, speaking to Japanese media in Beijing, said of the upcoming talks. "It is premature to expect some kind of major achievement. We are at the stage where a new process is starting," Wu was quoted as saying by Kyodo News. "We want to set up another opportunity for further discussions. It will be resumed within the year," he said, according to the online edition of the Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper. Wu suggested setting up a panel of experts to carry out the statement reached in September under which North Korea agreed in principle to scrap its nuclear programs in exchange for energy assistance and other benefits. "The ultimate goal is stated in the joint statement, but not the steps to attain it," Wu said, as quoted by Jiji Press said. "We will ask the participating nations to discuss ways to execute the joint statement," he said. China, Japan, South Korea" /> South Korea, Russia and the United States have been negotiating on and off with North Korea since 2003 amid fears that the communist regime is preparing nuclear weapons. The United States wants North Korea to dismantle its nuclear program immediately, while Pyongyang is holding out for benefits upfront from Washington before surrendering its bargaining chip. The gap between the two sides "is a dangerous factor that can potentially halt the progress of six-way talks," Wu said, according to Jiji. Chinese President Hu Jintao" /> Hu Jintaotravelled to Pyongyang last month to encourage North Korea to stay at the negotiating table. "North Korea said in general it wants to keep promises it made and take action. But it does not mean there are no difficulties in carrying out the promises made," Wu said. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 14 AFP: Modest expectations for NKorea nuclear talks - Monday November 7, 07:57 PM BEIJING, (AFP) - Six nations will meet for new negotiations on North Korea's nuclear program in Beijing this week, as expectations are kept deliberately low to avoid costly disappointment, analysts said. Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing, for one, has warned smooth sailing is the least likely scenario, ahead of Wednesday's start of the fifth round of talks involving China, the two Koreas, the United States, Japan and Russia. "We have confidence that thanks to the patient and flexible efforts of the various parties, the six-party talks will be carried forward," Li told reporters at the start of the weekend. "Despite that, we are quite sure that some problems will be unavoidable." The reluctance of the American and North Korean delegates to budge from entrenched positions is the main reason why talks will probably move at a snail's pace, according to observers. "It is premature to expect a complete agreement or fast resolution of North Korean problems at the six-party talks," said Dae-Sook Suh, an expert on Korean issues at the University of Hawaii. "In view of the US policy toward North Korea, no one truly expects a quick and binding resolution," he said. At the last round in September the six sides issued a joint statement of purpose agreeing to verifiably scrap North Korea's nuclear programs in exchange for energy assistance and other benefits. However, sharp differences remain in the talks, especially over the sequence in which the highly technical process will be done. "The minimum that is acceptable for progress at the talks is a willingness by North Korea to define 'all nuclear programs'," said Ralph Cossa, president of Honolulu-based think tank Pacific Forum CSIS. The North Koreans should not expect detailed discussion of foreign energy assistance, which the outside world is not prepared to provide until the isolated regime pulls back definitively from its nuclear ambitions. "How this is finessed will also test Chinese diplomacy as well as US and North Korean flexibility but it must not be allowed to detract from the real subject of the talks, which is denuclearization," Cossa said. The talks in the Chinese capital are open-ended, and could be recessed next week when the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) meets in the South Korean city of Busan for its annual summit. All of the six parties except North Korea are members of APEC, and having the respective leaders gathered in Busan can give instant endorsement, or instant criticism, to whatever may comes out of the Beijing talks, Cossa said. "The fact that the leaders will soon gather may also provide more incentive on participants, other than North Korea, to achieve some progress," he said. "This can be good, unless North Korea believes it gives them leverage and tries to take advantage of it." Failure to make at least some noticeable progress in Beijing will have a negative impact on Sino-North Korean ties, and a breakdown will have a disastrous one. China has sent enough messages to North Korea that Pyongyang could ill afford to alienate its few allies, said Jing-dong Yuan, an expert on Asian non-proliferation at California's Monterey Institute of International Studies. "One can never be certain about what move Kim will make, but one thing is pretty certain: he cares about his regime's survival and that survival will be questionable if he deliberately harms China's vital security interests," he said. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Australia &NZ Pty Limited. All rights ***************************************************************** 15 Guardian Unlimited: Beijing Nuclear Talks to Go Three Days From the Associated Press [UP] Monday November 7, 2005 11:16 AM BEIJING (AP) - The latest round of six-party talks on the North Korean nuclear issue will last three days, beginning Wednesday, the official Xinhua News Agency reported Monday, citing a foreign ministry official. Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said the first phase of the fifth round would last three days, with a detailed schedule to be decided by the six parties involved, Xinhua said. Xinhua paraphrased Kong as saying that ``holding the talks by phases in the new round could have a better result.'' The talks involving China, the United States, South Korea, Japan, Russia and North Korea have been ongoing since 2003 and are aimed at getting Pyongyang to give up its nuclear ambitions. Those efforts achieved their first success in September when the North promised to abandon its nuclear programs in return for economic aid, security assurances and diplomatic recognition. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 16 Victory Over New Nuclear Weapon! Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 01:26:39 -0600 (CST) Thanks in part to your actions, we achieved an enormous victory this week, when Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM) announced that Congress would deny all funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator. The Bush administration has sought to justify developing this new nuclear weapon in order to attack deeply buried command centers or underground stores of chemical and biological weapons. Independent analysis, however, has found that such a weapon would be ineffective and the radioactive fall-out could kill millions of innocent people in surrounding areas. For the last three years UCS and our activists have been working to eliminate funding for this misguided weapons program. While last year this work led to the money being dropped, this year the Bush administration came back with a renewed but reduced request for funding. Senator Domenici, who has been a prominent supporter of research into this new weapon, sought to keep the program alive. With the support of thousands of activists like you, and the leadership of Representative David Hobson--Republican chair of the key House committee that decides funding for nuclear weapons programs--this year the money was again eliminated. For more information, please see: The UCS statement on the victory http://ucsaction.org/ct/wp_tf_Y1SRfM/ Senator Domenici's statement http://ucsaction.org/ct/w1_tf_Y1SRfL/ The UCS fact sheet on the program http://ucsaction.org/ct/w7_tf_Y1SRfA/ The UCS animation that visually demonstrates the critical flaws in this weapon. http://ucsaction.org/ct/wd_tf_Y1SRf_/ Thank you for sending thousands of letters to Congress opposing this dangerous and ineffective weapon. -------------------------------------------------- Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this. http://ucsaction.org/join-forward.html?domain=ucsaction&r=Ud_tf_Y1QRdG If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for Union of Concerned Scientists at: http://ucsaction.org/ucsaction/join.html?r=Ud_tf_Y1QRdGE ***************************************************************** 17 [DU-WATCH] Nuclear bunker-busters: don't be fooled , they are Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 00:56:09 -0600 (CST) Oct 28/05 whitehouse says its "Closing door on nuclear BB's" http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi? file=/chronicle/archive/2005/10/28/EDG2NFEHIE1.DTL But Pentagon and State have already told North Korea it should fear fissile warhead on a bunlerbuster cruise missile http://www.wslfweb.org/nukes/foia.htm www.wslfweb.org/docs/12_jsscm.pdf Here you will see a picture of a uranium penetrator carrying a nuke. [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] ***************************************************************** 18 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Diplomacy Means Settling for Less From the Associated Press [UP] Monday November 7, 2005 9:46 AM AP Photo BRAA105 By ANNE GEARAN AP Diplomatic Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - In showdowns over Iran, North Korea and now Syria, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice seemingly agrees that half a loaf is better than none - an unexpectedly pragmatic streak for a Bush administration better known for going its own way in international affairs. Rice was an architect of the war in Iraq as President Bush's national security adviser, and long an open advocate of a forceful foreign policy that is often viewed with suspicion abroad. Her rhetoric hasn't changed much now that Rice is Bush's second-term secretary of state. Despite tough talk, Rice isn't conducting business as an ideologue or an absolutist, said Alan Henrikson, a diplomatic historian at Tufts University's Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. ``There has been a greater emphasis on diplomacy in the second Bush administration, which is altogether welcome,'' Henrikson said. Steven C. Clemons, foreign policy director for the New America Foundation think tank, called Rice a realist, albeit one who appears committed to Bush's second-term mandate to spread democracy even in places such as Saudi Arabia, a close Washington ally where true representational democracy seems a long way off. ``I don't really think the things she's doing are really robust, but she is willing to see the glass as half full,'' said Clemons, a critic of U.N. Ambassador John R. Bolton and other administration figures seen as hard-liners. ``She is moving forward incrementally.'' Rice will visit Saudi Arabia next week, after what promises to be difficult talks with Israeli and Palestinian leaders over the increased violence and unexpected pessimism following Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. Rice is expected to use a firmer hand than she has so far to push both sides toward compromise on issues such as smoother border crossings. On the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea - both countries Bush once famously labeled part of an axis of evil - Rice has agreed to try carrot-and-stick diplomacy shunned in the first term. The North Korea talks have been more successful, with an agreement in September that Pyongyang will give up its current nuclear weapons and renounce new ones. The deal capped two years of negotiations that had seemed headed nowhere, and was a diplomatic coup for the United States and the other four countries negotiating with the reclusive communist North. It also came with a catch for the United States: North Korea now has at least the theoretical right to demand a nuclear reactor to produce electricity, something the administration had previously called a deal-breaker. A take-what-you-can-get approach was also on display last week when Rice accepted a watered-down statement on Syria from the United Nations Security Council. The resolution does not mention sanctions or make an express threat of military action, but it says Syria will face unspecified further action if it fails to cooperate with a U.N. investigation of the assassination of an anti-Syrian politician in Lebanon. The administration favored economic or other sanctions, and the initial draft threatened them. Neither Rice nor other Western diplomats, however, could win support for that move from Russia, a close ally of Damascus, or from China and Algeria, the Security Council's only Arab member. Rice and partner France accepted the milder language and won unanimous support on the council. On Iran, Rice has quieted fears in Europe and elsewhere that the U.S. planned a second-term invasion or air strike to eliminate what it sees as a looming nuclear threat from the Islamic republic. Although Rice has said the military option remains on the table, she embraced European-led diplomacy with Tehran last spring. That effort stalled over the summer, but the United States had European powers at its side when Rice and others began to beat the drum for tough U.N. sanctions. As it later did with Syria, the United States has so far settled for less than it wanted on Iran. The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency first put off a vote and then, in September, passed a resolution that although harshly critical of Iran did not ask the Security Council to step in immediately with sanctions. U.S. diplomats framed the Iran vote as a victory, in part because only one nation sided outright with Tehran. Others, such as Russia, abstained. The United States may yet persuade other countries to go along with tough sanctions, or the European diplomacy the administration once viewed with skepticism may one day bear fruit. If not, Rice will have a half-measure in her pocket, plus the good will of formerly suspicious European diplomats. --- On the Net: State Department: http://www.state.gov --- EDITOR'S NOTE - Anne Gearan covers diplomacy and foreign affairs for The Associated Press. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 19 FT.com: US and Russia back nuclear fuel bank + By Guy Dinmore in Washington Published: November 7 2005 20:21 | Last updated: November 7 2005 [nuclear waste image] Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the UN nuclear monitor, said on Monday he had won commitments from the US and Russia for an initiative to create an international nuclear fuel bank. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said only such an international approach could resolve the problem of countries being able to develop a nuclear bomb through their own development of the fuel cycle. “You can’t target one country,†he told a Washington conference hosted by the Carnegie think-tank, referring to international pressure on Iran over its nuclear programme. Mr ElBaradei said he was “very close†to being able to establish an assured supply of nuclear fuel, under IAEA management, within the next year. The US made a commitment in September to supply 17 tonnes of highly enriched uranium that would be blended down to 290 tonnes of lightly enriched fuel. Russia would also give material from dismantled weapons. Japan’s multi-billion-dollar nuclear facility, to be built at Rokkasho, could also become part of a global fuel bank system, he suggested. Iran insists on its right under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) to develop the entire nuclear fuel cycle. In August, it renewed uranium conversion work at its Isfahan plant, ending a suspension agreement reached with the “EU3†– France, Germany and the UK. However, Iran has not moved to the more critical stage of uranium enrichment – what the EU3 calls its “red lineâ€.The IAEA hopes Iran can be persuaded not to enrich uranium in exchange for a guaranteed supply from outside. The US has accepted in principle the idea of Iran receiving fuel from Russia for its Bushehr nuclear power plant. The EU3 is exploring the possibility of a joint venture in Russia involving Iranian finance but not technology access. A western diplomat said the US was broadly supportive of Mr ElBaradei’s fuel bank proposal. Mr ElBaradei said the IAEA was making “good progress†but not as fast as he would like with its inspections in Iran. The recent visit to the Parchin military complex represented access beyond that required of Iran under its safeguard agreements. He added that there was only one more site, at Lavasan, that the IAEA wanted to see. The European Union on Monday issued a muted response to Iran’s latest request to resume talks with the EU3, broken off in August. Jack Straw, UK foreign secretary, said the bloc was “studying†the request. Additional reporting by Daniel Dombey in Brussels © Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2005. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. ***************************************************************** 20 Slovenia Business Week: IAEA Experts Propose Tweaks to NEK Decommissioning Plan Experts of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have proposed changes to the decommissioning plan for the Krsko Nuclear Power Plant (NEK), the Agency for Radioactive Waste said on Thursday, 3 November. The experts, who were in Krsko between 24 and 28 October as part of a regional IAEA mission, have said that new calculations should be made and a new preliminary decommissioning plan drawn up by 2008. Their remarks refer to Module 5 of the decommissioning plan, which deals with technical solutions regarding decommissioning. The experts believe the changes should later be transposed to the other modules. Nadja Zeleznik of the Agency for Radioactive Waste said that it is unclear at this point whether decommissioning costs have been correctly evaluated. She said more precise calculations will be made over the next three years. The nuclear power plant, which was built in 1981 and has a top output capacity of 676 MW, is in joint ownership of Slovenia and Croatia. In line with the current decommissioning programme, it will be phased out by 2023. Source: Slovene Press Agency STA ***************************************************************** 21 UPI: Intl. Intelligence - IAEA to set up nuclear fuel bank United Press International - 11/7/2005 4:30:00 PM -0500 Newstrack: Two women want the Fargo (N.D.) School WASHINGTON, Nov. 7 (UPI) -- The IAEA's Mohamed ElBaradei wants to set up a world nuclear fuel bank to supply individual countries and prevent them from enriching their own fuel. "We need a multi-national facility and a bank to guarantee that if a country isn't developing weapons (of mass destruction) it can get fuel," ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told a conference Monday on non-proliferation organized by the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He said Russia and the United States have both offered to make nuclear fuel available to the IAEA for the fuel bank program, which would be run by the agency. Once an assured supply has been set up, "no single country will have the right to enrich uranium on its own," ElBaradei said. "You have taken away the justification for countries to say, 'I'd like to make my own fuel,' and that's 80 percent of the problem." He said the IAEA would begin building stocks of nuclear fuel next year. © Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 22 Chernobyl +20: An International Conference in Kyiv, Ukraine April 23-25, 2005 Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 12:03:38 -0500 X-Fingerprint: nirsnet@nirs.org-127.127 Heinrich Boell Stiftung

Heinrich Böll Stiftung

Nuclear Information and Resource Service

World Information Service on Energy

Ecoclub

Greens/EFA in European Parliament

 

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                        Contact: Tetyana Murza, Ecoclub

November 7, 2005                                                          +380-362-237024; tanyam@nirs.org

                                                                                       +380-97-595-2346  (cell)

 

Chornobyl+20: Remembrance for the Future

An International Conference in Kyiv, Ukraine, April 23-25, 2005

 

An international conference to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Chornobyl catastrophe will be held at the House of the Teacher in Kyiv, Ukraine from April 23-25, 2006.

 

The conference will bring together independent scientists, environmentalists, NGO organizations, sustainable energy experts and a broad public audience for a new examination of the 1986 Chornobyl accident’s continuing health, social and economic consequences and to draw new attention to the promise and need to implement sustainable energy technologies.

 

The conference will begin on April 23, Orthodox Easter, with a cultural program. The conference will continue on April 24 and 25 with a focus on three areas: First, the ongoing catastrophe of Chornobyl and its continuing consequences, including release of a new study which reviews and analyzes the recently published report of the IAEA,WHO and others; second, the continuing safety, economic, proliferation and other problems posed by nuclear power generally; third, the development of a roadmap to a sustainable energy future. The issues will be addressed in a mixture of plenary sessions and workshops. Evening events will air issues of broad public concern.

 

A gallery hall inside the House of the Teacher will include a photo exhibition, while another hall will host displays of sustainable energy technology and provide information from international and Ukrainian organizations.

 

The conference is being sponsored by the Heinrich Böll Stiftung (Berlin), The Greens/EFA in the European Parliament, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (Washington, DC), World Information Service on Energy (Amsterdam), and Ecoclub (Rivne, Ukraine) and is being supported by numerous NGOs across the globe. Nearly 40 NGO representatives participated in an initial planning meeting in Kyiv September 30-October 2, 2005.

 

Information on speakers and other specifics will be announced soon. A website (www.ch20.org) is being developed and will soon be available for pre-registration and other information.

 

In the U.S., contact Michael Mariotte, NIRS, nirsnet@nirs.org; 202.328.0002, for more information.

 ***************************************************************** 23 NRC: NRC Seeks Public Comment on Revisions to Security Requirements News Release - 2005-15 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 05-151 November 7, 2005 governing the requirements pertaining to the design basis threat (DBT). These security regulations specify the DBT that nuclear power plants and certain related facilities must be able to defend against with high assurance. The proposed rule includes requirements related both to radiological sabotage, and theft or diversion of strategic special nuclear material. The specific adversary characteristics related to the DBT are protected and are not publicly available. Following a thorough review of security after the September 2001 terrorist attacks, the NRC issued supplemental DBT requirements by Orders that contained additional detailed adversary characteristics. These Orders required nuclear power plants and Category I fuel cycle licensees to revise their physical security plans, security officer training and qualification plans, and contingency response plans. The Orders resulted in revisions to the licensees protection strategies, including increased guard patrols, additional physical barriers and better coordination with law enforcement and the military. The proposed rule would amend the NRCs regulations to, among other things, include the supplemental security requirements previously imposed by the Commissions April 29, 2003, DBT Orders. The proposed rule would also define the level of security necessary to ensure public health and safety. In part, this rulemaking also addresses a petition filed by the Committee to Bridge the Gap, which asked that the DBT be amended to include attacks by air. The NRC considered the issues raised in the petition and continues to evaluate them. Comments must be received within 75 days of publication in the Federal Register to guarantee consideration by the NRC. Comments submitted later than this date may be considered if practical. They can be mailed to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Comments can be hand-carried to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Md., between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on federal work days, or they can be faxed to 301-415-1101. E-mail comments can also be sent to SECY@nrc.gov. In addition, comments can also be submitted through the NRCs eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. The entire proposed rule will also be available at that Web location. More information about the DBT and security requirements for NRC licensees can be found on the NRCs Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/safety- security.html. Last revised Monday, November 07, 2005 ***************************************************************** 24 NRC: RIN 3150-AH60: Design Basis Threat FR Doc 05-22200 [Federal Register: November 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 214)] [Proposed Rules] [Page 67380-67388] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr07no05-21] AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its regulations that govern the requirements pertaining to design basis threat (DBT). The proposed rule would amend the Commission's regulations to, among other things, make generically applicable the security requirements previously imposed by the Commission's April 29, 2003 DBT orders, which applied to existing licensees, and redefine the level of security requirements necessary to ensure that the public health and safety and common defense and security are adequately protected. The proposed rule would revise the DBT requirements for radiological sabotage (applied to power reactors and Category I fuel cycle facilities), and theft or diversion of NRC-licensed Strategic Special Nuclear Material (SSNM) (applied to Category I fuel cycle facilities). The NRC has developed draft Regulatory Guides (RGs) that provide guidance to licensees concerning the DBT for radiological sabotage and theft and diversion. These draft RGs have limited distribution because they contain either safeguards or classified information. The specific details related to the threat, which contain both safeguards information (SGI) and classified information, are contained in adversary characteristics documents (ACDs) that are not publicly available. These documents include specific details of the attributes of the threat consistent with the requirements imposed in the April 29, 2003, DBT orders. Additionally, a Petition for Rulemaking (PRM-73-12), filed by the Committee to Bridge the Gap, was considered as part of this proposed rulemaking; the NRC's disposition of this petition is contained in this document. DATES: Submit comments by January 23, 2006. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. Please include the following number RIN 3150-AH60 in the subject line of your comments. Comments on rulemakings submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including any information in your submission that you do not want to be publicly disclosed. Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. E-mail comments to: . If you do not receive a reply e- mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact us directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at . Address questions about our rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905; e-mail . Comments can also be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal . Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm Federal workdays. (Telephone (301) 415-1966). Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 415-1101. You may submit comments on the information collections by the methods indicated in the Paperwork Reduction Act Statement. Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Selected documents, including comments, may be viewed and downloaded electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web site at . Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at . From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and [[Page 67381]] Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415- 4737 or by e-mail to . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Timothy Reed, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone (301) 415-1462; e-mail: or Mr. Richard Rasmussen, Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone (301) 415-8380; e-mail: . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Background. II. Rulemaking Initiation. III. Proposed Regulations. IV. Section-by-Section Analysis. V. Petition for Rulemaking (PRM-73-12). VI. Guidance. VII. Criminal Penalties. VIII. Compatibility of Agreement State Regulations. IX. Availability of Documents. X. Plain Language. XI. Voluntary Consensus Standards. XII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Environmental Assessment: Availability. XIII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement. XIV. Regulatory Analysis. XV. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification. XVI. Backfit Analysis. I. Background The DBT requirements in 10 CFR 73.1(a) describe general adversary characteristics that designated licensees must defend against with high assurance. These NRC requirements include protection against radiological sabotage (generally applied to power reactors and Category I fuel cycle facilities) and theft or diversion of NRC-licensed SSNM (generally applied to Category I fuel cycle facilities). The DBTs are used by these licensees to form the basis for site-specific defensive strategies implemented through security plans, safeguards contingency plans, and guard training and qualification plans. Following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the NRC conducted a thorough review of security to ensure that nuclear power plants and other licensed facilities continued to have effective security measures in place for the changing threat environment. In so doing, the NRC recognized that some elements of the DBTs required enhancement due to the escalation of the domestic threat level. After soliciting and receiving comments from Federal, State, local agencies, and industry stakeholders, the NRC imposed by order supplemental DBT requirements that contained additional detailed adversary characteristics. The Commission deliberated on the responsibilities of the local, State, and Federal governments to protect the nation, and the responsibility of the licensees to protect individual nuclear facilities, before reaching consensus on a reasonable approach to security in the April 29, 2003 DBT orders. After gaining experience under these orders over the past two years, the Commission believes that the attributes of the orders should be generically imposed on certain classes of licensees. The Commission's decision was based on the analysis of intelligence information regarding the trends and capabilities of the potential adversaries and discussions with Federal, law enforcement, and intelligence community agencies. These enhanced adversary characteristics are reflective of the new threat environment. In general terms, DBTs are comprised of attributes selected from the overall threat environment. The ACDs set forth the specific details of the attributes of the DBTs. The DBT technical basis document contains a basis for the specific adversary characteristics. These supplemental documents contain safeguards and classified information that is distributed only to persons with authorized access and on a need-to- know basis. The NRC's DBT takes into consideration actual demonstrated adversary characteristics as well as pertinent intelligence information applicable to domestic threats and a determination as to those characteristics against which a private security force could reasonably be expected to provide protection. The April 29, 2003 DBT orders required nuclear power reactors and Category I fuel cycle licensees to revise their physical security plans, security personnel training and qualification plans, and safeguards contingency plans to defend against the supplemental DBT requirements. The orders required licensees to make security enhancements such as increased patrols; augmented security forces and capabilities; additional security posts; additional physical barriers; vehicle checks at greater standoff distances; better coordination with law enforcement and military authorities; augmented security and emergency response training, equipment, and communication; and more restrictive site access controls for personnel, including expanded, expedited, and more thorough initial and follow-on screening of temporary and permanent workers. The NRC has reviewed and approved the revised security plans that were developed and submitted by power reactor and Category I fuel facility licensees in response to the April 29, 2003 orders. II. Rulemaking Initiation On July 19, 2004, the staff issued a memorandum entitled ``Status of Security-Related Rulemaking'' to inform the Commission of plans to close two longstanding security-related actions and replace them with a comprehensive rulemaking plan to modify physical protection requirements for power reactors. This memorandum described rulemaking efforts that were preempted by the terrorist activities of September 11, 2001, and summarized the security-related actions taken following the attack. In response to this memorandum, the Commission directed the staff in an August 23, 2004, Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM), to forego the development of a rulemaking plan and provide a schedule for the completion of 10 CFR 73.1, 73.55, and Part 73 Appendix B rulemakings. The requested schedule was provided to the Commission by memorandum dated November 16, 2004. III. Proposed Regulations The principal objectives of the proposed rule are, among other things, to make generically applicable the security requirements previously imposed by the Commission's April 29, 2003 DBT orders, and to define in NRC regulations the level of security necessary to ensure adequate protection of the public health and safety and common defense and security. The Commission continues to consider many factors in developing the proposed DBT and other security requirements. As directed by Congress under section 651(a) of the recently enacted Energy Policy Act of 2005, the NRC is giving consideration to the following 12 factors as part of this rulemaking to revise the design basis threats: 1. The events of September 11, 2001; 2. An assessment of physical, cyber, biochemical, and other terrorist threats; 3. The potential for attack on facilities by multiple coordinated teams of a large number of individuals; 4. The potential for assistance in an attack from several persons employed at the facility; 5. The potential for suicide attacks; 6. The potential for water-based and air-based threats; [[Page 67382]] 7. The potential use of explosive devices of considerable size and other modern weaponry; 8. The potential for attacks by persons with a sophisticated knowledge of facility operations; 9. The potential for fires, especially fires of long duration; 10. The potential for attacks on spent fuel shipments by multiple coordinated teams of a large number of individuals; \1\ ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- \1\ Transportation of spent nuclear fuel is subject to separate regulatory requirements and public comments will be considered. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- 11. The adequacy of planning to protect the public health and safety at and around nuclear facilities, as appropriate, in the event of a terrorist attack against a nuclear facility; and 12. The potential for theft and diversion of nuclear material from such facilities. A number of these factors are already reflected in the text of the proposed rule. For example, the proposed rule would require protection against suicidal attackers, insiders, and waterborne threats. Some of these factors are not included in the proposed rule. For example, there is no provision in the proposed DBT rule for an attribute of air-based threats. The Commission invites and looks forward to public comment on the proposed rule provisions, as well as whether or how the 12 factors should be addressed in the DBT rule. The Commission will further consider and resolve any comments received in the final rule. The proposed rule would also revise certain exemptions for independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs). The current DBT rule exempts ISFSIs from the land vehicle transport and land vehicle bomb threats contained in Sec. Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(i)(E) and (a)(1)(iii), respectively. These exemptions should no longer be retained because the Commission issued orders to ISFSIs on October 16, 2002, requiring ISFSIs to protect against these threats. The NRC evaluated the need to apply waterborne requirements to ISFSIs and concluded that other means in the proposed rule were sufficiently protective to preclude the need for specific requirements regarding waterborne threats. Consequently, an exemption from the waterborne threat has been added for ISFSIs in this proposed rule. The proposed rule would also amend the exemption in the current Sec. 73.1(a) for licensees subject to the provisions of Sec. 73.20. The current rule exempts these licensees from the requirements to protect against vehicles transporting adversary personnel and equipment and the land vehicle bomb. The Commission has determined, however, that due to the current threat environment certain licensees subject to Sec. 73.20 (Category I fuel cycle facilities) need to protect against such threats, so the exemption must be amended accordingly. The amended exemption would continue for other licensees described in 10 CFR 73.20 (e.g., fuel reprocessing plants licensed under Part 50). The approach proposed in this rulemaking maintains a level of detail in the Sec. 73.1(a) rule language that is generally comparable to the current regulation, while updating the general DBT attributes in a manner consistent with the insights gained from the application of supplemental security requirements imposed by the April 29, 2003, DBT orders. The result is a proposed rule with a level of detail that reflects all major features of the DBTs, yet avoids compromising licensee security by not publishing the specific tactical and operational capabilities of the DBT adversaries. The goal of this approach is to provide sufficient public notice of the upgrades to the DBTs, including the new modes of attack that facilities must be prepared to defend against, so that meaningful public input is possible regarding the proposed rule's scope and content. The NRC recognizes that some stakeholders may expect more detail than is set forth in the current or proposed DBT regulations. However, the more detail that is made publicly available about the specific capabilities of the DBT adversaries, the greater the chance that potential adversaries could exploit that information. The disclosure of such details as the specific weapons, force size, ammunition, vehicles, and bomb sizes that licensees must be prepared to defend against could substantially assist an adversary in planning an attack. On the other hand, it is important for the public to be informed of the types of attacks against which nuclear power plants and Category I fuel cycle facilities are required to defend. The public has a vital stake in the security of these facilities, as well as the right to meaningful comment when NRC proposes to amend its regulations. Understanding the general scope of the proposed DBT rule is necessary if the public is to exercise its right to meaningful comment and oversight of NRC regulations. After carefully balancing these competing interests, the NRC arrived at the level of detail regarding the attributes of the DBT presented in the proposed rule. More specific details (e.g., specific weapons, ammunition, etc.) are consolidated in ACDs, which contain classified or safeguards information. The technical bases for the ACDs are derived largely from intelligence information, and also contain classified and safeguards information that cannot be publicly disclosed. These documents must be withheld from public disclosure and made available only on a need-to-know basis to those who otherwise qualify for access. The ACDs may be updated from time to time as a result of the NRC's periodic threat reviews, which NRC has been conducting since 1979. Those threat assessments are performed in conjunction with the intelligence and law enforcement communities to identify changes in the threat environment which may in turn require adjustment of NRC security requirements. Future revisions to the ACDs would not require changes to the DBT regulations in Sec. 73.1, provided the changes remain within the scope of the rule text. The NRC consulted with Federal, State, and local agencies, and with industry stakeholders in developing the updated DBTs. This consultation involved analysis of intelligence information regarding the trends and capabilities of potential adversaries, and discussion with Federal, law enforcement, and intelligence community agencies. Public comments and suggestions received in response to PRM-73-12, also informed the NRC's development of this proposed rule. The resolution of PRM-73-12, which is being granted in part through this rulemaking, is more fully discussed in Section V of this notice. The Commission concludes that the proposed amendments to Sec. 73.1 will continue to ensure adequate protection of public health and safety and the common defense and security by requiring the secure use and management of radioactive materials. The revised DBTs represent the largest threats against which private sector facilities must be able to defend with high assurance. The proposed amendments to Sec. 73.1 reflect requirements currently in place under existing NRC regulations and orders. [[Page 67383]] IV. Section-by-Section Analysis The following table provides a comparison between the proposed rule text and the current rule text. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- Old New Change ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- (a) Purpose. This part prescribes (a) Purpose. This part prescribes The proposed paragraph is modified requirements for the establishment requirements for the establishment to clarify that the DBTs are and maintenance of a physical and maintenance of a physical designed to protect against protection system which will have protection system which will have diversion in addition to theft of capabilities for the protection of capabilities for the protection of special nuclear material. special nuclear material at fixed special nuclear material at fixed The proposed exemptions would be sites and in transit and of plants sites and in transit and of plants updated based on the order in which special nuclear materials in which special nuclear material requirements and conforming changes used. The following design basis is used. The following design basis to other paragraphs of this part. threats, where referenced in threats, where referenced in ensuing sections of this part, ensuing sections of this part, shall be used to design safeguards shall be used to design safeguards systems to protect against acts of systems to protect against acts of radiological sabotage and to radiological sabotage and to prevent the theft of special prevent the theft or diversion of nuclear material. Licensees subject special nuclear material. Licensees to the provision of Sec. 72.182, subject to the provisions of Sec. Sec. 72.212, Sec. 72.20, Sec. 73.20 (except for fuel cycle 73.50, and Sec. 73.60 are exempt licensees authorized under part 70 from Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(i)(E) and of this chapter to received, Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(iii). acquire, possess, transfer, use, or deliver for transportation formula quantities of strategic special nuclear material), Sec. 73.50, and Sec. 73.60 are exempt from Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(i)(E), Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(iii), Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(iv), Sec. 73.1(a)(2)(iii) and Sec. 73.1(a)(2)(iv). Licensees subject to the provisions of Sec. 72.212, are exempt from Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(iv). (1) Radiological sabotage. (i) A (1) Radioloigcal sabotage. (i) A The proposed paragraph adds new determined violent external determined violence external capabilities to the DBT including assault, attack by stealth, or assault, attack by stealth, or operation as one or more teams and deceptive actions, of several deceptive actions, including attack from multiple entry points. persons with the following diversionary actions, by an attributes, assistance and adversary force capable of equipment: operating as one or more teams, attacking from one or more entry points, with the following attributes, assistance and equipment: (1)(i)(A) Well-trained (including (1)(i)(A) Well-trained (including The proposed paragraph would add to military training and skills) and military training and skills) and the DBT adversaries who are willing dedicated individuals, dedicated individuals, willing to to kill or be killed and are kill or be killed, with sufficient knowledgeable about specific target knowledge to identify specific selection. equipment or locations necessary for a successful attack, (1)(i)(B) inside assistance which (1)(i)(B) active (e.g., facilitate may include a knowledgeable entrance and exit, disable alarms individual who attempts to and communications, participate in participate in a passive role violent attack) or passive (e.g., (e.g., provide information), an provide information), or both, active role (e.g., facilitate knowledgeable inside assistance. entrance and exit, disable alarms The reference to an individual and communications, participate in would be removed and the paragraph violent attack), or both, reworded to provide flexibility in defining the scope of the inside threat. (1)(i)(C) suitable weapons, up to (1)(i)(C) suitable weapons, The phrase ``up to and including'' and including hand-held automatic including hand-held automatic was changed to ``including'' to weapons, equipped with silencers weapons, equipped with silencers provide flexibility in defining the and having effective long range and having effective long range range of weapons licensees must be accuracy, accuracy, able to defend against. (1)(i)(D) hand-carried equipment, (1)(i)(D) hand-carried equipment, This description is not revised by including incapacitating agents and including incapacitating agents and the proposed rule. explosives for use as tools of explosives for use as tools of entry or for otherwise destroying entry or for otherwise destroying reactor, facility, transporter, or reactor, facility, transporter, or container integrity or features of container integrity or features of the safeguards systems, and the safeguards systems, and (1)(i)(E) a four-wheel drive land (1)(i)(E) land and water vehicles, The scope of vehicles licensees must vehicle used for transporting which could be used for defend against would be expanded to personnel and their hand-carried transporting personnel and their include water vehicles and a range equipment to the proximity of vital hand-carried equipment to the of land vehicles beyond four-wheel areas, and proximity of vital areas, and drive vehicles. (1)(ii) An internal threat of an (1)(ii) An internal threat, and The current rule describes the insider, including an employee (in internal threat as a threat posed any position), and by an individual. The language would be revised to provide flexibility in defining the scope of the internal threat without adding details that may be useful to an adversary. [[Page 67384]] (1)(iii) A four-wheel drive land (1)(iii) A land vehicle bomb The proposed paragraph would be vehicle bomb. assault, which may be coordinated updated to reflect that licensees with an external assault, and are required to protect against a wide range of land vehicles. A new mode of attack not previously part of the DBT would be added indicating that adversaries may coordinate a vehicle bomb assault with another external assault. None (1)(iv) A waterborne vehicle bomb The proposed paragraph would add a assault, which may be coordinated new mode of attack not previously with an external assault. part of the DBT, that being a waterborne vehicle bomb assault. This paragraph also adds a coordinated attack concept. (2) Theft or diversion of formula (2) Theft or diversion of formula The proposed paragraph would add new quantities of strategic special quantities of strategic special adversary capabilities to the DBT nuclear material. (i) A determined, nuclear material. (i) A determined including operation as one or more violent, external assault, attack violent external assault, attack by teams and attack from multiple by stealth, or deceptive actions by stealth, or deceptive actions, entry points. a small group with the following including diversionary actions, by attributes, assistance, and an adversary force capable of equipment: operating as one or more teams, attacking from one or more entry points, with the following attributes, assistance and equipment: (2)(i)(A) Well-trained (including (2)(i)(A) Well-trained (including The proposed paragraph would add to military training and skills) and military training and skills) and the DBT adversaries who are willing dedicated individuals; dedicated individuals, willing to to kill or be killed and are kill or be killed, with sufficient knowledgeable about specific target knowledge to identify specific selection. equipment or locations necessary for a successful attack; (2)(i)(B) Inside assistance that may (2)(i)(B) Active (e.g., facilitate The reference to an individual would include a knowledgeable individual entrance and exit, disable alarms be removed and the paragraph who attempts to participate in a and communications, participate in reworded to provide flexibility in passive role (e.g., provide violent attack) or passive (e.g., defining the scope of the inside information), an active role (e.g., provide information), or both, threat. facilitate entrance and exit, knowledgeable inside assistance, disable alarms and communications, participate in violent attack), or both; (2)(i)(C) Suitable weapons, up to (2)(i)(C) Suitable weapons, The phrase ``up to and including'' and including hand-held automatic including hand-held automatic was changed to ``including'' to weapons, equipped with silencers weapons, equipped with silencers provide flexibility in defining the and having effective long-range and having effective long-range range of weapons licensees must be accuracy; accuracy; able to defend against. (2)(i)(D) Hand-carried equipment, (2)(i)(D) Hand-carried equipment, This description is not revised by including incapacitating agents and including incapacitating agents and the proposed rule. explosives for use as tools of explosives for use as tools of entry or for otherwise destroying entry or for otherwise destroying reactor, facility, transporter, or reactor, facility, transporter, or container integrity or features of container integrity or features of the safeguards system; the safeguards system; (2)(i)(E) Land vehicles used for (2)(i)(E) Land and water vehicles, The scope of vehicles licensees must transporting personnel and their which could be used for defend against would be expanded to hand-carried equipment; and transporting personnel and their include water vehicles and a range hand-carried equipment; and of land vehicles beyond four-wheel drive vehicles. (2)(i)(F) the ability to operate as Deleted This requirement would be included two or more teams. in Sec. 73.1(a)(2)(i). (2)(ii) An individual, including an (2)(ii) An internal threat, and The current rule describes the employee (in any position), and internal threat as a threat posed (2)(iii) A conspiracy between by an individual. The language individuals in any position who may would be revised to provide have: flexibility in defining the scope (A) Access to and detailed knowledge of the internal threat without of nuclear power plants or the adding details that may be useful facilities referred to in Sec. to an adversary. 73.20(a), or (B) items that could facilitate theft of special nuclear material (e.g., small tools, substitute material, false documents, etc.), or both. None (2)(iii) A land vehicle bomb The proposed paragraph would be assault, which may be coordinated updated to reflect that licensees with an external assault, and are required to protect against a wide range of land vehicles. A new mode of attack not previously part of the DBT would be added indicating that adversaries may coordinate a vehicle bomb assault with another external assault. None (2)(iv) A waterborne vehicle bomb The proposed paragraph would add a assault, which may be coordinated new mode of attack not previously with an external assault. part of the DBT, that being a waterborne vehicle bomb assault. This coordinated attack concept is another upgrade to the current regulation. [[Page 67385]] Additional guidance concerning the adversary characteristics is located in the corresponding draft regulatory guides (radiological sabotage in DG-5017 and theft and diversion in DG-5018). These draft RGs contain either safeguards or classified information and are not publicly available. V. Petition for Rulemaking (PRM-73-12) As discussed above in this notice, the NRC staff reviewed PRM-73-12 to determine whether the regulations in Part 73 regarding the DBT should be amended in response to requests in PRM-73-12 and public comments received on the petition. PRM-73-12 was filed by the Committee to Bridge the Gap on July 23, 2004. The petition requests that the NRC amend its regulations to revise the DBT regulations (in terms of the numbers, teams, capabilities, planning, willingness to die and other characteristics of adversaries) to a level that encompasses, with a sufficient margin of safety, the terrorist capabilities evidenced by the attacks of September 11, 2001. The petition also requests that security plans, systems, inspections, and force-on-force exercises be revised in accordance with the amended DBT. Finally, the petition requests a requirement be added to Part 73 to construct shields against air attack (the shields are referred to as ``beamhenge'') which the petition asserts would enable nuclear power plants to withstand an air attack from a jumbo jet. PRM-73-12 was published for public comment in the Federal Register on November 8, 2004 (69 FR 64690). The public comment period expired on January 24, 2005. There were 845 comments submitted on PRM-73-12, of which 528 were form letters. Many of the comments were submitted after the comment period expired; however, the staff reviewed and considered all of the comments. Comments were received from nine state attorneys general, approximately 20 public interest groups, a U.S. Congressman from Massachusetts, and six industry groups and licensees. In addition, two U.S. Senators and a U.S. Representative (all from New Jersey) requested an extension to the comment period. The bulk of the comments either supported the petition, requested a stronger DBT, or requested that NRC give consideration to the petition. All the comments from industry and licensees opposed the petition and indicated that the supplemental DBT requirements imposed (by order) to date were adequate. Based on a review of PRM-73-12 public comments, the NRC staff prepared a summary of those comments in the PRM-73-12 comment summary table (ML053040061). The table does not list each individual comment. The staff has grouped the comments by topic and provided the NRC's response. A review of the table shows that although there were a large number of comments, the comments fell into a relatively small number of topics. The table contains the NRC's responses to the issues raised by public comments, but the responses to comments do not include a detailed comparison of the differences between the current DBT requirements (as imposed by the April 29, 2003 orders) and the requests in PRM-73-12. Such a comparison could compromise security. The NRC's post-September 11, 2001, review of security requirements encompassed all the issues raised by the petitioner, and a number of the petitioner's requested changes to the DBT have been incorporated into the proposed DBT amendments as discussed below. The NRC is partially granting PRM-73-12 by conducting this proposed rulemaking to revise the DBT requirements in Sec. 73.1(a). Some of the requested changes in PRM-73-12 are reflected in the proposed rule text. These changes include the proposed requirements in Sec. Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(i) and (a)(2)(i) that licensees be required to protect against one or more teams of adversaries operating from multiple entry points. PRM-73-12 also requested that the DBT regulation make clear that adversaries are willing to kill and be killed. This change is reflected in proposed Sec. Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(i)(A) and (a)(2)(i)(A). The proposed rule would also require licensees to protect against waterborne threats, a wider range of land vehicles, and coordinated attacks. All of these features of the proposed rule grant requests made in PRM-73-12. The NRC intends to defer action on the other requests in PRM-73-12, specifically those aspects of PRM 73-12 which deal with the defense of nuclear power plants against aircraft, and to address those issues as part of the final action on this proposed rule. Federal and other governmental efforts to protect the nation from terrorist attacks by air have increased substantially since September 11, 2001. Those efforts already include a variety of measures such as enhanced airline passenger and baggage screening, strengthened cockpit doors, and the federal Air Marshals program. Federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies have increased efforts to identify potential aircraft-related threats before they can be carried out. Such improvements have already been exercised by the Department of Defense and the Federal Aviation Administration through responses to airspace violations near nuclear power plants that were subsequently determined not to be threats. These and other government-wide efforts have improved protection against air attacks on all industrial facilities, both nuclear and non-nuclear. Following the September 11, 2001, attacks in New York, the Pentagon, and Pennsylvania, the NRC conducted assessments of the potential for and consequences of terrorists targeting a nuclear power plant for aircraft attack, the physical effects of such a strike, and compounding factors such as meteorology that would affect the impact of potential radioactive releases. Furthermore, the NRC required existing nuclear power plant licensees to develop and implement strategies to mitigate potential consequences in the unlikely event of an attack, including an aircraft crash into a nuclear power plant. For new nuclear power plants, the opportunity exists to develop designs that provide for enhanced protection against potential threats. The NRC staff will continue to review intelligence and threat reporting to recommend any appropriate modifications to the DBT or NRC requirements to mitigate air attacks. PRM-73-12 also requests that nuclear power plants be required to defend against more than the number of attackers that carried out the September 11, 2001 attacks, and identifies specific weapons that nuclear power plants should be able to defend against. The Commission cannot comment publicly on the precise numbers of attackers or types of weapons that nuclear power plants are required to defend against under the proposed DBTs and ACDs for reasons stated earlier in this notice. However, the Commission has conducted a thorough review of security to continue to ensure that nuclear power plants and other licensed facilities have effective defensive capabilities and security measures in place given the changing threat environment. An important part of this review was the consideration of a terrorist attack similar to that which occurred on September 11, 2001. However, the DBT is based upon review and analysis of actual demonstrated adversary characteristics in a range of terrorist attacks, and a determination as to the attacks against which a private security force could reasonably be expected to defend. [[Page 67386]] In summary, the NRC grants PRM-73-12 in part by conducting this proposed rulemaking to revise the DBT requirements in Sec. 73.1(a) to reflect certain specific requested changes contained in PRM-73-12 in the proposed rule text, and is deferring action on other requests in PRM-73-12, specifically those aspects of PRM-73-12 which deal with air- based attacks. VI. Guidance The NRC staff is preparing new regulatory guides, as listed below, to provide detailed guidance on the revised DBT requirements in proposed Sec. 73.1. These guides are intended to assist current licensees in ensuring that their security plans meet requirements in the proposed rule, as well as future license applicants in the development of their security programs and plans. The new guidance incorporates the insights gained from applying the earlier guidance that was used to develop, review, and approve the site security plans that licensees put in place in response to the April 2003 orders. As such, this regulatory guidance is expected to be consistent with revised security measures at current licensees. The publication of the regulatory guides is planned to coincide with the publication of the final rule. The guides are described below. 1. Draft Regulatory Guide (DG-5017), ``Guidance for the Implementation of the Radiological Sabotage Design-Basis Threat (Safeguards).'' This regulatory guide will provide guidance to the industry on the radiological sabotage DBT. DG-5017 contains safeguards information and, therefore, is being withheld from public disclosure and distributed on a need-to-know basis to those who otherwise qualify for access. 2. Draft Regulatory Guide (DG-5018), ``Guidance for the Implementation of the Theft and Diversion Design-Basis Threat (Classified).'' This regulatory guide will provide guidance to the industry on the theft or diversion DBT. DG-5018 contains classified information and, therefore, is withheld from public disclosure and distributed only on a need to know basis to those who otherwise qualify for access. VII. Criminal Penalties For the purposes of Section 223 of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended, the Commission is issuing the proposed rule to revise Sec. 73.1 under one or more sections of 161 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA). Criminal penalties, as they apply to regulations in Part 73 are discussed in Sec. 73.81. VIII. Compatibility of Agreement State Regulations Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of Agreement States Programs,'' approved by the Commission on June 20, 1997, and published in the Federal Register (62 FR 46517; September 3, 1997), this rule is classified as compatibility ``NRC.'' Compatibility is not required for Category ``NRC'' regulations. The NRC program elements in this category are those that relate directly to areas of regulation reserved to the NRC by the AEA or the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and although an Agreement State may not adopt program elements reserved to NRC, it may wish to inform its licensees of certain requirements via a mechanism that is consistent with the particular State's administrative procedure laws, but does not confer regulatory authority on the State. IX. Availability of Documents Some documents discussed in this rule are not available to the public. The following table indicates which documents are available to the public and how they may be obtained. Public Document Room (PDR). The NRC Public Document Room is located at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. Rulemaking Web site (Web). The NRC's interactive rulemaking Web site is located at . These documents may be viewed and downloaded electronically via this Web site. NRC's Electronic Reading Room (ERR). The NRC's electronic reading room is located at . ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Document PDR Web ERR ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------- Environmental Assessment.... X X ML053040039 Regulatory Analysis......... X X ML053040013 Public Comments on PRM-73-12 X X ML053040061 Radiological Sabotage no no no Adversary Characteristics document. Theft and Diversion no no no Adversary Characteristics document. Technical Basis Document.... no no no Draft RG DG-5017 on no no no Radiological Sabotage. Draft RG DG-5018 on Theft or no no no Diversion. Memorandum: Status of X X ML041180532 Security-Related Rulemaking. Commission SRM dated August X X ML042360548 23, 2004. Memorandum: Schedule for X X ML043060572 Part 73 Rulemakings. Letter to Petitioner........ X X ML052920150 Commission SRM dated October X X ML053000448 27, 2005. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------- X. Plain Language The Presidential memorandum dated June 1, 1998, entitled ``Plain Language in Government Writing,'' published on June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883) directed that the Government's documents be in plain, clear, and accessible language. The NRC requests comments on the proposed rule specifically with respect to the clarity and effectiveness of the language used. Comments should be sent to the NRC as explained in the ADDRESSES caption of this notice. XI. Voluntary Consensus Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-113, requires that Federal agencies use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless using such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or is otherwise impractical. The NRC is not aware of any voluntary consensus standard that could be used instead of the proposed Government-unique standards. The NRC will consider using a voluntary consensus standard if an appropriate standard is identified. XII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Environmental Assessment: Availability The Commission has determined under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51, that this rule, if adopted, would not be a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality [[Page 67387]] of the human environment and, therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required. The determination of this environmental assessment is that there will be no significant offsite impact to the public from this action. However, the general public should note that the NRC is seeking public participation; availability of the environmental assessment is provided in Section IX. Comments on any aspect of the environmental assessment may be submitted to the NRC as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading. The NRC has sent a copy of the environmental assessment and this proposed rule to every State Liaison Officer and requested their comments on the environmental assessment. XIII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This proposed rule does not contain new or amended information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the Office of Management and Budget, approval number 3150-0002. Public Protection Notification The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request for information or an information collection requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently valid OMB control number. XIV. Regulatory Analysis The Commission has prepared a draft regulatory analysis on this proposed regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the alternatives considered by the Commission. The Commission requests public comment on the draft regulatory analysis. Availability of the regulatory analysis is provided in Section IX. Comments on the draft analysis may be submitted to the NRC as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading. XV. Regulatory Flexibility Certification In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Commission certifies that this rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule affects only the licensing and operation of nuclear power plants and Category I fuel cycle facilities. The companies that own these plants do not fall within the scope of the definition of ``small entities'' set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size standards established by the NRC (10 CFR 2.810). XVI. Backfit Analysis The NRC has determined, pursuant to the exception in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(4)(iii), that a backfit analysis is unnecessary for this proposed rule. Section 50.109 states in pertinent part that a backfit analysis is not required if the Commission finds and declares with appropriate documented evaluation for its finding that a ``regulatory action involves defining or redefining what level of protection to the public health and safety or common defense and security should be regarded as adequate.'' The proposed rule would increase the security requirements currently prescribed in NRC regulations, and is necessary to protect nuclear facilities against potential terrorists. When the Commission imposed security enhancements by order in April 2003, it did so in response to an escalated domestic threat level. Since that time, the Commission has continued to monitor intelligence reports regarding plausible threats from terrorists currently facing the U.S. The Commission has also gained experience from implementing the order requirements and reviewing revised licensee security plans. The Commission has considered all of this information and finds that the security requirements previously imposed by DBT orders, which applied only to existing licensees, should be made generically applicable. The Commission further finds that the proposed rule would redefine the security requirements stated in existing NRC regulations, and is necessary to ensure that the public health and safety and common defense and security are adequately protected in the current, post- September 11, 2001, environment. List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 73 Criminal penalties, Export, Hazardous materials transportation, Import, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures. For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC is proposing to adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 73. PART 73--PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF PLANTS AND MATERIALS 1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 53, 161, 68 Stat. 930, 948, as amended, sec. 147, 94 Stat. 780 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2167, 2201); sec. 201, as amended, 204, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1245, sec. 1701, 106 Stat. 2951, 2952, 2953 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5844, 2297f); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note). Section 73.1 also issued under secs. 135, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2232, 2241 (42 U.S.C, 10155, 10161). Section 73.37(f) also issued under sec. 301, Pub. L. 96-295, 94 Stat. 789 (42 U.S.C. 5841 note). Section 73.57 is issued under sec. 606, Pub. L. 99-399, 100 Stat. 876 (42 U.S.C. 2169). 2. In Sec. 73.1, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows: Sec. 73.1 Purpose and scope. (a) Purpose. This part prescribes requirements for the establishment and maintenance of a physical protection system which will have capabilities for the protection of special nuclear material at fixed sites and in transit and of plants in which special nuclear material is used. The following design basis threats, where referenced in ensuing sections of this part, shall be used to design safeguards systems to protect against acts of radiological sabotage and to prevent the theft or diversion of special nuclear material. Licensees subject to the provisions of Sec. 73.20 (except for fuel cycle licensees authorized under Part 70 of this chapter to receive, acquire, possess, transfer, use, or deliver for transportation formula quantities of strategic special nuclear material), Sec. 73.50, and Sec. 73.60 are exempt from Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(i)(E), Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(iii), Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(iv), Sec. 73.1(a)(2)(iii), and Sec. 73.1(a)(2)(iv). Licensees subject to the provisions of Sec. 72.212 are exempt from Sec. 73.1(a)(1)(iv). (1) Radiological sabotage. (i) A determined violent external assault, attack by stealth, or deceptive actions, including diversionary actions, by an adversary force capable of operating as one or more teams, attacking from one or more entry points, with the following attributes, assistance and equipment: (A) Well-trained (including military training and skills) and dedicated individuals, willing to kill or be killed, with sufficient knowledge to identify specific equipment or locations necessary for a successful attack, (B) Active (e.g., facilitate entrance and exit, disable alarms and communications, participate in violent attack) or passive (e.g., provide information), or both, knowledgeable inside assistance, (C) Suitable weapons, including hand-held automatic weapons, equipped with silencers and having effective long range accuracy, (D) Hand-carried equipment, including incapacitating agents and [[Page 67388]] explosives for use as tools of entry or for otherwise destroying reactor, facility, transporter, or container integrity or features of the safeguards system, and (E) Land and water vehicles, which could be used for transporting personnel and their hand-carried equipment to the proximity of vital areas, and (ii) An internal threat, and (iii) A land vehicle bomb assault, which may be coordinated with an external assault, and (iv) A waterborne vehicle bomb assault, which may be coordinated with an external assault. (2) Theft or diversion of formula quantities of strategic special nuclear material. (i) A determined violent external assault, attack by stealth, or deceptive actions, including diversionary actions, by an adversary force capable of operating as one or more teams, attacking from one or more entry points, with the following attributes, assistance and equipment: (A) Well-trained (including military training and skills) and dedicated individuals, willing to kill or be killed, with sufficient knowledge to identify specific equipment or locations necessary for a successful attack; (B) Active (e.g., facilitate entrance and exit, disable alarms and communications, participate in violent attack) or passive (e.g., provide information), or both, knowledgeable inside assistance, (C) Suitable weapons, including hand-held automatic weapons, equipped with silencers and having effective long-range accuracy; (D) Hand-carried equipment, including incapacitating agents and explosives for use as tools of entry or for otherwise destroying reactor, facility, transporter, or container integrity or features of the safe-guards system; (E) Land and water vehicles, which could be used for transporting personnel and their hand-carried equipment; and (ii) An internal threat, and (iii) A land vehicle bomb assault, which may be coordinated with an external assault, and (iv) A waterborne vehicle bomb assault, which may be coordinated with an external assault. Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 2nd day of November, 2005. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 05-22200 Filed 11-4-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 25 Australia ill-prepared for nuclear terrorist attack - Carr November 2005. 09:48 (ACDT)Tuesday, 8 November 2005. 06:48 (AWST) Former New South Wales premier Bob Carr says Australia needs to prepare for mass evacuations should there be a nuclear terrorist attack. Mr Carr gave a speech in Melbourne last night that compared Australia's capabilities with American efforts during Hurricane Katrina. Mr Carr says Australia needs to be better prepared. "We've got to be ready with plans that tell us when it's safe to go back, when radiation levels can be scrubbed down to acceptable levels, how you rebuild the core of one of our cities from scratch and how you handle evacuation, how you manage huge displaced populations," he said. He says Australia has never really been tested. Mr Carr says there is no doubt terrorists have attempted to get hold of nuclear weapons. "They've probed access to nuclear bombs, there are said to be literally thousands of bombs or concentrations of material under relatively loose security under the old Soviet Union and in Pakistan to name two countries with less than gold standard security," he said. ***************************************************************** 26 UPI: Security & Terrorism - EU warns Iran on nukes United Press International - 11/7/2005 2:55:00 PM -0500 Newstrack: Two women want the Fargo (N.D.) School BRUSSELS, Nov. 7 (UPI) -- The European Union Monday warned Iran to halt uranium enrichment activities and stop threatening Israel or face international isolation. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad provoked a storm of protest last month when he told a rally in Tehran that Israel should "be wiped off the map." EU foreign ministers meeting in Brussels Monday said they condemned "in the strongest terms" the president's remarks. The European Union "deplores calls for violence and for the destruction of any state. These comments cause concern about Iran's role in the region and its future intentions," it said. The European Commission's foreign policy chief, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, told United Press International: "President Ahmadinejad's remarks were so shocking and unacceptable that it provides a reason for us to be firm." Foreign ministers also expressed their "grave concern" at the resumption of nuclear activity at the Esfahan processing site. Talks between Iran and the EU trio of France, Germany and Britain broke down in August after the country resumed its uranium conversion work at the site. On Sunday Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, called on the European Union to resume negotiations on its nuclear research program, saying it had allowed U.N. inspectors to enter the Parchin military complex. Tehran insists its research program is of a purely peaceful nature. Foreign ministers refused to welcome the offer, merely stating they would look at the letter carefully. "The Iranians are under an obligation to respond positively to the resolution of the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency and we look to them to do that," said British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 27 [NukeNet] Chernobyl +20: An International Conference in Kyiv, Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 18:30:30 -0800 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Heinrich Böll Stiftung Nuclear Information and Resource Service World Information Service on Energy Ecoclub Greens/EFA in European Parliament FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Tetyana Murza, Ecoclub November 7, 2005 +380-362-237024; tanyam@nirs.org +380-97-595-2346 (cell) Chornobyl+20: Remembrance for the Future An International Conference in Kyiv, Ukraine, April 23-25, 2005 An international conference to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Chornobyl catastrophe will be held at the House of the Teacher in Kyiv, Ukraine from April 23-25, 2006. The conference will bring together independent scientists, environmentalists, NGO organizations, sustainable energy experts and a broad public audience for a new examination of the 1986 Chornobyl accidents continuing health, social and economic consequences and to draw new attention to the promise and need to implement sustainable energy technologies. The conference will begin on April 23, Orthodox Easter, with a cultural program. The conference will continue on April 24 and 25 with a focus on three areas: First, the ongoing catastrophe of Chornobyl and its continuing consequences, including release of a new study which reviews and analyzes the recently published report of the IAEA,WHO and others; second, the continuing safety, economic, proliferation and other problems posed by nuclear power generally; third, the development of a roadmap to a sustainable energy future. The issues will be addressed in a mixture of plenary sessions and workshops. Evening events will air issues of broad public concern. A gallery hall inside the House of the Teacher will include a photo exhibition, while another hall will host displays of sustainable energy technology and provide information from international and Ukrainian organizations. The conference is being sponsored by the Heinrich Böll Stiftung (Berlin), The Greens/EFA in the European Parliament, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (Washington, DC), World Information Service on Energy (Amsterdam), and Ecoclub (Rivne, Ukraine) and is being supported by numerous NGOs across the globe. Nearly 40 NGO representatives participated in an initial planning meeting in Kyiv September 30-October 2, 2005. Information on speakers and other specifics will be announced soon. A website (www.ch20.org) is being developed and will soon be available for pre-registration and other information. In the U.S., contact Michael Mariotte, NIRS, nirsnet@nirs.org; 202.328.0002, for more information. _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 28 [DU-WATCH] DU expose' film "Blowin in the Wind" nominated for Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2005 01:46:25 -0600 (CST) Hi - I thought this would be of interest. I met David at the Bradbury at the Uranium Weapons Conference in 2003. Our interview with him is found at http://traprockpeace.org/depleted_uranium_hamburg03.html (scroll to the end of the page for the mp3 audio file) http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m17404&date=02-nov-2005_18:09_ECT Australia November 2, 2005 I have just had the distinct privilege of viewing the Australian short film documentary titled Blowin in the Wind,. Blowing in the Wind has been nominated for Academy Award; it premiered at a Newtown (Sydney) cinema, on Thursday, where it will run for one week, then moves to other major city centres (see www.bsharp.net.au ). The cleverly produced documentary is a wake-up call to Australians, exposing the dreadful, horrible, inhuman use of the material known as Depleted Uranium, (DU), as a projectile warhead, on all manner of arsenal and weaponry, being used to annihilate nations around the world. DU is the weapons material of choice for all of the guided missiles and Bunker-Buster, bombs being rained onto the Afghanistan and Iraqi citizens in the senseless, unlawful invasion of these Middle-East countries. Tank shells, heavy calibre machine guns, ship-to-shore rockets and heavy guns, have poured thousands of tons of the miserable compound into the cities and countryside of affected battlegrounds, producing a wasteland of radioactively contaminated earth, water and air, DU has a half-life, which is rated in millions of years. So, not only the poor sods who are murdered by the blast or are left dismembered and crippled for the rest of their lives, suffering the effects of the blasted DU, those who survive are also effected. The contamination lingers in their food, drinking water and the air they breath, causing grotesque deformities and diseases, especially in new- born children. Blowin in the Wind, was produced by New South Wales, North coast film producers, David Bradbury and Peter Scott, who, together with a team of very talented technicians, have put together a most powerful expose, on the manufacture and widespread use of Depleted Uranium weapons, with special emphasis on U.S. and Australian Defence Forces use of the miserable material. The film draws attention to the lack of awareness amongst Australian residents, regarding the amount of exposure we have in this country, to the effects of DU. Already, cases of horribly deformed new-born babies are occurring in Australia, due to the huge amounts of DU weaponry being dumped onto our countryside in some of the most absurdly stupid and careless acts anyone could possibly imagine. If you want to know more about this dumping of DU into Australia and other serious challenges to you and your family for the future, might I suggest you make it your business to get to see Blowing in the Wind. Some of the more amazing facts which are exposed in the film, concern the huge amount of cover-up by deliberate lying and either no announcements or outright denials about Australia,s complicit involvement in furnishing the supply of DU into the World,s atmosphere, soil and water. You will be stunned when you learn the number of large American Military Bases which exist on this island and more are planned through the Memorandums of Understanding, which are held by our leaders with the United States of America. You will be staggered. I give this film five stars. I recommend it to all Australians, especially young Australians and Australians with young families. The film is considered to be suitable for 15 plus, however, outside the ugliness in the scenes of maiming and disfigurement, there is nothing which is beyond the comprehension of early teen-agers and I would thoroughly recommend the whole family view what is after all, real life, real time, everybody should know, type drama. I bet there will be some serious family discussion after you see Blowin in the Wind. ### Charles Jenks Chair of Advisory Board and Web Manager Traprock Peace Center 103A Keets Road Deerfield, MA 01342 413-773-7427 fax 413-773-7507 http://www.traprockpeace.org [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] ***************************************************************** 29 Rocky Mountain News: Program to aid sick workers going faster, but still seems slow By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News Last year, angry U.S. senators ripped into the Department of Energy for spending $95 million on paperwork to aid only 31 of the tens of thousands of sick nuclear weapons workers. The program to help workers damaged by radiation and toxic chemicals on the job was subsequently transferred to the Department of Labor. There, processing is significantly faster - but still interminably slow to the workers who are dying. "What's going on here is wrong," said Laura Schulz, a former Rocky Flats engineer who has kidney cancer and neurological disorders she attributes to her work at the former nuclear weapons plant. She recently was told that her exposure to contaminants wasn't considered enough to cause her illnesses and therefore she is ineligible for compensation. The Department of Labor will hold public meetings about the former DOE program today and tomorrow in Arvada so applicants can find out what's going on. Since taking over the DOE program a year ago, the Labor Department has paid 1,827 workers, or about 5 percent of 35,694 applicants nationwide. But that processing is about to speed up, said Roberta Mosier, deputy director of the division for energy employees compensation. Labor now has adequate staff trained and hopes to finish 75 percent of the applications submitted to the former DOE program within the next 11 months, she said. In 2000, Congress approved a two-part program to pay up to $250,000 compensation to nuclear weapons workers who risked their lives for the nation during the Cold War from exposure to radiation and toxic chemicals. Officials expected a few thousand applications. Instead, 50,000 applied to one program at the Labor Department and 35,000 to the other at DOE. Many applied to both. The part run by Labor was simpler and more successful. Thus far, it has paid compensation to 301 workers from Rocky Flats, the now-demolished atom bomb plant 16 miles northwest of downtown Denver. That amounts to 13 percent of workers paid. Meanwhile, 45 percent of applicants have been denied and the rest are awaiting complex accounting of their individual exposure to radiation and chemicals on the job. The former Energy Department program, meant to substitute for workers comp claims, has paid 71 former Rocky Flats workers, or 3 percent of applicants. The rest are now awaiting a decision from the Labor Department. Only a few people have had their applications to the former DOE program formally denied by Labor, Mosier said. Still, officials can expect to hear from many unhappy workers this week. Some are furious over a rule that made it harder to qualify for aid than stated in the law. Mosier said the rule has not been finalized. Public meetings •What: Labor Department officials are holding publicmeetings on the former Department of Energy program to compensate workers sickened at nuclear weapons plants. • When: Today, 7 p.m.; Tuesday, 3 p.m. • Where: Arvada Center for Arts and Humanities, 6901Wadsworth Blvd., Arvada Subscribe | | Electronic edition | more info » ---> Advertising Links 2005 © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 30 Deseret News: Are Utah fallout stories grossly exaggerated? [deseretnews.com] Monday, November 7, 2005 By Lee Benson Deseret Morning News As a retired physics professor who has spent the majority of his life in and around a place that has been called "American Ground Zero," "America's Most Lethal Secret" and "An American Nuclear Tragedy," Daniel W. Miles of Washington County, Utah, is in the decided minority when he says the tortured stories of "downwinders" are mostly just urban myth: alarming, horrible and sad but also grossly overstated and largely untrue. "People in this area believe hundreds and hundreds of people died from fallout," says Miles, who received his doctorate in physical chemistry at the University of Utah in 1967 before teaching physics over nearly four decades at Westminster College and Dixie College. "I estimate that it was maybe five to 10." His estimates are based on scientific data compiled by researchers who have systematically combed through southern Utah medical records and death statistics from 1952 through 1981 — a time period extensive enough to chronicle most of the resultant damages from atmospheric nuclear testing that took place "upwind" at the Nevada Test Site from 1951 through 1958. While it is possible — although not a proven statistical fact — that St. George and the surrounding area experienced an increased cancer rate during that period, Miles says the data suggest it was very slight. Certainly it was considerably less than the 5 percent cancer increase verifiably recorded among survivors of the atomic bombs that fell on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagaski in 1945. "The truth is, the scientific community that does research in this area has never been interested in using St. George data to provide risk estimates for the danger of radiation," says Miles. "The percentages are too small. If Japan had a 5 percent increase in their rates, where the exposure was 10 times greater, why should we expect anything more than a 1 or 2 percent increase?" If you think Miles is making sense, you're in good company. The Forum on Physics &Society, a quarterly publication of the American Physical Society, has published an article he has written on the subject in its October newsletter. In "The Great Fallout-Cancer Story of 1978 and Its Aftermath," Miles presents his case that pits science against anecdote. He charts his personal history growing up in St. George during the above-ground nuclear tests in the 1950s and largely rebuffs the popular tales that have become accepted fact over the years about "children playing in fallout snow," "hair loss," "skin burns" and "paint burned off the hoods of trucks." More to the point, he rebuffs the extension of these anecdotes: that fallout-caused death and destruction have plagued Washington County and the surrounding area ever since. It is a compelling one-man tale based on the facts and nothing but. You can read it in its entirety by going online. Type "Physics and Society" in your search engine and access the October 2005 newsletter. Miles' article is just above one titled "The Genius as National Icon: Albert Einstein, Zionism and Social Responsibility." The headlines in the Forum on Physics &Society aren't exactly National Enquirer, but then neither is the sourcing. Miles footnotes no fewer than 36 sources in his six-page article. In the newsletter's introduction, the P editor notes: "The following article on fallout and cancer indicates the difficulty much of the American public has in separating fact from fiction in their own lives. Apparently, given a contradiction between 'scientific fact' and anecdote, much of our public — and their media and politicians — will opt for the latter." Lee Benson's column runs Sunday, Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Please send e-mail to benson@desnews.comand faxes to 801-237-2527. © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company [ /] ***************************************************************** 31 GAZETA.KZ: Govt to start paying compensations to victims of nuclear tests [Gazeta.kz] November 8, 2005 [Govt to start paying compensations to victims of nuclear tests] Kazakhstan today The government will start paying compensations to several categories of Semipalatinsk district residents as from 1 January, 2006. Danial Akhmetov, prime minister of RK, has stated this today, November 7, at a joint session of the parliament chambers, KZ-today correspondent reports. "The president of the country has ordered to the government to make a proposition to the parliament and to start paying compensations to residents of the maximum risk zones in East Kazakhstan and Pavlodar regions and to citizens of the republic who lived from 1940 to 1990 in the maximum risk zones and currently reside in other regions as from 1 January, 2006," - the PM has said. "You are required by all means to support this order. The government is ready to make all necessary calculations in due terms," - D. Akhmetov addressed the deputies. Earlier the president of Kazakhstan ordered the government to pay compensations to victims of the Semipalatinsk nuclear tests in 2007. According to preliminary calculations, more than 14 billion KZT will be needed to pay these lump sum compensations. All rights reserved. Copyright © Alma-Media, 2000-2005 ***************************************************************** 32 AU ABC: Crossin to seek nuclear waste laws probe November 2005. 11:50 (ACDT)Monday, 7 November 2005. 08:50 (AWST) Labor Senator Trish Crossin says she will move a motion in the Senate today, calling for an inquiry into the Federal Government's nuclear waste laws. The House of Representatives last week passed the bill, which enables a dump to be built in the Northern Territory. The NT Government is vehemently opposed to the facility and has today presented senators in Canberra with a petition with the signatures of 9,000 people who are against it. Senator Crossin has also called on CLP Senator Nigel Scullion to cross the floor and vote against the legislation. "This is bully boy tactics from the Federal Government overriding the rights of Territorians and if Senator Scullion can't even stand up for that then not only should he resign from the party but he should get out of Parliament," she said. "The CLP ought to put somebody there who can represent Territorians properly." ***************************************************************** 33 AU ABC: Dump plan raises tourism threat worries November 2005. 15:00 (ACDT)Monday, 7 November 2005. 12:00 (AWST) A central Australian tourism operator has warned that a proposed nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory will deter tourists. Legislation paving the way for the dump is expected to be introduced to the Senate later today. Lindsay Bookie operates a bush camp near one of the proposed sites for the dump at Harts Range north-east of Alice Springs. He has travelled with a Northern Territory Government delegation to Canberra to try and lobby senators to vote against the bill. Speaking outside Parliament, Mr Bookie says the decision to place the dump near his land does not make sense. "That's what the Government wants people to do, to start an enterprise ... and here we are fighting people to try and stop putting the waste dump [here]," he said. "How are Aboriginal people going to start their business when you've got people putting waste dumps there that could turn people away? We won't be able to get tourism." ***************************************************************** 34 AU ABC: NT Senator backs dump deal November 2005. 20:31 (ACDT)Monday, 7 November 2005. 17:31 (AWST) A Northern Territory delegation has failed to persuade CLP Senator Nigel Scullion to vote against the Federal Government's legislation for a nuclear waste dump. The Commonwealth's Radioactive Waste Management Bill was introduced into the Senate this afternoon and will be debated later this week. Senator Scullion says he will support an additional motion to have the legislation referred to a Senate committee. But he has ruled out crossing the floor and says the dump will be a good deal for Territorians. "We've put amendments in, they're very good amendments, they're amendments that support Territorians," he said. "They make the level of amenity much better. "They allow the Northern Land Council and other landholders to get benefits from the land, which I think is a fundamental right for Territorians, particularly Indigenous Territorians. "I've explained my positions and made it very clear." Deputy Chief Minister Syd Stirling, who led the delegation, says he is disappointed Senator Scullion did not give more ground. "We had a full and frank discussion," he said. "Unfortunately Senator Scullion is committed to this legislation as opposed to the wishes of the Northern Territory Government on behalf of our constituents. "We remain totally opposed." ***************************************************************** 35 Business Journal: West Valley, DOE in new deal - 2005-11-07 » Buffalo » Business First of Buffalo - 7:02 AM EST The U.S. Department of Energy said Nov. 4 that it will extend West Valley Nuclear Services Co.'s contract to operate the West Valley Demonstration Project by a year. WVNSCO has managed the project under contract to the DOE since 1982. The extension, effective Jan. 1 through Dec. 31, 2006, will allow the Energy Department to complete a competitive acquisition for interim end-state completion of all project activities within the scope of its current regulatory and legal authority, the DOE said in a release. WVNSCO, a subsidiary of Boise, Idaho-based Washington Group International, will continue preparing the site for decommissioning. Its activities for the term of this extension will include processing and disposing of low-level and mixed radioactive waste; decontaminating a former nuclear-fuel reprocessing plant; and reducing site infrastructure. The 3,345-acre site is part of the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority's Western New York Nuclear Services Center in the Town of Ashford. © 2005 American City Business Journals Inc. Add RSS Headlines ©2005 American City Business Journals, Inc. and its licensors. ***************************************************************** 36 AU ABC: Indigenous people appeal against nuclear waste dump The World Today - Monday, 7 November , 2005 12:18:00 Reporter: Peta Donald ELEANOR HALL: A group of Aboriginal people from Central Australia is in Canberra today, making an urgent appeal to the Federal Government not to build a nuclear waste dump on their traditional land. The legislation that would allow the Federal Government to build the low to medium level dump on one of three Commonwealth sites in the Northern Territory has already passed the Lower House and will be tabled in the Senate today. But the traditional owners are pinning their hopes on the Northern Territory's Country Liberal Party Senator Nigel Scullion, whom they're urging to cross the floor, and vote against the bill. From Canberra, Peta Donald reports. PETA DONALD: In a courtyard in Canberra this morning, Aboriginal people from two of the proposed sites, near Alice Springs, made their feelings clear about the prospect of a low level nuclear waste dump on their traditional country. AUDREY MCCORMACK: Um, I'm Audrey McCormack, I live just about 5ks from the proposed dump, and I'd like to keep the place clean for my children, my grandchildren and further generations, and 'cause we go out hunting there, we go for our bush tuckers. That's about all. KATHLEEN MARTIN: My name is Kathleen Martin. I live within that area of Mount Everard. In fact, I'm only 13ks away. Mount Everard, in the Arrernte language, means Dreamtime, Altyerre, Dreamtime, and we, we cannot allow such a thing to use our name for starters, and to be so close within our front yard. PETA DONALD: Lindsay Bookie is worried about the impact on his tourism business. LINDSAY BOOKIE: I've been talking to tourists, and they reckon it's going to be bad. They won't be able to come out if they're going to put the waste dump there. And also, you know, people, there's getting lands, we've been fighting lands, for land, we're getting the lands back, and we wanted to start a business, the Aboriginal people. That's what the Government want, people to start an enterprise you know, and then here we are fighting people to try and stop the waste dump. How are Aboriginal people going to start their business when we've got people putting waste dumps there? That could turn people away, we won't be able to get tourism. PETA DONALD: And William Tilmouth has concerns about what a nuclear waste dump would do for the cattle industry nearby. WILLIAM TILMOUTH: We're very concerned because of the rivers, the creeks. We pride ourselves on selling our cattle in regards to clean and green, and the traditional owners have said no, and we'd like Senator Scullion to cross the floor and say no as well. PETA DONALD: It's with Northern Territory CLP Senator, Nigel Scullion, that those against the dump are now pinning their hopes. The Northern Territory Government has dropped plans for a High Court challenge on legal advice, instead presenting a petition with 9,000 signatures opposing the dump. The Territory's other Senator, Labor's Trish Crossin, is stepping up the pressure. TRISH CROSSIN: Senator Scullion was elected under the mantra of the CLP, the Territory Party. Well, I think as soon as he supports this bill in the Senate he should resign from that commitment. There is no way in supporting this bill that you stand up for the Territory. Nine thousand signatures in only a couple of months clearly shows Senator Scullion that people don't support the dump being in the Territory, clearly want him to cross the floor. PETA DONALD: Senator Scullion wasn't available to speak to The World Today, but to date he's shown no interest in crossing the floor, and possibly blocking the Commonwealth's radioactive waste management bill. Fran Kilgariff is the Mayor of Alice Springs, also in Canberra to lobby against the dump. FRAN KILGARIFF: I think the fact that the proposed facility is chosen not through any particular criteria, scientific or environmental or whatever, but as a matter of political convenience. And the fact that the Federal Government is introducing legislation which seeks to override the rights of Territorians to oppose that in any way, even using Federal Government legislation such as Native Title Act or federal heritage laws, it's really strong-arm tactics. We don't want the nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory and we object to, I suppose, the expedient way that this has been done. ELEANOR HALL: And that's Alice Springs Mayor Fran Kilgariff ending that report by Peta Donald. ***************************************************************** 37 AU ABC: Commonwealth going it alone on waste dump 7.30 Report - 07/11/2005: Australian Broadcasting Corporation 7.30 Report Reporter: Murray McLaughlin KERRY O'BRIEN: Twenty years after the Federal Government and the states began trying to identify suitable sites for a national radioactive waste dump, no single site has yet been agreed upon. Frustrated by court and legislative actions by state and local governments over many years, the Commonwealth is now going alone. It'll choose between three defence properties in the Northern Territory for a site to store its holdings of nuclear waste. A bill to enforce that choice against the wish of the Territory Government went through the Lower House of Federal Parliament, and is expected to be debated in the Senate early next month. But the Federal Government's unilateral action has incurred the wrath of the Territory's Labour Government. Murray McLaughlin reports from Darwin. MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: These traditional owners are a long way from their homelands in Central Australia, where they run pastoral and tourism businesses. They've journeyed to Lucas Heights in Sydney's southern suburbs - the home of Australia's only nuclear reactor - to protest against plans by the Commonwealth to locate a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory. They say a dump would threaten their businesses and traditional way of life. WILLIAM TILMOUTH: We pride ourselves on the fact that our cattle are clean and green and it's something that we feel that would hinder our business. BENEDICT STEVENS: My old people don't want no waste dump as well. We wouldn't want that to affect our land and our hunting animals and all that. MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: Because it's not a state, the Northern Territory is effectively powerless to stand in the way of the Commonwealth's plans. But as late as yesterday, it was still arguing for Commonwealth nuclear waste to be stored at Lucas Heights. CLARE MARTIN, NT CHIEF MINISTER: If it can be stored safely in the middle of Australia, doesn't it make more sense to store it safely near where it's been actually produced? And I think there's a real logic. Why put nuclear waste on our roads, transport it across half of Australia and then put it into a facility that's so remote you can't really assure its security? MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: PM Robert Menzies opened Australia's only nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights in April 1958. It's been used since for research purposes. Back in the late '50s, Australia already had a long involvement in nuclear science and technology and wanted to be part of the nuclear big league. DR IAN HOLLAND NUCLEAR SCIENCE WRITER: Until the '70s it wanted to be involved in nuclear power. It was interested in being a nuclear weapons state right up into the early '70s, but it was not really until the '70s that Australia started to realise that it needed to actually deal with the waste that it produced. MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: By comparison with other OECD countries, Australia has been a small producer of nuclear waste, because there are no nuclear power stations here. The Commonwealth holds about 3,500 cubic metres of low-level waste, enough to fill about eight average-sized houses. Nearly half of that is stored at Lucas Heights, the rest at 30 other sites around the country. DR RON CAMERON, OPERATIONS CHIEF, ANSTO: Our low-level waste compromises things like gloves, paperwork, equipment, glassware - all new materials that you would use in handling radioactive materials or producing nuclear medicines, and which is likely contaminated as a result of being used in those areas. MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: Then there's about 400 cubic metres of intermediate-level waste, most of it generated by and stored at Lucas Heights. DR RON CAMERON: That consists of mainly materials resulting from producing nuclear medicine, and also the residues for spent fuel to be returned to Australia. MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: The low-level waste will be buried 10 to 20m below ground and the intermediate-level waste will be stored in drums in a secure building. The Commonwealth Department of Science is distributing this video to placate public apprehension about safety. VIDEO VOICEOVER: Waste transport to the facility will be strictly governed by stringent national and international standards. MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: The Commonwealth Government doesn't know yet where a facility like this will be located in the Northern Territory. In July it announced a list of three sites, all owned by the Department of Defence. And now the Commonwealth is moving to override recent Northern Territory law which purports to ban a nuclear waste dump in the Territory. DAVE SWEENEY, AUSTRALIAN CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: Twelve months ago the Federal Government promised the Northern Territory that there would not be a radioactive waste dump imposed on the Northern Territory. They made an absolute, categorical reassurance there would be no dump and 12 months later, they're rushing through anti-democratic and heavy-handed legislation. MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: The Government's legislation was introduced to the Senate today, and in Darwin that turned the attention of environmental activists to Nigel Scullion, the Country Liberal Party Senator for the Northern Territory. He's going to vote for a dump in the Territory, although he regrets that the Federal Government had to renege on its commitment of a year ago. NIGEL SCULLION, CLP NORTHERN TERRITORY: The reality is whilst they tried very hard for an offshore site, there were issues at the final decision that prevented them from doing so. So obviously the rest is history. I'm a pragmatist and whilst like most Territorians I'm deeply hurt by the fact that once again we have something foisted upon us that wasn't our choice. MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: The Commonwealth's plans have provoked protest over the past few months from Alice Springs to Darwin. The Territory Government is claiming that 9,000 citizens have claimed letters and petitions against a waste dump. Public information sessions by Commonwealth scientists and bureaucrats up and down the Territory, have failed to quell community fears. At a meeting in Katherine in August, an official from the Federal Department of Science acknowledged that the select three sites in the Territory has been a consequence of flawed process, that the Commonwealth's preference for a site at Woomera in South Australia would have been better. PAT DAVOREN, DEPT OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE: In an ideal world, we would have had the facility operating at Woomera which is technically one of the best sites of the world. But I guess it was just a failure of leadership at some levels of Government. MURRAY McLAUGHLIN: But court action by the South Australian Government against the Commonwealth put paid to the Woomera option last year. Clare Martin's Northern Territory Government, being ultimately subservient to Canberra, won't have the option of any legal challenge. ***************************************************************** 38 AU ABC: Inquiry expected to delay nuclear dump laws. 08/11/2005. ABC News Online [Delay: The Senate is expected to approve an inquiry into the laws.] Inquiry expected to delay nuclear dump laws Debate on the Federal Government's nuclear waste dump legislation could be postponed until Christmas. Three sites in the Northern Territory are being considered to house the facility. The Commonwealth's Radioactive Waste Management Bill, which will pave the way for a nuclear waste dump in NT, was due to be debated in the Senate later this week. But passage of the legislation is now expected to be delayed, with indications the Senate will today support a motion to refer the matter to a Senate Committee. NT Labor Senator Trish Crossin says she has received positive indications from the Federal Government that it will not block the move to send the Bill to a Senate committee. Senator Crossin admits it is a stalling tactic, but hopes it will give the Government time to rethink its plans. "Some inquiry is better than no inquiry and even though it will be short, at least it will give some people the chance to put their views to the Senate," she said. Time limit Although happy with the concession, Senator Crossin says the time frame means the Bill will not be fully scrutinised. "I certainly would have liked the opportunity to take the committee to Darwin and Katherine - the number of places we can go to is limited," she said. She says she hopes the inquiry will give time for the Territory CLP Senator Nigel Scullion to consider crossing the floor to vote against the Bill. "What we would like to see in the meantime is Senator Scullion realise that there is a better process here, there can be a more cooperative and a more consultative process here," she said. "The Federal Government shows some leadership and gets all the parties around the table and tries to resolve this issue, rather than bulldoze the rights of Territorians." Senator Nigel Scullion has welcomed the inquiry but says it will not change his vote. "At this stage I just simply couldn't see the circumstance where I'd cross the floor to vote against this legislation," he said. "There are amendments, the Government has supported our amendments and I will be supporting those amendments in the Senate." ***************************************************************** 39 PittsburghLIVE.com: State DEP waste plan concerns officials - [Pittsburgh Tribune-Review] By Wynne Everett VALLEY NEWS DISPATCH Monday, November 7, 2005 A state environmental agency should take another look at a plan to ship uranium-contaminated waste to a landfill in Westmoreland County, local officials say. "This maybe wasn't the best decision," said East Huntingdon supervisor Howard Keefer, who asked the state Department of Environmental Protection for another review of the plan. In October, DEP issued a permit to the Kiski Valley Water Pollution Control Authority to remove 12,000 cubic meters of uranium-contaminated ash from a former wastewater treatment lagoon in Allegheny Township. The ash is slated to go to the Greenridge Landfill in East Huntingdon before the end of the year. The ash was contaminated between 1978 and 1984 by uranium from the former Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corp. and its successor companies, Atlantic Richfield and Babcock and Wilcox. The companies manufactured nuclear material for military and industrial use at sites in Apollo and Parks Township, Armstrong County. The companies had a contract with the pollution control authority -- the Kiski Valley's sewage processing authority -- to treat wastewater from the sites. At least 400 area residents and former workers have died or have illnesses caused by the nuclear-fuel processing that happened at the sites, according to lawsuits and claims filed with the federal government. Resident Patty Ameno said she fears that those who live near the East Huntingdon landfill are about to inherit the Kiski Valley's nuclear problems. "People there need to scream," Ameno said. Keefer said the DEP officials notified the township that some waste would be headed to the local landfill but didn't say it was contaminated with uranium. A complex of Southmoreland School District buildings -- a high school, middle school and elementary school -- sits near the landfill, Keefer said. Trucks carrying the uranium-contaminated ash will share the road with school buses, he said. "The schools are within such a distance that we hope this decision wasn't made solely on an economic basis," Keefer said. Alvin Smith, of Beaver County, who works for EnviroCare of Utah, a nuclear waste disposal company, said economics is driving the decision. Smith's company disposed of some of the contaminated waste from the Parks facility. He said disposing of the ash in a municipal landfill should cost about $27 per ton. Putting it in a low-level nuclear waste facility would cost $50 to $300 per cubic foot, Smith said. He estimated disposing of the 12,000 cubic meters of ash would cost $19 million if put into a low-level waste facility. Disposal in the East Huntingdon landfill would cost less than $1 million. "That's the difference," Smith said. Since B ceased operation in 1984, several cleanup projects have aimed to rid the former sites of contamination, including the ash in the wastewater lagoon. The pollution control authority sought to remove the ash in 1993 when the lagoon was closed because it is full. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission stopped the cleanup plan, ruling that the uranium-contaminated ash could not be moved. Early this year, the NRC reversed its decision, declaring the ash is no longer a regulated material. The change in the commission's position is related to changes in the way the state and federal governments measure radioactivity, according to the chief of DEP's radioactive materials section. In 1994, the NRC ruled that the concentration of uranium in the ash was higher than acceptable for ordinary landfill waste. Today, however, the NRC measures uranium based on the amount of radiation a person would receive from the contaminated material. Under the new measure, the lagoon ash is considered safe. In essence, the change means the NRC now considers the ash the same as any non-contaminated soil, even though the amount of radioactive material in it hasn't changed. The change also meant the water pollution control authority and DEP could proceed with decade-old plans to move the ash into a municipal landfill. "This is an unusual decision," Smith said. Authority director Bob Kossak said the agency would carefully monitor the ash leaving the facility for nuclear contamination. Responding to concerns from Kiski Valley residents in August, the DEP added more precautions. It will require trucks carrying the ash to be lined and carefully cleaned. DEP spokeswoman Betsy Mallison said the precautions weren't designed to protect against nuclear contamination but because any dirt that falls on roadways is a driving hazard. Keefer said his township has a good working relationship with DEP. He stopped short of demanding the agency stop the transfer of the lagoon ash, but he said supervisors want DEP to address their concerns. Wynne Everett can be reached at or (724) 226-4676. Images and text copyright © 2005 by The Tribune-Review ***************************************************************** 40 PittsburghLIVE.com: Worries follow contaminated ash to landfill - By Wynne Everett VALLEY NEWS DISPATCH Monday, November 7, 2005 Supervisors in East Huntingdon Township want answers from environmental officials before a load of uranium-contaminated waste from Allegheny Township is shipped to a landfill there. "This maybe wasn't the best decision," said township supervisor Howard Keefer, who penned a letter to the state Department of Environmental Protection Friday, asking for another review of the plan. In October, DEP issued a permit to the Kiski Valley Water Pollution Control Authority to remove 12,000 cubic meters of uranium contaminated ash from a former wastewater treatment lagoon in Allegheny Township. The ash is slated to go to the Greenridge Landfill in East Huntingdon before the end of this year. The ash was contaminated between 1978 and 1984 by uranium from the former Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corp. and its successor companies, Atlantic Richfield and Babcock and Wilcox. The companies manufactured nuclear material for military and industrial use at sites in Apollo and Parks. The companies had a contract with the pollution control authority -- the Kiski Valley's sewage processing authority -- to treat waste water from the sites. At least 400 area residents and former workers have died or have illnesses caused by the nuclear-fuel processing that happened at the sites, according to lawsuits and claims filed with the federal government. One of those residents, Patty Ameno, said she fears residents near the East Huntingdon landfill are about to inherit the Kiski Valley's nuclear problems. "People there need to scream," Ameno said. Keefer said the DEP officials notified the township that some waste would be headed for the local landfill, but they didn't say it was contaminated with uranium. A complex of Southmoreland School District buildings -- a high school, middle school and elementary school -- sits near the landfill, Keefer said. Trucks carrying the uranium-contaminated ash will share the road with school buses, he said. "The schools are within such a distance that we hope this decision wasn't made solely on an economic basis," Keefer said. Alvin Smith, a Beaver County resident who works for EnviroCare of Utah, a nuclear waste disposal company, said economics is driving the decision. Smith's company disposed of some of the contaminated waste from the Parks facility. He said disposing of the ash in a municipal landfill should cost about $27 per ton. Putting it in a low-level nuclear waste facility would cost $50-$300 per cubic foot, Smith said. He estimated disposing of the 12,000 cubic meters of ash would cost $19 million if put into a low-level waste facility. Under the current plan, the disposal would cost less than $1 million. "That's the difference," Smith said. Since B ceased operation in 1984 a succession of cleanup projects have aimed to rid the former sites of contamination, including the ash in the waste water lagoon. The pollution control authority sought to remove the ash in 1993 when the lagoon was closed because it is full. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission stopped the cleanup plan, however, ruling that the uranium contaminated ash could not be moved. Early this year, the NRC reversed its decision, declaring the ash is no longer a regulated material. The change in the commission's position is related to changes in the way the state and federal governments measure radioactivity, according to the chief of DEP's radioactive materials section. In 1994, the NRC measured the concentration of uranium in the ash and ruled it was higher than acceptable levels for ordinary landfill waste. Today, however, the NRC measures uranium based on the dosage of radiation a person would receive from the contaminated material. Under the new measure, the lagoon ash is considered safe. In essence, the change means the NRC now considers the ash the same as any other non-contaminated soil, even though the amount of radioactive material in it hasn't changed. The change also meant the water pollution control authority and DEP could proceed with decade-old plans to move the ash into a municipal landfill. "This is an unusual decision," Smith said. For peace of mind, authority director Bob Kossak said the agency would carefully monitor the ash leaving the facility for nuclear contamination. Responding to concerns from Kiski Valley residents in August, the DEP added more precautions. It will require trucks carrying the ash to be lined and carefully cleaned. DEP spokeswoman Betsy Mallison said the precautions weren't designed to protect against nuclear contamination, but because any dirt that falls on roadways is a driving hazard. Keefer said his township has a good working relationship with DEP. He stopped short of demanding the agency stop the transfer of the lagoon ash, but he said supervisors want DEP to address their concerns. "If something happened after and you didn't bring things up, you'd feel bad," Keefer said. Wynne Everett can be reached at or (724) 226-4676. copyright © 2005 by The Tribune-Review Publishing Co. ***************************************************************** 41 NEWS.com.au: Pressure mounts to oppose nuke dump - From: AAP November 07, 2005 TRADITIONAL owners are stepping up pressure on Northern Territory senator Nigel Scullion to cross the floor over Federal Government plans to build a nuclear waste dump on their land. A group of eight representatives from Harts Range and Mount Everard, near Alice Springs, took their message to Parliament House today. They were joined by non-government politicians in presenting Senator Scullion, a member of the Country Liberal Party, with a petition of 9000 signatures opposing the proposed dump. Their protest came as Senator Scullion confirmed the federal government would allow a two-day Senate inquiry into the nuclear dump on November 21 and 22. Opposition parties want a month-long inquiry. NT Deputy Chief Minister Syd Stirling held last-ditch talks with Senator Scullion today in an attempt to get him to vote against the government's plans. Senator Scullion said although he had expressed concerns about the dump previously, information revealed during the Senate inquiry was unlikely to make him cross the floor and vote against the government's plans. "If at the end of the day people think my vote is going to change anyway, it won't," he said. Science Minister Brendan Nelson has compiled a short-list of three possible sites for the Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Facility. These are defence department properties at Mount Everard, Harts Range and Fishers Ridge, near Katherine. The delegation of traditional owners said they held grave fears for the safety of up to 5000 Aboriginal people living in small communities and out stations should the building of the low-level waste dump go ahead. The group protested outside the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in Sydney yesterday, as NT Chief Minister Clare Martin conceded there were no grounds on which a legal challenge to the dump would be successful. Traditional owner William Tilmouth, from the Alcoota Aboriginal Corporation which ran cattle on two stations with a combined area of about 4000 square kilometres, today said his likelihood was at stake. "We're very concerned because of the rivers and the creeks - we pride ourselves on selling our cattle in regards to clean and green," Mr Tilmouth told reporters. "The traditional owners have said no and we'd like Senator Scullion to cross the floor and say no as well." Benedict Stephens, from Mount Everard, aid urgent action was needed from Senator Scullion. "We don't want a nuclear dump in our backyard," he said. "My elders back home there, they don't want this - we've got heaps of sacred sites around that area plus our hunting ground." Traditional owner Audrey McCormack said her land may be poisoned either by an accident on site or during the transport of materials. "This land, which has been ours for many thousands of years, may be poisoned," she said. "This is my kids' land and my grandkids' land where they learn about law, about hunting and about bush tucker." The Central Land Council (CLC), whose area covers Mount Everard and Harts Range, is bitterly opposed the waste dump proposal. But the Northern Land Council (NLC), whose region includes Fishers Ridge, offered to negotiate with the government about other possible sites on indigenous land. Mr Stirling, who accompanied the CLC's traditional owners, said the nuclear dump was designed to store low-level waste, but he feared it could be upgraded to handle highly radioactive material. Dr Nelson said he would consider the NLC's proposal to put forward other possible sites, provided traditional owners agreed and cultural issues were addressed. Legislation to allow the Federal Government to site a nuclear waste dump in the Northern Territory was introduced to the Senate today. The bills passed the House of Representatives last week. 2005 News Limited. All times AEDT (GMT ***************************************************************** 42 Rocky Mountain News: Extended benefits for Flats workers rejected By M.E. Sprengelmeyer, Rocky Mountain News WASHINGTON - The U.S. Senate on Monday rejected $15 million in extended benefits for workers who helped clean-up the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant early. Republican Sen. Wayne Allard, the measure's sponsor, and Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar called it a matter of fairness to extend benefits to about 70 workers for contractor Kaiser-Hill Co. who fell short of the amount of service needed to qualify for pensions and lifetime medical benefits. Those workers would have been eligible for benefits if Kaiser-Hill had taken all the time the Department of Energy gave it - until Dec. 15, 2006 - to complete the clean up job at Rocky Flats. Kaiser-Hill declared the job done in mid-October, 14 months before the deadline. Company officials said only the federal government can extend benefits to workers just shy of satisfying the eligibility requirements. But in a bipartisan, 38-53 vote, the Senate rejected an amendment Allard offered to a larger defense authorization bill being considered. Allard called the situation "a wrong being perpetrated by the Department of Energy." "He was surprised so many senators would vote against working people," said Allard spokeswoman Angela de Rocha. Salazar argued that the Senate needed to honor the sacrifice of workers and their families. "It's unfair from my point of view to penalize the employees who performed this great work on behalf of our national security in this cleanup by not providing the benefits they had anticipated," Salazar said. Opponents, including Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said it would set a bad fiscal precedent that would affect countless federal contracts throughout the United States. "I join (Allard) in commending the workers at Rocky Flats for what has been achieved. I cannot support, however, taking this unprecedented step...It's contrary to good, sound fiscal policy." Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, said that if the amendment had passed, "We'd be opening up a very interesting line of argument by a number of contractors and employees." The vote disappointed Leo Chavez, 51, who worked at Rocky Flats for 17 years but was laid off by the contractor in 2004 just six working days short of his 50th birthday, which would have qualified him for medical benefits and a substantially larger pension. Although his pension will be half what he once anticipated, he said a bigger worry is how to afford medical coverage because he is a diabetic. "The way the budget is going, there are priorities and choices being made in expenditures," Chavez said. "Obviously, this is one not many people thought was a priority." site 2005 © The E.W. Scripps Co. ***************************************************************** 43 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Fire alarm sounds at Hanford site [seattlepi.com] Monday, November 7, 2005 SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER STAFF AND NEWS SERVICES RICHLAND -- The U.S. Department of Energy activated its emergency operations center at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation on Sunday evening after a fire alarm went off in a non-radioactive part of the nation's largest nuclear waste site. There were no immediate reports of any injuries, no fire and no spill, authorities said. A chemical reaction caused smoke to fill one area, they said. The fire alarm went off in the area where the department's newest reactor is located. [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com ©1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer ***************************************************************** 44 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Second Hanford downwinder trial begins [seattlepi.com] Monday, November 7, 2005 · Last updated 2:51 p.m. PT By NICHOLAS K. GERANIOS ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER SPOKANE, Wash. -- Jury selection began Monday for the second trial of a Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, woman who contends that radiation releases from the Hanford nuclear reservation caused her thyroid cancer. In May, a federal court jury deadlocked over whether the health problems of Shannon Rhodes were caused by the emissions during the early days of Cold War production of nuclear weapons. Rhodes' cancer, which had been in remission, returned during the first trial, but defense attorneys for federal contractors insisted that jurors not be told. Rhodes believes the information about her cancer returning, and the fact that the jury will be presented with only one case, rather than six as in the previous trial, will work to her favor. "I think it was very confusing for the jury last time, having so many," Rhodes said outside the courtroom. "I am optimistic." In the first trial, Rhodes was one of six so-called "bellwether" plaintiffs who were considered representatives of thousands of people who were exposed to Hanford releases. [advertising] The lawsuit was filed in 1990 on behalf of thousands of downwinders who sued the private companies that ran Hanford's plutonium factories during World War II and the early days of the Cold War. The case did not reach the trial stage until earlier this year. Of the six bellwether plaintiffs, two who suffered from thyroid cancer were awarded a combined total of about $500,000 after the jury decided their illnesses were "more likely than not" caused by Hanford radiation. The jury rejected the claims of three others with autoimmune thyroid disease, saying their illnesses likely were not caused by Hanford's emissions of radioactive iodine-131, a byproduct of plutonium production. The jury deadlocked 10-2 in Rhodes' case, so U.S. District Judge William Nielsen declared a mistrial. Among the thyroid cancer cases, Rhodes had the lowest estimated Hanford radiation dose, 6.9 rads of iodine-131. A jury verdict in Rhodes' favor would be good news for thousands of other plaintiffs with radiation doses under 10 rads. Richard Eymann, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, has said the government's liability could reach $2 billion in the remaining 2,300 cases. Defense attorney Kevin Van Wart has said he expects many of the remaining cases to be rejected. Van Wart, of Chicago, represents General Electric Co., E.I. DuPont de Nemours Co. and UNC Nuclear Inc. Taxpayers will be responsible for any payments to plaintiffs because the federal government agreed to indemnify the corporations that ran Hanford. The federal government has already spent $100 million on legal costs for the defense and $40 million on a pair of radiation studies since the first Hanford cases were filed in 1990, Eymann has said. Rhodes, who grew up near Colfax, drank milk from the family's cows during the years of Hanford's largest iodine-131 emissions in the mid-1940s. Children were most at risk from the radiation, which fell on grass that was consumed by cows. Her left thyroid lobe was removed in 1978, and she was told it was a benign tumor. Cancer was detected again in her body after she and her husband, Ken, retired and moved to Coeur d'Alene from Seattle five years ago. She had three more cancer surgeries and joined the downwinders' lawsuit in 2003. Van Wart had argued that Rhodes' cancer relapse was not relevant to the legal question of what caused the cancer. People who grew up downwind of Hanford, which is located near Richland, didn't learn about the radiation releases until the government declassified the information in 1986. Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 ©1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer ***************************************************************** 45 ABQJOURNAL: Decision Looms on Los Alamos Nuclear Lab Contract the Albuquerque Journal newspaper. Monday, November 07, 2005 Albuquerque Journal--> By Jennifer Talhelm/ Associated Press WASHINGTON — The government office overseeing the nation's nuclear weapons complex is nearing its Dec. 1 deadline to decide which of two teams will get the $79 million-a-year contract to manage Los Alamos National Laboratory. The contenders include a group headed by the University of California — which has managed the lab since it was created during World War II — and Bechtel Corp., and another team comprised of Lockheed Martin and the University of Texas. As they await the decision, both teams are rushing to make sure everything's ready in case they win. "Things are very hectic here,'' said Don Carson, a spokesman for the UT/Lockheed group. "Everybody's trying to make sure we've dotted all the 'I's' and crossed all the 'T's' to make sure we've done all the things we need to do.'' Both teams submitted their bids in July, then gave oral presentations in August. So far, neither has been called back to answer more questions. The bids contain plans for how they will encourage science and manage safety and security. The National Nuclear Security Administration says it is evaluating the teams' strengths and weaknesses and will score each according to a set of criteria. After the government awards the contract, there will be a six-month transition period so the new managers can observe the lab's operations before taking over. Further details of the bids or the evaluation process have been closely guarded secrets. Many lawmakers hope the change will stop the run of scandals and safety concerns that have plagued Los Alamos in recent years. But meanwhile, the decision is anxiously awaited in Los Alamos, a remote town at the top of a mesa where life revolves around the lab at which scientists secretly developed the world's first atomic bomb. Some say life has been put on hold. Alex Arevalo, acting manager of Prudential Los Alamos Realty, said he's noticed that some people are hesitant to buy property. "I joked about people being deer in the headlights, not knowing what to do until the contract is announced in December,'' he said. Both sides have opened storefront offices in Los Alamos where employees and residents can ask questions about the teams' plans for the lab under the new contract. "Our concern is doing everything we can to prepare to minimize the level of anxiety that comes with change,'' said Michael Anastasio, who leads the University of California group. The UT/Lockheed team is preparing to open an office within the next week in Española, where many Los Alamos employees live. Rod Geer, a spokesman for the team, said an average of seven or eight residents, employees and retirees visit the Los Alamos office each day. Some just pick up brochures, but others talk for hours about making sure the new managers will encourage the same level of science the lab has been respected for in the past 60 years. "The most important thing is to answer and listen,'' Geer said. "We have a pretty good idea of what they want to see stay ... and what they don't like.'' Copyright Albuquerque Journal Steve@abqjournal.com ***************************************************************** 46 lamonitor.com: State said to be hobbling cleanup progress The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS, , Monitor Assistant Editor The state has fallen behind on its part of the comprehensive environmental cleanup agreement with Los Alamos National Laboratory, it is reported. The state Environment Department has met fewer than half of the deadlines, said Hazardous Waste Bureau Chief James Bearzi, explaining the department's inability to provide timely reviews and modifications required under the order. A joint legislative committee Friday looked into the status of the laboratory's environmental projects, spending much of its time on shared presentation by Bearzi and David McInroy, LANL's deputy director for environmental remediation and surveillance. Rep. John Heaton, D-Eddy, vice chair of the radioactive and hazardous materials committee put the paperwork shortfall in stronger terms: "18 reviewed out of 62 delivered." Bearzi also acknowledged that the department is six years late in drafting a new operating permit for the laboratory. In general, he explained, the consent order covers past contamination and the operating permit, under the Resource Conservation and Recover Act, regulates current and future environmental hazards. The proposed operating permit has been promised by February 2006, and Bearzi said the draft would be presented in a series of public meetings that will start in March. "I've got five people," he said. "That's not just for the order, but permitting and everything else. That's all we have and it's not enough." Help is on the way - in the form of a memorandum of agreement with the Department of Energy that will provide funding for additional staff and expenses for the state's current fiscal year (from Jul. 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006). The department agreed to a payment of $1.8 million, instead of additional regulatory fees. A down payment of $500,000 was transferred when the agreement was signed at the end of September, and the remainder is pending the energy budget negotiations in Washington. Those funds will help cover the current staff and add an additional five full-time employees, but will require state legislative authorization to create the positions. The next meeting of the Legislature is in January 2006. Bearzi also alluded to a performance measure that will be introduced in the budget bill at the next session that will require NMED to provide timely responses on future notices at least 90 percent of the time. Some of the legislators noted the one-year span of support from DOE and wondered if the supplements could be counted on for the future. But Bearzi was confident, based on a similar agreement at the Waste Isolation Pilot Project in Carlsbad, that the arrangement would be extended for the course of the clean up, now scheduled for completion in 2015. J.D. Campbell, chairman of the Northern New Mexico Citizen's Advisory Board, a DOE-appointed advisory board that provides public input on environmental issues, said the board had formally recommended that DOE pitch in to avoid significant delays for completing the cleanup order. He also testified at a Legislative Finance Committee hearing last month to secure the additional staffing levels for the bureau. At Friday's hearing Campbell said more help would be needed to enable the bureau to hire outside specialists for ground water monitoring and risk assessments "There has been and is a lot of concern that NMED is greatly understaffed in its ability to keep up with the consent order," he said. McInroy recounted the laboratory's cleanup achievements, noting that work began even before a final agreement was reached with the state in March. He said 100 major cleanup milestones had been reached, meaning that nothing more needed to be done at those sites. "Some have slipped," he said, a neutral reference to unmet deadlines by NMED. "And new ones are added." Heaton said the delays affected how the state is perceived. "If it takes them forever to get a permit out or to do their job, then we're not going to be seen as a very business-friendly place," he said. Overlooked in the joint meeting of the Radioactive and Hazardous Materials Committee and the LANL Oversight Committee was the current controversy over the lab's groundwater characterization wells, the subject of recent critical reports by the DOE's inspector general's office and the Environmental Protection Agency. Among the reports Bearzi is reviewing at the moment is one having to do with the lab's future deep well monitoring plan for protecting the water in the regional aquifer. The plan was submitted in May, before the technical adequacy of some or all of the current characterization wells was called into question. DOE is just completing a review of the wells to determine how many of them can be repaired and how many will need to be replaced. NMED's response is due in December. Asked about the monitoring issue after his testimony, Bearzi said, "They're going to get a deficiency." The environmental portion of the hearing at the Research Park in Los Alamos included an overview by Kenneth Hargis, the laboratory's acting division leader for environmental stewardship, and water and air quality reports from group leaders Steven Rae and David Fuehne. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 47 Business Journal: Stanford moves on $400 million laser project - 2005-11-07 » San Jose A massive scientific research initiative with the potential to transform understanding of several scientific disciplines -- from biology to nuclear physics -- has received federal approval to start construction on a nearly $400 million, one-of-a-kind laser at 's Linear Accelerator Center. The project's construction and related research have the potential to pump as much as $1 billion into the regional economy over the next decade and to advance science in ways only partially understood, says physicist Roger Falcone, who chairs a science advisory committee working on the project. "The technology is revolutionary and that is always a terribly exciting place to be -- at the cutting edge," Mr. Falcone says. "We think we know how we are going to use this equipment, but we also know that we don't know everything it will be useful for." That gray area beyond full understanding or planning is often where the most startling and important scientific advancement materializes, he adds. The new laser is being built on the 426-acre campus of the , which sits on Stanford University property in Menlo Park. While not the priciest project ever built at the center, the laser is the most ambitious since 1992. 's San Jose office in partnership with engineering experts Hatch Mott MacDonald have been selected to execute the $75 million in construction work. The remaining $300 million-plus will be spent on equipment to outfit it and to modify existing equipment. The money for the work is largely coming from the federal government's Department of Energy. Turner, which has headquarters in New York, and Hatch Mott MacDonald, a UK concern with an extensive American presence, defeated five other general contractors to get the job, says Kevin Antonelli, regional manager for Turner in San Jose. Mr. Antonelli says he is thrilled to have landed the work, which comes on top of a nearly $60 million job Turner also recently secured at the , also at Stanford. "This (the laser) is a very major project for us and puts us in a great spot," Mr. Antonelli says. "It has a lot of visibility." He expects to employ as many as 200 people on site to manage the laser project, and he is already looking to hire 20 new higher-level managers to oversee the laser job and the hospital work. Construction on the laser project is to start early next year. It could be used for the first time as early as May 2008, but isn't expected to be officially complete until the spring of 2009. © 2005 American City Business Journals Inc. Add RSS Headlines Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal email: ©2005 American City Business Journals, Inc. and its licensors. ***************************************************************** 48 UPI: Security & Terrorism - Energy Secretary: The future is nuclear United Press International - 11/7/2005 3:07:00 PM -0500 Newstrack: Two women want the Fargo (N.D.) School By LEIGH BALDWIN UPI Correspondent WASHINGTON, Nov. 7 (UPI) -- The United States will continue its push toward increased reliance on nuclear power, with new reactors to be built by 2010. "New advanced light-water reactors will be operational by the end of the decade," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman told the Carnegie Non-Proliferation Conference in Washington Thursday. The reactors will be the first to be built in the United States for over three decades. "Our government is setting the stage for an expansion of nuclear power," said Bodman, explaining that the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island had caused an aversion to nuclear energy that was now being overcome. "Nuclear power has proved not only safe; it is the cheapest means of producing energy. It is also the most efficient and produces no greenhouse gases," he said. Bodman envisages a greater worldwide dependence on nuclear power, a trend which he endorses. "We can extend the peaceful use of nuclear energy across the earth to increase stability and prosperity," he said. But nuclear expansion must be accompanied by increased security measures, he said. Central among these would be the continuing development of the permanent nuclear fuel repository at Yucca Mountain. Bodman also announced the removal of 200 tons of highly enriched uranium from the United States nuclear stockpile, which he called "a triumph for energy security and a triumph for non-proliferation. The fuel will be transferred to the Navy for use in its propulsion systems. Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************