***************************************************************** 11/20/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.270 ***************************************************************** 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 SF Chronicle: NEWS ANALYSIS / The claims and facts on Iraq weapons 2 AFP: Iran says military site off-limits to UN nuclear probe 3 AFP: Iran says disclosing suspected bomb blueprint shows good faith 4 AFP: Iran may have handed over nuclear core plan by accident - 5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Calls Nuclear Report 'Baseless' 6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Lawmakers Block Nuclear Inspections 7 Guardian Unlimited: Iranians admit receiving nuclear warhead 8 AFP: US demands North Korea honor agreement to scrap nuclear weapons 9 RIA Novosti: S.Korean leader praises Russia's role in six-party talk 10 HindustanTimes.com: Additional papers to shed greater light on Khan 11 PTI: Pakistan's nuke facilities suffered damage by recent quake 12 RIA Novosti: APEC leaders back new security initiatives 13 BBC: Vanunu freed after W Bank visit 14 AFP: Japanese port fights basing of US nuclear warship - 15 AU ABC: Snowdon seeks weapons training assurances. NUCLEAR REACTORS 16 Business Unlimited: Britain needs a debate on nuclear energy, say 17 Australian: Nuclear cloud of indecision over European powers 18 London Times: Never mind the fallout from Chernobyl, the Finns belie 19 London Times: Safety claim for new designs - 20 London Times: How a pledge on greenhouse gases made Blair go nuclear 21 London Times: Britain is ready to go nuclear 22 London Times: The nuclear nettle - Comment - 23 US: SLO Tribune: Anti-nuclear activist to speak to Democrats 24 Miami Herald: Minor fire at nuclear power plant 25 FT.com: UK - Looming Cabinet split over nuclear power 26 RIA Novosti: Energy a key part of Russian-APEC cooperation -- Putin 27 FT.com: UK - Science chief backs more nuclear power 28 US: APP.COM: DEP: Prove plant is safe 29 AFP: Blair urged to approve new generation of nuclear reactors - 30 Scotsman.com News: Call to order new nuclear reactors 31 Macleans.ca: Delegates at Sask NDP convention reject call to NUCLEAR SECURITY 32 NEWS.com.au: Security holes expose key facilities to attack 33 US: UPI: Denver mayor unhappy with disaster drill NUCLEAR SAFETY 34 [NYTr] Are Our Leaders Insane? Radioactive Tank Limps Home 35 US: Hawk Eye: Wind foils IAAP burn plans 36 Japan Times: BATTLEFIELD RADIATION DU vet: 'My days are numbered' 37 US: NEI Nuclear Notes: Talking About Radiation NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 38 US: SimiValley Acorn: Toxic residue at Dayton Creek still a mystery, 39 US: SLO Tribune: NRC approves dry casks at Humboldt Bay 40 US: KRT Wire: Veteran recounts dumping of radioactive waste off U.S. 41 US: Craig Daily Press: Agency not opening uranium disposal site 42 US: Deseret News: Consultants give up state contracts 43 US: allAfrica.com: Namibia: Uranium Mine Under Fire 44 CTV.ca: NDP delegates support uranium refining 45 US: Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Nuclear Waste: Shrinking promise 46 BBC: Thousands guard nuclear shipment 47 Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Ethics must be applied to Yucca 48 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Yucca Mountain continues to fail 49 NewsFromRussia.Com: Nuclear waste transport bound for disputed stora 50 US: Eureka Reporter: Dry storage license issued for PG nuclear fuel 51 US: Salt Lake Tribune Nelson: Disposal by milling is legal, but is i 52 Detroit News: Junkets 'R' us 53 AFP: Protestors greet nuclear waste convoy as it crosses into German 54 US: San Francisco Bay View: Radioactive Tank No. 9 comes limping hom 55 US: Guardian Unlimited: Zimbabwe to Process Newly Found Uranium 56 UK: News & Star: Council lays out its decommissioning cash demands 57 US: The Signal: Resin bonds with perchlorate to help clean out PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 58 Seattle Times: Woman in Hanford case brings courtroom to tears 59 New Mexican: Experts disagree on lab's impact 60 Santa Fe New Mexican: LANL: Lab retirees tout perks of UC contract ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 SF Chronicle: NEWS ANALYSIS / The claims and facts on Iraq weapons Sunday, November 20, 2005 Rarely in recent memory has a political debate turned on such diametrically opposed claims about the factual record. As the Bush administration and war critics, most of them Democrats, are engaged in a slashing battle of words over the conflict in Iraq, what the president and his advisers knew and when they knew it have become a domestic second front. In the past week, this verbal battlefield consumed the House of Representatives and stretched across the Pacific to Asia, where President Bush on Saturday delivered his third major defense of his Iraq policies in nine days. Here is a review of the factual basis for some of the White House and Democratic claims: Weapons intelligence Claim: Democrats and war critics have long claimed that the administration manipulated intelligence about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. In his Veterans Day speech this month, Bush in rebuttal said Democratic leaders "are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs." Facts: Many of the administration's prewar claims have proved to be false or misleading. Reports by the Senate Intelligence Committee, released in July 2004, and the Silberman-Robb Commission, released in March, came to no firm conclusions about who was at fault, generally blaming the fiasco on sloppy work by CIA analysts. However, neither report attempted to interpret how the administration had used the intelligence or whether it had ignored dissenting views. This gap caused a major fight on the Senate floor earlier this month, when Democrats complained that the GOP leadership of the Intelligence Committee had quashed a section of the probe that was to cover the administration's prewar use of intelligence on Iraq. Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., finally relented and allowed this second phase to continue; results are not expected to be completed until late next year. So far, there has been no official attempt to assess why Vice President Dick Cheney, during the run-up to the war, continually made dramatic assertions that -- it is now known -- had already been discredited by internal intelligence reports. For example, he repeatedly claimed that the Sept. 11 ringleader Mohammed Atta had met with Iraqi government agents not long before the terrorist attacks, that Iraq had mobile biological weapons laboratories and that Iraq was harboring and training al Qaeda terrorists -- claims that had been questioned in numerous CIA memos and later turned out to be false. The administration's inaccurate claim that Iraq was trying to import yellowcake uranium from Niger has blossomed into a legal nightmare for the administration, as Justice Department special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald has indicted Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, for perjury, obstruction of justice and making false statements. More indictments are possible. Who knew what? Claim: The White House has accused Democratic leaders of hypocrisy, saying they had also believed Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. On Wednesday, Cheney said, "There was broad-based bipartisan agreement that Saddam Hussein was a threat ... that he violated U.N. Security Council resolutions and that, in a post-9/11 world, we couldn't afford to take the word of a dictator who had a history of (weapons of mass destruction) programs, who had excluded weapons inspectors ... who had committed mass murder. Those are the facts." Facts: The White House version is largely correct. Most Democratic leaders don't like to admit it now, but they roundly supported the prewar conventional wisdom that Hussein had chemical and biological weapons and an active nuclear program. From former President Bill Clinton to former House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt to Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., to 2004 presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., the consensus was overwhelming -- Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. The chorus about Iraq's weaponry was reinforced by the vast majority of think-tank analysts. "The consensus of the intelligence community was probably the most important factor" in the unanimity about Iraq's possession of weapons, said Kenneth Pollack of the Brookings Institution in Washington, who was an influential voice in the prewar debate. "I was listening to the intelligence analysts. More the fool me, but they were absolutely adamant." What the vote meant Claim: The White House says the October 2002 war-powers resolution passed by the House and Senate was essentially a vote on whether to invade Iraq. Democrats say it was merely a vote to give the president increased leverage over Hussein in jockeying over U.N. weapons inspections. Facts: The White House version is correct. At the time of the vote, it was widely understood that the vote was about whether to invade Iraq. But from the perspective of the tiny handful of experts who dissented from the conventional wisdom about Iraq's weapons, both Republicans and Democrats are to blame. "The White House wasn't misleading Congress because Congress was playing the game," said Scott Ritter, the chief U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 through 1998. Ritter was derided by many commentators for his claims in the prewar debate that Iraq did not have any banned weapons. "It was politically expedient for all," he said. "The problem is that no politician, Republican or Democrat, had the courage to stand up and speak the truth about Iraq, because that would ... not only fly in the face of the American policy of 'regime change,' but also damage them politically because people would say: 'You're supportive of Saddam.' Everybody fell right in line and said: 'Yes, Saddam is a threat,' when they knew there was no information out there to sustain this information." The same intelligence? Claim: Democrats had access to the same intelligence about Iraqi weapons that the White House saw. Facts: The White House version is only partly true. The Democrats had access to final CIA reports assessing Iraqi weapons, but they did not have access to dissenting reports from mid-level intelligence officials that cast cold water on erroneous or exaggerated claims. Democratic leaders "didn't have the same intelligence by any means, and a lot of these guys look at the press because they have no ability to get classified information," said David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector who now is president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington. "What the administration did was spin up the information," Albright said. "The White House made it look like (an Iraqi attack with weapons of mass destruction) could happen anytime. ... There was the CIA making mistakes, hyping stuff up, suppressing dissent, belittling dissent; you had the White House exaggerating what the CIA was saying; and you had Kay exaggerating even what the White House was saying," Albright said, referring to former U.N. inspector David Kay, who before the Iraq invasion was a strident pro-war commentator. After the war, Kay headed a CIA team in Iraq searching for the weapons and -- when he found none -- became an equally strident Bush critic. Foreign intelligence Claim: In his Nov. 11 speech, Bush said that the Democrats "also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein. They know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions citing his development and possession of weapons of mass destruction." Facts: The only major Western intelligence agencies that agreed fully with the Bush administration's stance on Iraqi weapons were the British and the Germans. In France, President Jacques Chirac and Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin publicly stated that although there was evidence suggesting the possibility of banned activity by Iraq, there was no solid proof that such weapons existed. U.N. weapons inspectors led by Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei reported that Iraq had failed to cooperate fully with their inspections teams and that major questions remained about Iraqi weapons, but they also said clearly that there was no irrefutable evidence of active weapons programs. The Iraq resolutions passed by the U.N. Security Council did not say that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Instead, the council members condemned Hussein's failure to abide by U.N. resolutions ordering Iraq to allow inspectors full access for their searches. E-mail the reporters at and . Page A - 17 The San Francisco Chronicle] ***************************************************************** 2 AFP: Iran says military site off-limits to UN nuclear probe 20/11/2005 08h55 Iranian women protest outside the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, 350 kms south of Tehran ©AFP TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran says it will not bow to UN nuclear agency demands to visit a military site in Tehran unless the UN provides "concrete proof" to justify an inspection. Foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi nevertheless said a new report by International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei does "not contain any negative points" and insisted a two-year-old probe should be closed. ElBaradei's report, released ahead of an IAEA meeting on Thursday, notes that "Iran's full transparency is indispensable and overdue". His agency is investigating suspicions that Iran is using an atomic energy drive as a cover for weapons development. The report also says Iran is still denying access to "military-owned workshops and research and development locations". The IAEA wants to return to the Lavizan-Shian area in Tehran, site of a physics research center that was dismantled and the ground razed before IAEA inspectors paid an initial visit in June 2004. "We only work within the framework of the safeguards, and if they come up with concrete proof within the framework of the safeguards and NPT we will consider it," Asefi told reporters. Under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran is not obliged to provide access to such sites but has allowed some access as a "confidence-building" measure. "They cannot just say we want to talk to this or that person and keep on dragging out the dossier. They should tell us their aims, and these aims should be towards closing the case," Asefi argued. Iranian women protest in front of a model of the White House outside the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, 350 kms south of Tehran ©AFP/File Iran insists it only wants to make electricity, and is losing patience with the two-year-old IAEA probe of its activities. The agency has uncovered suspect activity, but no "smoking gun" that proves a weapons program. "We have cooperated with the IAEA and will continue doing so. But we will only work within the framework of the NPT and the safeguards, and will not accept anything further," Asefi repeated. The IAEA board of governors will meet this week to consider whether to refer Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions for not complying with the NPT. Concerns over Iran's activities have been raised by the submission by Tehran of a document which describes how to make what could be the explosive core of an atom bomb. The document -- which Iran said came from a black market offer in 1987 that it never acted upon -- gives "procedural requirements for... the casting and machining of enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms," the IAEA report said. Asefi said the significance of the document was being exaggerated. "This a work of the media. The US and some of its allies, when they saw ElBaradei's report did not contain any negative points, tried to tarnish it," he said. "There is no legal and rational reason to send Iran's case to the Security Council. But we have a few days to go before the session and I do not rule out a politicisation of the case," he added. The IAEA report, Asefi said, "clearly shows Iran has cooperated." "We can see some progress and there were some positive points. It shows Iran is committed to international law and shows the previous resolution was politicised. It is expected that they close the case as soon as possible." Iran triggered the latest standoff in August when it effectively broke off negotiations with Britain, France and Germany on a package of incentives for restraining its nuclear plans and resumed uranium conversion activities it had suspended a year ago. Conversion is a precursor to enrichment, and the IAEA board has called on Iran to return to a full freeze. Iran says it is willing to negotiate, but not suspend all of its activities. An IAEA resolution passed on September 24 also stated that Tehran was in "non-compliance" with the NPT -- an automatic trigger for taking the matter to the Security Council. + Àðàáñêèé Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005 ***************************************************************** 3 AFP: Iran says disclosing suspected bomb blueprint shows good faith - Sat Nov 19, 3:40 PM ET TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran " /> Iransaid that its handing over of a document describing how to make what could be the explosive core of an atom bomb showed its good faith over its controversial nuclear program. The document, which Iran said came from a black market offer in 1987 that it never acted upon, gives "procedural requirements for ... the casting and machining of enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms," an International Atomic Energy Agency " /> International Atomic Energy Agencyreport said Friday. The IAEA report "does not reveal a breach of trust in this matter, but settles for mentioning the complete transparence of Iran," Iranian Atomic Energy Agency vice chairman Mohammad Saidi said on state television. Disclosure of the document raised new concerns about the nuclear programme, which Tehran says is a peaceful drive to produce electricity but the United States and Europe fear could be hiding the development of atomic weapons. The report, which IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei is to present to a board of governors' meeting on Thursday, said Iran is still denying access to sensitive sites and information. The governors will consider whether to refer Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions for not complying with the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 AFP: Iran may have handed over nuclear core plan by accident - Sun Nov 20, 3:13 PM ET VIENNA (AFP) - Iran may have handed over a document which describes how to make what could be the explosive core of an atom bomb by accident to UN inspectors, diplomats said, giving more details about its contents. One diplomat told AFP: "It's a bit puzzling they came and gave" the document to inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency " /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA). Other diplomats said the IAEA inspectors found it in a stack of other unrelated papers that the Vienna-based UN nuclear watchdog had asked for. But IAEA vice chairman Mohammad Saidi said Saturday in Tehran that by handing over the document Iran was showing its good faith, reporting with "complete transparence" on its controversial nuclear program. Iran said the document was part of a 1987 offer from a black market network that it never acted upon. The text spells out "procedural requirements for ... the casting and machining of enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms," the IAEA said in a confidential report released Friday to its 35-nation board of governors and obtained by AFP. Gary Samore, a non-proliferation expert who was an official in former president Bill Clinton " /> Bill Clinton's White House, told AFP: "There is no other purpose for manufacturing highly enriched uranium in hemispheres except for nuclear weapons." The disclosure of the document raised concerns about Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran says is a peaceful drive to produce electricity but the United States and Europe fear could conceal a secret program to develop atomic weapons. A diplomat close to the IAEA said the document was found in "two or three cardboard boxes" full of papers which Iran handed over and was in a binder and consisted of some 10 pages. The diplomat said the document was a "step-by-step" guide for turning uranium gas into enriched uranium metal and casting it into a hemispherical shape. Samore, speaking from Chicago where he works for the MacArthur Foundation, said: "The first step is you have to convert the gas to metal, then melt and cast the metal, not too much at a time because you don't want a criticality accident (an explosion). "Then you make it into a rough cast hemisphere, put it on a lathe and cut it to exact specifications," he said. The diplomat close to the IAEA said the Iranian document had "a couple of drawings" but was by no means a blueprint and that there were "no drawings for the core" of a bomb where the hemispheres would lie. Also, the document "doesn't give anything like dimensions," the diplomat said. But the 1987 offer from the smuggling network run by disgraced Pakistani atomic scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan did provide blueprints for centrifuges, the IAEA has said. The diplomat said the Iranian document was the same sort of texts and drawings the Khan network handed to Libya and South Africa but that no one has seen a "whole set" of the Khan documents detailing nuclear technology and materials. "Khan and company were hawking the whole works" of bomb technology, a second diplomat said, while the first diplomat said the IAEA was "still working to find out what else Iran may have received." Gregory Schulte, the US ambassador to the IAEA, told reporters Friday: "Iran owes the (IAEA) board an explanation why it had these documents, what it has done with them, and why it didn't disclose them in the past." He said the "documents open new concern about weaponization that Iran has failed to address." Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Calls Nuclear Report 'Baseless' From the Associated Press [UP] Sunday November 20, 2005 12:01 PM AP Photo VAH109 By NASSER KARIMI Associated Press Writer TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran sought on Sunday to blunt potential international action over its contentious nuclear program, labeling as baseless a U.N. nuclear watchdog report that it had received blueprints for building the core of an atomic weapon. The 35-member board of the International Atomic Energy Agency meets Thursday and could refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions. In a preparatory report, the U.N. agency found that Iran received the detailed designs from the network run by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear program. His network supplied Libya with information for its now-dismantled nuclear weapons program that included an engineer's drawing of an atomic bomb. The document given to Iran in 1987 showed how to cast ``enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms,'' said the confidential IAEA report. ``This is just a media speculation,'' said Hamid Reza Asefi, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman. ``It is baseless.'' The report on the blueprints was revealed to The Associated Press on Friday by IAEA diplomats, who requested anonymity in exchange for discussing the findings. Most board nations are concerned that Iran has resumed uranium conversion - a precursor to enrichment - and has refused to meet all IAEA requests about a nuclear program that was clandestine for nearly 20 years until discovered three years ago. The United States insists Iran is trying to make nuclear weapons, while Iran maintains its program is strictly for generating electricity. Gordon Brown is not opposed in principle to nuclear power. He has already asked Nick Stern, a senior official, to carry out an inquiry into the long-term economics of tackling global warming and another headed by Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary, on climate change targets is expected soon. Labour's target is to cut present carbon dioxide emissions by 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2010, but on current projections that it is likely only to reach 14 per cent. Sir Digby Jones, the Director-General of the CBI, said: "A decision on the future of nuclear power has been allowed to drift too long. Potential investors and the British public both deserve certainty." The business group said that public debate must start without delay and be concluded by the end of 2006. "Nuclear's position as a reliable, low-carbon energy source is without doubt, but understandable concerns exist about costs and waste," he said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Lawmakers Block Nuclear Inspections From the Associated Press [UP] Sunday November 20, 2005 7:46 pm AP Photo VAH106 By ALI AKBAR DAREINI Associated Press Writer TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Raising the stakes before a key vote by the U.N. nuclear agency, lawmakers approved a bill Sunday requiring the government to block inspections of atomic facilities if the agency refers Iran to the Security Council for possible sanctions. The bill was favored by 183 of the 197 lawmakers present. The session was broadcast live on state-run radio four days before the International Atomic Energy Agency board considers referring Tehran to the Security Council for violating a nuclear arms control treaty. The council could impose sanctions. When the bill becomes law, as expected, it likely will strengthen the government's hand in resisting international pressure to permanently abandon uranium enrichment, a process that can produce fuel for either nuclear reactors or atomic bombs. The United States accuses Iran of trying to build a nuclear weapon. Iran says its program is for generating electricity. The bill now will go to the Guardian Council, a hard-line constitutional watchdog, for ratification. The council is expected to approve the measure. ``If Iran's nuclear file is referred or reported to the U.N. Security Council, the government will be required to cancel all voluntary measures it has taken and implement all scientific, research and executive programs to enable the rights of the nation under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty,'' lawmaker Kazem Jalali quoted the bill as saying. Canceling voluntary measures means Iran would stop allowing in-depth IAEA inspections of its nuclear facilities and would resume uranium enrichment. Iran has been allowing short-notice inspections of those facilities. Iran resumed uranium-reprocessing activities - a step before enrichment - at its Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facility in August. It has said it preferred a negotiated solution to begin uranium enrichment. The United States and Europe want Iran to permanently halt uranium enrichment. But Iran says the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty allows it to pursue a nuclear program for peaceful purposes, and it will never give up the right to enrich uranium. ``Through this bill, we are declaring to Europe that referring Iran to the U.N. Security Council means Europeans are pushing the region toward a crisis,'' Jalali told the chamber before the vote. ``If it happens, it will impose a heavy cost on the world, the region and European countries themselves.'' Vice President Gholamreza Aghazadeh, who also oversees the nuclear program, said the vote sends a message that Iran will not give up its legitimate rights to develop a nuclear fuel cycle. In May, the Guardian Council ratified a bill compelling the government to continue the nuclear program, including uranium enrichment activities. The law set no timetable, however, allowing the government room to maneuver during negotiations with the Europeans. The 35-member IAEA board of governors meets Thursday in Vienna, Austria. In a preparatory report, the agency found that Iran received detailed nuclear designs from a black-market network run by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's atomic program. Diplomats say those designs appear to be blueprints for the core of a nuclear warhead. Khan's network supplied Libya with information for its now-dismantled nuclear weapons program that included an engineer's drawing of an atomic bomb. The document given to Iran in 1987 showed how to cast ``enriched, natural and depleted uranium metal into hemispherical forms,'' said the confidential IAEA report. Iran sought Sunday to blunt potential international action over its nuclear program, labeling the report about its blueprints ``baseless.'' ``This is just a media speculation,'' Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said. The nuclear program is arguably the only policy in Iran that is supported by all parts of the political spectrum. It is regarded as a source of national pride, and any government abandoning enrichment likely would lose support. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 7 Guardian Unlimited: Iranians admit receiving nuclear warhead blueprint from disgraced Pakistani expert Ian Traynor in Zagreb Saturday November 19, 2005 The Guardian International suspicion of Iran's nuclear programme heightened yesterday when it was revealed that Tehran had obtained a blueprint showing how to build the core of a nuclear warhead. Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told diplomats that his inspectors had recently obtained documents from Tehran showing that the Iranians had been given various instructions on processing uranium hexafluoride gas and casting and enriching uranium. These had been obtained via the black market in nuclear technology headed by the disgraced Pakistani scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan. Informed diplomats said the blueprint for casting uranium was required in making the core of a nuclear warhead, although that alone was not enough for the manufacture of a weapon. United Nations inspectors had long suspected that the Khan network had helped Iran, but this was the first time the Iranians had come clean on the issue. They told the inspectors they had not sought the information, but that the Khan network had supplied the documents anyway. This claim stretched credulity among diplomats and nuclear experts, and reinforced their conviction that Tehran is determined to acquire the capacity and knowhow for nuclear weapons. Dr ElBaradei's disclosure came in a five-page confidential report to diplomats, ahead of a meeting of the 35-strong IAEA board on the Iranian dispute next week. It comes a day after the Guardian reported that the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, had conducted a purge of his opponents in key ministries - drawing accusations of a coup. Iran, meanwhile, displayed further defiance of the IAEA yesterday by announcing it had started processing more uranium for its nuclear programme. Dr ElBaradei, the recent Nobel peace prizewinner, criticised Iran for continuing to withhold information on the project, demanding access for his inspectors to two Iranian military sites and to personnel involved in the programme. He reiterated that Iranian "transparency" was "indispensable and overdue". Amid frantic behind-the-scenes diplomacy aimed at building a broader international consensus on how to respond to the Iranian nuclear challenge, Tehran's chief nuclear negotiator announced that more uranium ore was being processed into gas for nuclear fuel purposes at the conversion complex in Isfahan. While the Iranian move was no surprise, its timing was seen as a signal of intransigence, less than a week before the IAEA board session. In the run-up to next week's Vienna session, the US, Russia, Britain and other main European players have been working with Dr ElBaradei to finalise an offer to the Iranians that would leave them with a civil nuclear power programme but deny them the capacity to manufacture weapons-grade uranium. Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, has asked Dr ElBaradei to travel to Iran to put the proposal to the Iranians - a mission in which, informed diplomats say, the Russians are the linchpin. US, European, and Russian officials were meeting in London yesterday to discuss the proposals and also to try to come up with a common strategy on Iran. The deal on offer would leave the Iranians processing uranium ore at the Isfahan plant, but forfeiting their proposed uranium enrichment complex at Natanz, where they want to build a large underground facility to process uranium gas into nuclear fuel. The offer has the support of the Europeans, the Americans, the Russians and of Dr ElBaradei - placing Tehran under increased pressure. In September, the IAEA board resolved to report Iran to the UN security council for breaches of its international nuclear commitments. But it did not set a date for such referral. Backstory Iran's game of nuclear cat and mouse with the west and UN nuclear inspectors goes back to early 2003 when Mohamed ElBaradei, the IAEA chief, visited the planned uranium enrichment plant at Natanz and was staggered by what he found. Iran had been covertly building and planning its nuclear projects for 18 years undetected. Since then, IAEA inspections have been the main subject of 13 reports by Dr ElBaradei to his board. The disclosures led, in turn, to the uncovering later in 2003 of the international trafficking in nuclear and weapons technology headed by Abdul Qadeer Khan, seen as the father of Pakistan's atomic bomb. But the UN inspections of Iranian sites have yet to provide conclusive evidence to show whether Tehran's nuclear projects are designed solely for energy or also for weapons. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 8 AFP: US demands North Korea honor agreement to scrap nuclear weapons: Bush 20/11/2005 12h07 This DigitalGlobe satellite image shows a nuclear reactor site in Yongbyon, North Korea ©AFP/DigitalGlobe/File BEIJING (AFP) - The United States demands that North Korea honor its commitment to end its nuclear weapons program, US President George W. Bush has said during a visit to China, the North's closest ally. "The fourth round of six-party talks in September ended with a joint statement in which North Korea committed to abandon all nuclear weapons and all existing nuclear programs," Bush said Sunday, following a meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao. "The United States expects it to honor its commitment." He was speaking to reporters after a meeting with Hu during which both discussed ways to make progress in the six-party talks, which are aimed at halting the North's nuclear ambitions. China is also Pyongyang's biggest aid provider and Washington needs Beijing's help to resolve the nuclear issue. Bush said the United States and China both want "a Korean peninsula that is stable, peaceful and free of nuclear weapons." He expressed appreciation to China for playing a leading role in the talks, which Beijing hosts. China also played a key role in convincing the North to participate in the multilateral talks. "Thank you for taking the lead in the six-party talks," Bush said. Hu pledged to continue to work with the United States to "move forward" the six-party talks and "peacefully resolve" the nuclear issue at an early date. After more than two years of six-party negotiations, North Korea agreed in principle at the fourth round in September to scrap its nuclear weapons drive in return for economic and diplomatic benefits. But countries involved, as well as those at a just-ended summit of Asia-Pacific leaders in South Korea, want concrete action to put that deal into effect after a fifth round of talks ended in deadlock this month. The six nations involved in the talks are the United States, the two Koreas, China, Russia and Japan. + Àðàáñêèé Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2005 ***************************************************************** 9 RIA Novosti: S.Korean leader praises Russia's role in six-party talks on N. Korea 19/ 11/ 2005 BUSAN (South Korea), November 19 (RIA Novosti) - The South Korean president highly assessed Russia's role in the six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear problem. "I would like to stress Russia's pro-active role in and its contribution to the six-party talks," Roh Moo-hyun said Saturday at a news conference in Busan. He continued that Russia was an active participant in economic and security processes in Northeast Asia, noting the good potential for cooperation with Russia. "The Russian economy is developing very quickly and very successfully," Roh Moo-hyun said. He highlighted the development of military technology, science and space research in Russia, adding that cooperation in these spheres would be advantageous to both states. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 10 HindustanTimes.com: Additional papers to shed greater light on Khan Additional papers to shed greater light on Khan network: India Press Trust of India New Delhi, November 19, 2005 Noting that additional documents have been made available to IAEA on Iran's nuclear issue, India on Saturday said these would shed "greater light" on clandestine activities of Pakistan-based AQ Khan network which has "seriously affected our national security". Referring to the report of IAEA Director General, External Affairs Ministry spokesman Navtej Sarna said it states that the agency has been able to interview individuals involved in procurement in nuclear field who have not been previously made available. "It refers to additional documents being made available to the agency in a variety of areas," Sarna said here about the report on 'Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran' presented by the IAEA DG to its Board of Governors on Friday. "The additional documentation and information made available to the IAEA will shed greater light on clandestine activities of 'foreign intermediaries', particularly the Pakistan-based AQ Khan network, that is of utmost concern to India as they have seriously affected our national security," Sarna said. "Greater clarity and transparency in this area is very much in India's interest," he said adding New Delhi believed "the principled position that we have taken on focussing on the sources as well as recipients of clandestine proliferation has contributed to this development." ***************************************************************** 11 PTI: Pakistan's nuke facilities suffered damage by recent quake New Delhi, Nov 20 (PTI) Pakistani nuclear facilities and storage sites in the Northern Areas have suffered "15 to 20 percent damage" in the recent mega quake and the local populace faces the risk of contamination, a report said. Claiming that these sites and facilities had suffered serious damage, the European website 'Newsinsight' reported that "the local population faces the risk of contamination, but a curfew has been imposed and they are being actively prevented by the authorities to leave the area". "There is 15 to 20 per cent damage to Pakistani nuclear facilities and storage sites in the Northern Areas, especially in Skardu and Chitral," it said, adding "while Western sources did not say that reactors had been damaged in the October eight earthquake, they confirmed that missile silos had developed cracks and storage facilities had taken a hit". Pakistan goverment turned away international relief teams "because of the serious damage to the nuclear facilities in the Northern Areas". The report said Pakistan had not allowed Indian Army relief work or IAF supply drops besides withdrawing consent for Israeli assistance fearing infiltration by Mossad agents "who would destroy the atomic establishments". "Since the epicentre is likely to be seismically active for another two years, they expressed fear of further collapse of the nuclear establishments," the website said. "To prevent leak of this massive nuclear destruction, Pakistan bottled up the local population by imposing curfew and did not permit international inspection of the disaster-hit areas," it added. PTI © Copyright PTI 2003-2004 ***************************************************************** 12 RIA Novosti: APEC leaders back new security initiatives 19/ 11/ 2005 BUSAN (South Korea), November 19 (RIA Novosti) - The leaders of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation countries have backed new initiatives on nuclear safety, general security and simplification of global trade Saturday. APEC leaders also said they intended to implement the organization's commitments to fight terrorism and ensure secure trade and travels. They condemned terrorist attacks on the region. [Рейтинг@Mail.ru] [rss2] © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 13 BBC: Vanunu freed after W Bank visit Last Updated: Sunday, 20 November 2005 [Former nuclear scientist Mordechai Vanunu. File photo] Mordechai Vanunu says he has averted a nuclear holocaust in the region Israeli ex-nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu has been released on bail after being arrested on his way back from a visit to the West Bank. Police held him at a checkpoint north of Jerusalem as he was returning by bus from the West Bank on Friday. Under the conditions for his release from prison in 2004, he is not allowed to visit the Palestinian territories. He was jailed in 1986 for 18 years after discussing his work at the Dimona nuclear reactor with a UK newspaper. Asked what he had done to prompt the arrest, he said: "Nothing. They just want to arrest me again. They don't want me to enjoy freedom." Christianity convert Mr Vanunu served most of his jail term in solitary confinement. He was released in April 2004 under strict conditions. Mr Vanunu has not been allowed to have a passport, is forbidden to approach ports and airports, and is banned from talking to foreigners without permission. Israel insists Mr Vanunu - who has converted to Christianity - still poses a security threat. In March, he was charged with violating the terms of his release from jail by giving interviews to the foreign media. Mr Vanunu says his action in revealing Israel's nuclear secrets aimed to avert a nuclear holocaust in the region. Many Israelis view him as a traitor. ***************************************************************** 14 AFP: Japanese port fights basing of US nuclear warship - Sun Nov 20, 5:11 PM ET YOKOSUKA, Japan (AFP) - Manabu Hattori, 79, stands almost every night on the street with a petition hanging from his shoulders. He has suffered two strokes but he wants still more signatures. The soft-spoken retiree is determined that his hometown, Yokosuka, does not become the first city outside the United States to host a nuclear-powered US aircraft carrier. The plan is fuelling strong local opposition here, even though it is backed by the local member of parliament, who happens to be Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "The US Navy doesn't let Japan screen the safety of nuclear-powered ships, let alone disclose anything related to safety concerns we have," said Hattori, a physicist specializing in nuclear reactors and the former director of Rikkyo University's Institute of Atomic Energy. "Nothing is more dangerous than leaving it up to people who blindly believe accidents will never happen," he said. Japan, a close US ally, announced last month it had agreed to host a Nimitz-class US nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in this naval port from 2008, prompting protests in the only nation to have suffered nuclear attack. The US Navy said that East Asia's unpredictable security environment meant the most capable ships had to be deployed. Yokosuka Mayor Ryoichi Kabaya deplored that the central government, despite being headed by a local resident, had overruled the city's demands that the currently deployed carrier, USS Kitty Hawk, be replaced with another conventionally powered ship when it is to be decommissioned in 2008. Hattori, who asks people to sign the board on his chest nearly every night, and his civil group have gathered more than 450,000 petition signatures, even though Yokosuka's population is 430,000. Masahiko Goto, a lawyer representing the civil group, said the movement is not necessarily against the US Navy presence itself. "It's not like the naval base inflicts a noise problem, and local residents are used to living with it," he said. "We're just asking for no nuclear-powered ship to base here." As a city of navy port since 19th century, Yokosuka has maintained a relatively friendly relationship with the US Navy after it replaced the Japanese military following World War II. It has hosted a US aircraft carrier -- USS Midway, Independence and then Kitty Hawk -- since 1973, the only non-US city to do so. But Japan's history as the only country attacked with a nuclear weapon -- more than 210,000 people died when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed by US forces in 1945 -- has made the basing of nuclear powered warships here controversial. James Kelly, the commmander of the US Navy in Japan, tried to assure the public that the nuclear warship would help "protect the regional security interests of the United States and its allies in the region". "I commit myself to you -- the citizens of Japan -- a 100-percent effort to discuss and address your safety concerns," he wrote in the liberal Asahi Shimbun daily's English edition on November 18. -- Safety concerns -- Although spurring frequent protests, the US Navy has sent nuclear-powered warships temporarily into Japanese ports, including Yokosuka, more than 1,200 times since 1964. US Navy spokesman John Wallach said in an e-mail interview that the past 40 years "confirms US nuclear-powered warships operations have had no adverse effect". But he added, "For reasons of operational security and classification, the US Navy does not release detailed technical information on the design or operations of its naval reactors." Last month, around 1,000 people imagined that radiation leaked from a US nuclear warship here. It was part of a drill held each year since 2002 that tests responses from the evacuation of schoolchildren to the dispatch of a special medical team. US forces take part only passively in the drill, making a call to the city government which takes two minutes in a more than three-hour exercise. "The city government is essentially picking a fight with the US which has insisted its nuclear-powered warships are perfectly safe," lawyer Goto said, saying "the possibility of an accident never is none". Wallach, the naval spokesman, defended the minimal US participation, saying the navy "would not require assistance from the Government of Japan to respond to an affected nuclear-powered warship." "Thus, existing civil emergency response plans already in place for handling industrial and natural events are sufficient to respond to any potential and highly unlikely radiological emergency onboard a US nuclear-powered ship." Koizumi acknowledged at a recent summit with US President George W. Bush that most Japanese did not want their communities to host US troops. Referring to a shift of forces in Okinawa, the small southern island chain that hosts most US troops, Koizumi said Japan, which is officially pacifist, needed to pay the price for the security alliance. "The government will make its utmost effort to gain local residents' understanding, although it may take some time," he said. Koizumi, who won a sweeping election mandate in September, could start by trying to persuade some of his own constituents about the warship. Mayumi Kamijo, a 59-year-old housewife, said after signing a petition against the warship, "I'm not politically outspoken and Yokosuka is home of Prime Minister Koizumi, but this is a different story." "Nothing guarantees there won't be an accident, ever," she said. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 15 AU ABC: Snowdon seeks weapons training assurances. 21/11/2005. ABC News Online Update: Monday, November 21, 2005. 9:03am (AEDT) The Federal Member for Lingiari is calling on the Department of Defence to release a report into an incident at the Delamere air weapons range near Katherine in August. Warren Snowdon says the community needs to understand what went wrong if there is going to be increased US strategic bomber training in the region. Starting next year, facilities on the Northern Territory will be the training grounds for B-52 and B-1 bombers and B-2 stealth aircraft from the US Pacific Island base of Guam. Mr Snowdon says it is important to know what the implications are and who was responsible. He says there is also a need to get some guarantee as to what ammunition the US is going to use in the Northern Territory. "We need categorical assurances from the Australian Government that they will not allow the use of depleted uranium shells on Australian soil," he said. © 2005 ABC| Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 16 Business Unlimited: Britain needs a debate on nuclear energy, say industry leaders Mark Milner Monday November 21, 2005 The Guardian The government is coming under increasing pressure from industry to make an early decision about the role of nuclear power in meeting Britain's energy needs. The employers' organisation, the CBI, says today that Britain needs a coherent energy policy as a matter of urgency, including a decision within the year on whether to build a new generation of nuclear reactors. Its call follows a recent report from the EEF, the body representing many of Britain's manufacturers, which argued that Britain needed new nuclear power stations as part of a balanced range of electricity-generating capacity. The CBI says gaps in energy policy could threaten future security of supply. "The threat to companies of gas shortages and rising energy costs this winter has shot the issue to the top of the business agenda," says the CBI's director, Sir Digby Jones. "Risk is an accepted fact of business life. But what users and producers of energy need, as in any market place, is a clear framework that lets them manage that risk in the most efficient way." Britain is facing potential short-term energy constraints because of the decline in output from the North Sea and the time being taken to bring imported supplies and storage capacity on stream. In the longer term it faces problems as ageing nuclear reactors, which provide about a fifth of the country's electricity, are shut down. Additional capacity will be lost in coming years as generators restrict production and then close down some coal-fired capacity, rather than make the investment needed to meet European Union emission rules. According to the CBI about a third of Britain's generating capacity will need to be replaced by 2020. The employers' organisation said that it did not want greater government interference in the energy market but it did want greater policy clarity. Sir Digby, who has already ruffled ministerial feathers by warning that Britain could face a return to the three-day week if the winter proves unusually severe, criticises the government for taking too long to decide whether to allow new building of nuclear plants and says it should begin a debate on the issue now. "Potential investors and the British public both deserve certainty," he says. "Nuclear's position as a reliable, low-carbon energy source is without doubt but understandable concerns exist about costs and waste." Sir David King, the prime minister's scientific adviser, yesterday joined the calls backing nuclear as part of the solution to Britain's energy problems. "I think the important thing is to give the green light to the private sector and the utilities and give them nuclear as an option," he told BBC1's Sunday AM programme. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 17 Australian: Nuclear cloud of indecision over European powers [November 21, 2005] Time is running out to permanently store radioactive waste, writes Amanda Hodge November 21, 2005 FOR visitors to the green fields and sprawling chateaux of France's Loire Valley, there could be few more dislocating sights than the twin stacks of a nuclear power station belching grey-white clouds into the atmosphere. Yet in a country where the provincial idyll is considered an inviolable national heritage, the French have been remarkably tolerant of these imposing symbols of industry. That is, until the question arises of what to do with the waste generated by the 58 atomic power stations peppering the French landscape. As one of the largest consumers of nuclear energy, with local reactors contributing 78 per cent of its electricity supply, France never experienced the passionate anti-nuclear movement that existed in countries such as Germany, the US and even Australia. But like a growing number of its nuclear compatriots, France is increasingly concerned about what to do with radioactive waste -- particularly given that the country's only viable storage option is an underground clay shaft in the Champagne wine region. In the US, support within Congress is declining for the proposed national high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, in Nevada, and local opposition is mounting. The Australian Government's proposed solution for its nuclear waste -- building a store on federal land in the Northern Territory -- has also drawn loud protests from the public and the Territory Government. After 15 years of research, the French Government must decide by January whether to bury its nuclear waste, now kept at its La Hague facility; find another permanent storage site; or commit to yet another intensive research program into ways of diluting it. With the EU pushing for all member states to find permanent disposal sites for thousands of tonnes of waste temporarily stored around Europe by 2008, France is running out of time. So, the tiny village of Bure -- just south of Reims and home to some of the most famous Champagne caves -- is likely to bear the burden of France's 50-year nuclear power legacy. In 2002, France temporarily stored 978,000cum of waste at nuclear facilities and its reprocessing plant. By 2020, it is tipped to climb to 1.9millioncum. For the past five years, the national radioactive waste management agency ANDRA has built and operated a 450m-deep geological laboratory in Bure, testing the clay for long-term nuclear waste storage. The region has become a flashpoint for a relatively alien French concept: an anti-nuclear movement. Such has been the level of public opposition to a waste dump that the Government's plan for a second geological laboratory was abandoned. Greenpeace France nuclear spokeswoman Helene Gassin said the issue had prompted some of the largest environmental rallies in French history. Last September, about 10,000 people protested against the proposed nuclear waste dump. "That's very important for France and particularly away from the big cities," she said. "At the beginning, it was just people not wanting it in their own backyard, but now more and more people are saying they don't want the nuclear industry leaving a burden for future generations. Even local people, rural people who were not against nuclear power in the beginning, now realise waste is a result of the industry." Even government-friendly green groups such as the Nicholas Hulot foundation, founded by and named after a French television presenter, would like to see a greater mix of energy power and less reliance on nuclear power. French nuclear power and mining giant AREVA -- which operates the La Hague reprocessing facility -- admits the waste issue is controversial but rejects suggestions it could galvanise public opinion against nuclear power. "Yes, it's controversial, but not as much as in some other countries because the waste is already vitrified," AREVA spokesman Charles Hufnagel said, referring to the reprocessing method that dilutes and encases the waste in glass. The Bure underground option would almost certainly be the final solution, Mr Hufnagel said. Citing Finland -- where Europe's first new nuclear plant in a decade has just been completed -- and US plans to increase nuclear power capacity, Mr Hufnagel said he was confident countries such as Germany would be forced to reverse anti-nuclear policies in the face of local and international pressure to restrict greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels. Germany's new Chancellor, Angela Merkel, will almost certainly push back the former government's 2022 final phase-out date for nuclear energy so that no plants close during her term. But it is by no means clear that she will abandon the commitment, particularly while the problem of where to store the country's 76,000cum of nuclear waste remains unsolved. The Gerhard Schroeder-led Social Democrat/Green alliance's decision in 2000 to phase out nuclear power was influenced by the anti-nuclear lobby's focus on the waste problem. Mr Schroeder argued that the phase-out plan made it easier to find a disposal solution because it quantified the amount of waste to be dealt with. In the past two decades, up to 100,000 demonstrators at a time have clashed violently with police, both over the transportation of reprocessed nuclear waste back over the border from La Hague and proposals to store the waste in a salt dome in the Lower Saxony village of Gorleben. A second salt repository in the former GDR state of Morsleben has already begun to break down and the Government faces a E2billion ($3.2billion) bill to stabilise and seal it with thousands of tonnes of concrete. The two states with the largest number of atomic energy plants -- both CDU strongholds -- also have large areas of granite deposits, which are considered more stable sites for nuclear repositories than salt stores. But both Baden-Wurttenberg and Bavaria have refused to entertain a dump site within their borders, and Ms Merkel is unlikely to challenge them. "We have a temporary solution that at every single plant (there are 17), we have interim disposal facilities where the elements can cool down for about 30 years," said Bernd Warnat, from the federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. "It could be that (the Government) agrees simply not to agree and leaves things as they are, which wouldn't cause a problem, because we have 30 years until a final disposal site must be ready." With the Christian and Social Democrats sharing power under a grand coalition, it seems unlikely that a final decision on waste disposal will be made during this term. But Mr Warnat warned that deferring a decision beyond 2009 would give the next government less time to find a solution. © The Australian ***************************************************************** 18 London Times: Never mind the fallout from Chernobyl, the Finns believe in the atom - From Mark Henderson 11-20-5 Yet in a nation that boasts 1.5 million saunas — one for every four people — and a vast, electricity-hungry paper industry, energy issues have acquired a high political profile. The Finns are no longer content to rely on imported gas, oil and coal for their power, or to pump out more and more of the greenhouse gases that are anathema to their environmentally conscious traditions. The nuclear option, they decided after a two-year national debate, has become least worst way of generating electricity cheaply and reliably. The result is Olkiluoto 3, the third nuclear plant to be built on the island and the country’s fifth, for which the foundation stone was laid in September by Paavo Lipponen, the former Prime Minister. When the 1,600 megawatt station begins operations in 2009, it will supply up to 10 per cent of Finland’s electricity. The Finnish example is now being keenly studied by British politicians, in search of clues to swinging the public behind an industry that has struggled to shed a reputation for accidents, pollution and an addiction to subsidies. It proves that even a sceptical public can be won over to a nuclear future — but also demonstrates many of the hurdles that Britain will have to cross if the Government is to secure popular support for a new generation of nuclear power stations. Finnish government officials and executives of TVO, the consortium of major energy users that commissioned Olkiluoto 3, agree it is unlikely that the plans would have been approved by parliament — by a narrow margin of 107 votes to 92 — had not several conditions been met. Some of these would present Britain with few problems. Like Finland, Britain has several existing nuclear sites, with both the national grid infrastructure to support new plants and a sympathetic local population who are used to living with atomic energy. Significant improvements in reactor design since Chernobyl have also helped. The £2 billion European Pressurised Water Reactor (EPR) model, is also designed to be fail safe. “If there is a problem, the reaction will stop,” Vincent Hertault, the safety manager, said. Perhaps the most important factor in Finland’s decision, however, was that the nation has taken firm steps to resolve the problem of long-term storage of waste. An underground repository for low and intermediate-level waste is already operating 100 metres below the surface at Olkiluoto, and work has begun nearby on an even deeper facility for high-level waste. Deep underground disposal was accepted as the only option, with even Green MPs backing the plans when the Finnish parliament voted by 159-3 to approve the store. The Finnish experience suggests that transparency, public debate and genuinely open minds in Government are vital if the case for nuclear power is to be made. , The Times and The Sunday Times. Copyright 2005 Times Newspapers Ltd. ***************************************************************** 19 London Times: Safety claim for new designs - Nigel Hawkes 11-20-5 The Westinghouse AP-1000 pressurised water reactor has 50 per cent fewer valves, 35 per cent fewer pumps, 80 per cent less piping and 70 per cent less cable than Sizewell-generation plants. The nightmare in any reactor is loss of coolant, and earlier PWRs had complex emergency core cooling systems to prevent the nuclear core melting. The AP-1000 achieves the same result more simply. The emergency cooling water is stored in a reservoir at the top, so that gravity, not pumps, gets it to where it is needed. Natural circulation and evaporation also help to cool the core. Made of 250 modular sections that can be fabricated and shipped to the site, the AP-1000 already has a US safety licence. Westinghouse believes one could be built in as little as three years. It is claimed that the advanced reactors have a longer life, of up to 60 years, and higher fuel burn-up to make better use of fuel. Still under development are fourth generation reactors, such as the pebble-bed reactor in which the fuel consists of graphite pebbles about the size of a golf ball filled with particles of uranium dioxide fuel which should have great intrinsic safety. Times Newspapers Ltd. ***************************************************************** 20 London Times: How a pledge on greenhouse gases made Blair go nuclear - Nigel Hawkes 11-20-5 Now it is plain that the target will be missed: Britain’s carbon emissions have risen two years running. Meeting future obligations will also be impossible unless the Government changes its course. Age is catching up with Britain’s nuclear plants and replacements — unless they are also nuclear — would emit much more carbon dioxide. Britain risks slipping even further behind its targets, as the Government has belatedly realised. While the “dash for gas” in the 1990s reduced carbon emissions, this situation could now be sustained only by a massive increase in gas imports from Russia and the Middle East, sources of dubious reliability. So global warming and energy security have conspired to revive a technology that Labour instinctively rejects. If there are to be new nuclear plants, as the Prime Minister wants, it will involve trampling over the principles of many of his MPs. Britain has 14 nuclear power stations on 11 sites, which generate a fifth of our electricity. The oldest date from the mid-1960s, the most recent — Sizewell B — from the mid-1990s. “Half the existing nuclear plants will have closed by 2015,” Keith Parker, of the Nuclear Industry Association, said. “By 2023 there will be only one left — Sizewell B.” Without new plants the share of nuclear electricity will inevitably decline as the plants shut down. On its own, analysts say, this would not lead to an “energy gap”. There is plenty of gas in the world and no immediate supply problems. If global warming were disregarded, energy supplies would be sufficient, although subject to the whim of suppliers aboard. “But if Britain is to continue the path of reducing emissions, it will need to maintain some nuclear capacity,” said John Loughead, of the UK Energy Research Institute, summarising a two-day discussion by 150 specialists held in London recently. “Renewable energy and conservation are also vital,” he said, “but the market alone won’t deliver these aspirations. If it is left to the market, it will be an extremely bumpy ride. It needs guidance from the Government.” Tony Blair’s recognition that “business as usual” would not deliver both secure energy and low carbon emissions lay behind his announcement of a new energy review in his party conference speech this year. But why should he want a review only two years after the publication of the Energy White Paper, which laid out energy strategy? The inevitable conclusion is that the Prime Minister wants a different answer — one that incorporates nuclear power. New nuclear plants cannot help Labour to meet its promise of a 20 per cent cut in carbon by 2010. “Achieving that is now a forlorn hope,” Mr Parker said. A new nuclear programme would take at least ten years to generate its first watt — five years’ planning and getting clearance, five years’ building. Critics say that the timescale would be longer. Any new plant would be built on one of the existing nuclear sites, which have the necessary infrastructure and enjoy local support. The old arguments about British versus overseas designs are dead, partly because indigenous innovation has withered in the long hiatus between orders and partly because the industry is now an international one. Whatever design were to be chosen, the technology would be proven rather than new, costs lower and designs simpler and safer. No subsidies would be needed, insisted Vincent de Rivas, the chief executive of EDF Energy, which owns British power stations and distribution networks including London Electricity and Seeboard. “That’s an old-fashioned view,” he told MPs on the Environmental Audit Committee of the House of Commons this month. “What [the] nuclear [industry] requires from Government is a clear policy in terms of licensing, in terms of planning, in terms of putting in place a safety authority, a clear vision and a Government which delivers. “For the rest, building and operating nuclear [facilities] with the technologies that are available at the moment is competitive and does not require special subsidies. It will deliver. There will be investors to invest, there will be customers to buy the energy produced.” The 2003 White Paper laid a lot of emphasis on renewable sources and energy efficiency. Renewables are expected to generate a fifth of electricity by 2020, with most of it coming from the wind. FISSION HISTORY 1896: radioactivity was discovered by Henri Becquerel 1947: the first UK research reactor started at Harwell 1949: start of civil nuclear energy in Britain with decision that the next plutonium-producing reactors should generate electricity 1956: first of four reactors, built at Calder Hall near Windscale in Cumbria, opened by the Queen 1959: four more at Chapelcross opened. 1979: Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania suffers a partial core meltdown. Minimal radioactive material is released 1986: reactor exploded in Chernobyl, Ukraine. The effects of the fallout are still affecting 16 million people 2003: Calder Hall closed 2005: Chapelcross closed 2010: Britain aims to cut greenhouse emissions by 20 per cent — above Kyoto agreement figure — by this date 2023: final deadline for plants in Heysham 2, Lancashire, and Torness, Scotland to close 2035: final deadline for Sizewell B to shut down ***************************************************************** 21 London Times: Britain is ready to go nuclear By Philip Webster, Political Editor 11-20-05 Blair courts controversy with power station plan BRITAIN will start building new civil nuclear power stations under plans backed by Tony Blair, The Times has learnt. Less than two years after a government paper called nuclear power an unattractive option, the Prime Minister has become convinced that building nuclear power stations is the only way to secure energy needs and meet obligations to reduce carbon emissions. In a controversial move, he wants planning procedures to be quickened so that the first stations could be under construction within ten years, far earlier than expected, advisers have told The Times. After first promising a decision on new stations by the end of this Parliament, then by the end of next year, Mr Blair will face down critics and set up a government review within the next two weeks, asking it to reach conclusions by the early summer. The stations would be built on existing sites in the hope of reducing public opposition and swifter planning and building procedures. They would involve the latest technology expected to be adopted soon in France and the US. Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary and the Cabinet's leading opponent of nuclear power, hinted yesterday that even she would back the move. In an interview with the BBC's Politics Show, she said that, although there were many problems with nuclear power, "I've always accepted we can't afford to close the door on nuclear." But Mr Blair, who has been given private preliminary studies, believes that all the arguments point to nuclear power and has effectively made up his mind, according to authoritative sources. His decision is a remarkable U-turn. The review, though headed by a senior figure from the Trade and Industry Department, will report to the Prime Minister and Alan Johnson, the Industry Secretary, and contain members from other departments and, crucially, from the Downing Street strategy unit. Critics will suspect that membership will be chosen to ensure a different conclusion to the last energy White Paper in 2003. Britain's 12 nuclear power stations provide 22 per cent of the electricity. Unless they are replaced there will only be three stations left by 2020. Studies prepared for Mr Blair by Sir David King, his chief scientific adviser, and other advisers have convinced him that renewable forms of energy, such as wind and wave power, cannot fill the gap. As coal-fired and nuclear stations close they will have to be replaced by gas-fired electricity stations and Britain will soon become a net gas importer. Mr Blair's advisers maintain that the debate should not be seen as a competition between nuclear power and "renewables", which the Government is committed to boosting. The nuclear option is unlikely to be opposed by the Conservatives. David Willetts, the Shadow Industry Secretary, said at the party conference: "We must make the case for civil nuclear power to tackle the energy crisis with least damage to the environment." London Times: Britain is ready to go nuclear - 11-20-5 Philip Webster, In a controversial move, he wants planning procedures to be quickened so that the first stations could be under construction within ten years, far earlier than expected, advisers have told The Times. After first promising a decision on new stations by the end of this Parliament, then by the end of next year, Mr Blair will face down critics and set up a government review within the next two weeks, asking it to reach conclusions by the early summer. The stations would be built on existing sites in the hope of reducing public opposition and swifter planning and building procedures. They would involve the latest technology expected to be adopted soon in France and the US. Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary and the Cabinet’s leading opponent of nuclear power, hinted yesterday that even she would back the move. In an interview with the BBC’s Politics Show, she said that, although there were many problems with nuclear power, “I’ve always accepted we can’t afford to close the door on nuclear.” But Mr Blair, who has been given private preliminary studies, believes that all the arguments point to nuclear power and has effectively made up his mind, according to authoritative sources. His decision is a remarkable U-turn. The review, though headed by a senior figure from the Trade and Industry Department, will report to the Prime Minister and Alan Johnson, the Industry Secretary, and contain members from other departments and, crucially, from the Downing Street strategy unit. Critics will suspect that membership will be chosen to ensure a different conclusion to the last energy White Paper in 2003. Britain’s 12 nuclear power stations provide 22 per cent of the electricity. Unless they are replaced there will only be three stations left by 2020. Studies prepared for Mr Blair by Sir David King, his chief scientific adviser, and other advisers have convinced him that renewable forms of energy, such as wind and wave power, cannot fill the gap. As coal-fired and nuclear stations close they will have to be replaced by gas-fired electricity stations and Britain will soon become a net gas importer. Mr Blair’s advisers maintain that the debate should not be seen as a competition between nuclear power and “renewables”, which the Government is committed to boosting. The nuclear option is unlikely to be opposed by the Conservatives. David Willetts, the Shadow Industry Secretary, said at the party conference: “We must make the case for civil nuclear power to tackle the energy crisis with least damage to the environment.” Gordon Brown is not opposed in principle to nuclear power. He has already asked Nick Stern, a senior official, to carry out an inquiry into the long-term economics of tackling global warming and another headed by Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary, on climate change targets is expected soon. Labour's target is to cut present carbon dioxide emissions by 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2010, but on current projections that it is likely only to reach 14 per cent. Sir Digby Jones, the Director-General of the CBI, said: "A decision on the future of nuclear power has been allowed to drift too long. Potential investors and the British public both deserve certainty." The business group said that public debate must start without delay and be concluded by the end of 2006. "Nuclear's position as a reliable, low-carbon energy source is without doubt, but understandable concerns exist about costs and waste," he said. ***************************************************************** 22 London Times: The nuclear nettle - Comment - Nuclear energy is an emotive subject, and it was politically understandable, though democratically lamentable, that the Prime Minister wanted to avoid it until after this year’s general election. But, stripped of emotion, the position is stark. Britain’s 12 ageing nuclear power stations provide a fifth of the country’s energy needs. Yet all but one will be out of business by 2023. Many coal-fired plants, which produce another 30 per cent, fall foul of Brussels rules on clean air and will also be shutting down over the next two decades. By then, Britain will need to find 50 gigawatts of new capacity. Given the lead time for any successor plants to be designed, approved and phased in, decisions need to be made in the next year or two. One of the looming problems for the Government is self-made. It has allowed the vacuum over its nuclear policy to be filled by hopes for the possibilities of wind power and other renewables that are bit-part players. Those who believe giant turbines can close the energy gap are thinking with their hearts rather than their heads. Wind power, by definition, depends on the wind blowing not too weak and not too strong. Wind farms run well below their capacity, (around 15 per cent in Germany). And they are unlikely even to be up to the job of providing 10 per cent of our electricity by 2020, the Government’s target. There will inevitably be an ugly political battle, but it is winnable. The ace is climate change. For those concerned about global warming, nuclear power is the logical step. It is clean, carbon-free, and it is relatively cheap — up to a third of the price of fossil fuels and nearly half the price of wind power per kilowatt-hour. New pressurised water reactors produce a tenth of the waste of the current reactors, (though what to do with that waste needs to be addressed, as does the security of any new plants, given the new terrorist threat.) But shut-down technology should make another Chernobyl disaster impossible. If new reactors are sited at current power stations, planning battles with local communities will be minimised. Mr Blair should continue to encourage renewable sources. The potential of wave power and tidal waters should be explored; and there must be much more research into making the storage of solar energy more efficient — Sharp, the Japanese electronics company, claims to be close to a breakthrough in this area. But in the meantime he should ask the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate to begin examining existing nuclear sites for future use. Nuclear reactors may not be what Mr Blair has in mind when he thinks of his legacy. But the next generation would thank him for this initiative. Times Newspapers Ltd. ***************************************************************** 23 SLO Tribune: Anti-nuclear activist to speak to Democrats Posted on Sun, Nov. 20, 2005 The Tribune SAN LUIS OBISPO Anti-nuclear activist and Grover Beach resident Rochelle Becker will speak at the SLO Democratic Club on Monday. Becker will discuss her newly formed organization, the Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility, which seeks to educate Californians on the costs and risks of nuclear power. For many years before forming the new group, Becker was the spokeswoman for the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace. She has become a nationally recognized activist on nuclear issues. The speech will start at 7 p.m. at the IHOP restaurant on Madonna Road in San Luis Obispo. For more information, call 595-7729. -- David Sneed ***************************************************************** 24 Miami Herald: Minor fire at nuclear power plant Associated Press El Universal November 20, 2005 A fire broke out at a nuclear power plant in Veracruz, but officials said Saturday that it caused no injuries or major damage and posed no health risk. The blaze began Friday evening inside a ventilation shaft on the roof of a building housing a generator, though it was away from the central core of the Laguna Verde nuclear power plant, said Ranulfo Márquez, deputy secretary of civil protection for the Gulf Coast state of Veracruz. Firefighters extinguished the flames after about forty minutes, Márquez said. What caused the fire was unclear, but investigators said it could have been a short circuit on the rooftop, where employees were recently working on maintenance. El Universal| Directorio| | Avisos Legales| Mapa de sitio © 2005 Copyright El Universal-El Universal Online, México. ***************************************************************** 25 FT.com: UK - Looming Cabinet split over nuclear power By Christopher Adams and Jean Eaglesham Published: November 20 2005 19:58 | Last updated: November 20 2005 19:58 [uk nuclear] The threat of a cabinet split over nuclear power loomed closer on Sunday when Margaret Beckett warned that the cost of building a new generation of plants had not been properly explored. “My position is that there are lots of concerns about nuclear,†said the environment secretary in a BBC interview, remarks that will be seen as confirmation of her perceived scepticism. As Tony Blair’s chief scientific adviser declared that the government should approve more nuclear reactors to help to cut carbon emissions, Ms Beckett said nuclear power could do “nothing extra†to meet near-term targets. Amid accusations of drift from business, the prime minister is expected to use next week’s annual conference of the CBI employers’ body to announce the terms of reference for a wide-ranging energy review. The review, which will re-visit the 2003 energy white paper, will lead to a decision in principle by the middle of next year on whether to replace ageing nuclear power plants, all but one of which are due to be decommissioned by 2023. Some cabinet ministers and Labour MPs are opposed to new nuclear build. The environment secretary, whose views are suspected to differ from the emerging pro-nuclear position in Downing Street and the Department of Trade and Industry, denied being “anti-nuclear†but listed a number of concerns. “There’s the cost, which has never really been properly explored. There is the issue of the waste and how we deal with it and what the consequences are of having new nuclear build,†she told the BBC’s The Politics Show. Ms Beckett said of a 2010 target to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 20 per cent, which the government has admitted it is unlikely to meet: “I think everybody agrees . . .there’s nothing extra nuclear can bring to that particular party because there’s just no way you could get new nuclear power stations in time to contribute to that.†However, she added that nuclear power might nevertheless need to be part of a future energy mix. “I’ve always accepted...that, particularly because of climate change, we could come to a position where we and other governments were driven back towards nuclear. So I’ve always accepted we can’t afford to close the door on nuclear.†The CBI will on Monday accuse the government of leaving it until “five to midnight†before waking up to the need for a revamped and coherent energy policy. Continued “drift†by ministers, including the failure to decide on new nuclear power stations, could threaten the security of energy supplies, it will warn. The “woefully inadequate†level of government investment in energy research and development, which fell 80 per cent between 1990 and 2001, is also criticised by the CBI in a policy paper issued on Monday. It argues the energy policy review needs to be more effective than the white paper, which ducked a decision on nuclear plants. © Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2005. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. ***************************************************************** 26 RIA Novosti: Energy a key part of Russian-APEC cooperation -- Putin 20/ 11/ 2005 TOKYO, November 20 (RIA Novosti) - Russia is interested in developing energy cooperation with member economies of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation organization, including Japan, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Sunday. Putin, on an official visit to Japan, said in summing up the results of the recent APEC summit that the energy sphere takes first place in Russia's cooperation with APEC. The president said that the issue would be a focus at talks in Japan. APEC members' confirmation of their readiness to cooperate in Asia was very significant, he said. "This is important for Russia, considering its plans to develop its Far Eastern and Siberian regions." Putin also encouraged APEC member states to discuss cooperation in high-tech areas, including space and nuclear energy. He also expressed his support for the discussions at the APEC summit on the principles of freedom in economic relations and trade. "This is especially important for Russia in the context of its talks to join the World Trade Organization," Putin said. © 2005 "RIA Novosti" ***************************************************************** 27 FT.com: UK - Science chief backs more nuclear power By Christopher Adams, Political Correspondent Published: November 20 2005 19:58 | Last updated: November 20 [uk nuclear] Tony Blair's chief scientific adviser has urged him to give the “green light†to new nuclear plants, in the strongest signal yet that the government is preparing to replace the UK's ageing power stations before they become obsolete. “We have to make decisions very quickly and I think the important thing here is, give the green light to the private sector utilities, to give them nuclear as an option,†said Sir David King in an interview on Sunday. His comments will reinforce expectations that Downing Street, which is poised to announce a review of energy policy, is to back at least a limited building programme to keep nuclear power as part of Britain's overall energy mix. The comments contrasted with those made on Sunday by Margaret Beckett, the environment secretary, who is believed to be a cabinet sceptic. She said there were “lots of concerns about nuclearâ€. Speaking on the BBC's Sunday AM programme, Sir David made clear he thought the need to cut long-term carbon emissions made keeping a nuclear capacity an attractive option. “The equation is very simple. We have roughly now 21 per cent of our energy from nuclear on the grid. A few years ago it was 24 per cent,†he said. “One of the reasons why our carbon dioxide emissions are going up is because we are already seeing a loss of power from nuclear. “Go forward to 2010 and we are down to 4 per cent on to the energy grid in the UK from nuclear,†he continued. “All of that is coming from a carbon dioxide-free source. I think we need every tool in the bag to tackle this problem.†© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2005. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. ***************************************************************** 28 APP.COM: DEP: Prove plant is safe | Asbury Park Press Online BEFORE LICENSE RENEWAL State unsure if Oyster Creek can handle attack, metal fatigue Posted by the on 11/19/05 BY TODD B. BATES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITER New Jersey is seeking a federal hearing on the application for a 20-year license extension for the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant, saying it falls short in dealing with aircraft attack risks and "metal fatigue" issues, among other contentions. "Public assurance that Oyster Creek's continued operation does not represent an unnecessary risk to the citizens of New Jersey is essential," state Environmental Commissioner Bradley M. Campbell wrote in a letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Monday. Rachelle Benson, a spokeswoman for the Lacey plant, which is run by AmerGen Energy Co., said "we'll be sending in our own responses to all those issues" in the state Department of Environmental Protection's request. NRC spokesman Neil A. Sheehan said in an e-mail that the NRC will have to decide whether the DEP petition should be reviewed by an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board panel. If the NRC decides to refer the petition to that panel, it will have to "decide, A, whether or not the state has standing and, B, whether or not the (state's) contentions warrant further review," Sheehan said in an interview. If a hearing is granted, the panel would "say whether or not it thinks the contentions have validity," and the matter would go back to the NRC, which can agree or disagree, he said. The DEP wants a hearing on several issues, including: Attack risks. Before the NRC decides whether to extend Oyster Creek's operating license, "the plant's vulnerability to aircraft attacks and in particular the spent fuel pool vulnerability must be analyzed," Campbell's letter says. Metal fatigue. The plant's application "uses a nonconservative assumption regarding metal fatigue for the additional 20 years that the plant would be in service," the letter says. Backup power. At issue are the long-term availability, maintenance and aging management of two combustion turbines, which are owned and operated by FirstEnergy Corp., an AmerGen competitor, according to the letter and a document listing the DEP's contentions. The turbines are a "backup power supply to essential safety systems at Oyster Creek," the document states. Copyright © 2005 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 29 AFP: Blair urged to approve new generation of nuclear reactors - Sun Nov 20, 4:31 PM ET LONDON (AFP) - British Prime Minister Tony Blair " /> Tony Blair's chief scientific advisor urged the government to "give the green light" to a new generation of nuclear reactors. With Britain's ageing plants set to be retired in the coming years, David King told the BBC "we have to take decisions very quickly." Nuclear power meets more than a fifth of Britain's energy needs but that will fall to just four percent by 2010 if reactors built in the 1960s and 1970s are not replaced soon. Blair relaunched the nuclear debate in September by saying all options were being considered in a review of the government's energy policy, but he faces stiff opposition from green groups and some in his Labour Party to building new reactors. But faced with the reality of global warming, King said "the equation is simple". The declining share of energy produced from nuclear reactors -- a carbon dioxide-free source -- was contributing to the failure to meet the government's targets for reducing emissions by 2010. "I think we need every tool in the bag to tackle this problem," King told the BBC. But Environment Minister Margaret Beckett said it would be impossible to build nuclear reactors quickly enough to help Britain meet its targets under the Kyoto treaty, which requires nations to cut greenhouse gases. There were concerns about the full cost of nuclear power and storage of waste, but climate change meant governments had to take another look at nuclear energy, she told the BBC. "I've always accepted we can't afford to close the door on nuclear," Beckett said. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 30 Scotsman.com News: Call to order new nuclear reactors Sun 20 Nov 2005 Prime Minister Tony Blair should "give the green light" to a new generation of nuclear reactors, his chief scientific adviser said. Mr Blair faces stiff opposition from green groups and some in his Labour Party if he sanctions new reactors. But Sir David King said faced with the reality of global warming, "the equation is simple". Nuclear power met almost a quarter of Britain's energy needs in recent years but that will fall to just 4% by 2010 if reactors are not replaced. "All of that is coming from a CO2 free source. I think we need every tool in the bag to tackle this problem," Sir David told BBC1's Sunday AM programme. The decline in nuclear power was contributing to failure to meet the Government's targets on reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 2010, Sir David said. "We have to take decisions very quickly. I think the important thing here is give the green light to the private sector and the utilities and give them nuclear as an option." © Copyright Press Association Ltd 2005, All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 31 Macleans.ca: Delegates at Sask NDP convention reject call to prevent uranium refining TIM COOK --> November 19, 2005 - 18:25 REGINA (CP) - Saskatchewan NDP Premier Lorne Calvert was pleased that delegates at his party's annual convention supported his government's plan to explore refining uranium in the province. "I never view resolutions or debates as vindications, but I'm of course pleased . . . to see the party - through its process - support that direction," Calvert told reporters Saturday. A resolution that would have called on the government to stop consideration of refining was defeated Friday afternoon in panel discussions behind closed doors. Involvement in the nuclear power cycle is a touchy issues for Saskatchewan's NDP. The province is already one of the world's largest miners of uranium and it's been an economic position of the government to look at options for further development of that industry. But some in the NDP feel that nuclear power and the radioactive waste it generates is not something a left-wing party should support. Uranium has been a frontburner issue for Calvert since he returned from a trade mission to Asia last month and suggested that China's desire to build nuclear power plants presented an opportunity for Saskatchewan's uranium industry. Calvert was asked whether his government would support a nuclear waste disposal site in the province. He said he may consider a proposal if extensive study was done. But a day later, Calvert ruled the storage of nuclear waste out and has remained firm on the issue since. Calvert denied suggestions that party debate on the issues was squelched by keeping the resolution from the convention floor, which is open to the media. Party policy dictates that resolutions defeated in panel are not moved to the public part of the convention. "I'm told there was a lively debate," Calvert said of the panel discussion. "It's been the process for years and years that the resolution are debated in panel." Copyright by Rogers Media Inc. ***************************************************************** 32 NEWS.com.au: Security holes expose key facilities to attack By Ben Johnson and Adam Bell November 20, 2005 GAPING holes remain in security at key Sydney facilities and landmarks thought to be on terrorist hit lists. At several Sydney facilities, there is little to prevent a determined, resourceful and quick-thinking terrorist carrying out an attack. It has also been revealed that calls to the national security hotline have doubled to 1500 a week in the wake of the arrests and debate about anti-terror laws. Among the most vulnerable facilities is Bankstown airport. The runway can be accessed by simply walking through an unlocked gate. A reporter toting a backpack was ignored by office workers and encountered no security personnel on airport property. Security is virtually non-existent at dozens of hangars around the airport. In July, when The Sunday Telegraph exposed a large unlocked gate at Bankstown airport, airport authorities said companies would be reprimanded over the security breach. But it appears little has changed. At Balmoral, a metre-tall, barbed-wire fence is all that divides the public from HMAS Penguin, home to part of the Royal Australian Navy's systems command. The Sunday Telegraph was not challenged by security staff, despite preparing to scale the low fence by standing on its brick base. An unattended bicycle with a backpack attached was left chained to a street sign outside the front entrance of State Parliament House for almost an hour on Friday without being inspected by security staff. The Lucas Heights nuclear reactor, which police have alleged was the target of a Sydney terrorist cell, is protected by flimsy wire fences unlikely to repel a determined intruder at the wheel of a car, van or truck. But Australian Protective Services officers were quick to pounce on anyone failing to stop at the facility's first checkpoint, or those curious for a look at the large white structure from a gate behind a narrow barricade further along New Illawarra Road. Two armed guards pulled up in separate cars within two minutes to accost a photographer and a journalist parked in a small car about 500m from - and in full view of - the reactor on Friday. "We are on a heightened state of alert and you cannot take photographs of the reactor," one clearly agitated officer said. They demanded, and recorded, identification details including drivers' licences and vehicle registration. Prime Minister John Howard warned of the possibility of an imminent attack when he introduced urgent amendments to anti-terror laws two weeks ago. But when The Sunday Telegraph visited Kirribilli House last Thursday, security was sluggish to respond. A reporter wearing a large black backpack waited at the front gate for four minutes directly under a security camera before being challenged. Mr Howard was not at home at the time. Security at Chifley Tower, home to several investment banks and the International Olympic Committee, consisted of a single security guard and no bag check. No security sign-in was required to enter, and no swipe card was needed to take the lift to the offices of the IOC on the 27th floor. At the Australian Stock Exchange, the public can enter the lobby unchallenged, but a security swipe card is required to enter the lifts. Though not tested by The Sunday Telegraph, four pop-up barriers designed to stop a speeding truck have been installed at Sydney's overseas passenger terminal. Premier Morris Iemma said the $460,000 barricade system could stop a truck travelling at 80km/h. Ports Minister Eric Roozendaal said the four-year, $23 million upgrade of security included 23 closed-circuit TV cameras on wharves around Sydney Harbour. The Attorney-General's Department said there had been more than 3000 calls to the security hotline in the past two weeks, 71 per cent of them with information. In a similar period in September, 1500 calls were made. | | Copyright 2005 News Limited. All times AEDT (GMT + ***************************************************************** 33 UPI: Denver mayor unhappy with disaster drill United Press International - NewsTrack - 11/19/2005 6:16:00 PM -0500 Newstrack: Prime Minister Tony Blair plans to DENVER, Nov. 19 (UPI) -- The mayor of Denver, dissatisfied with a recent fake disaster exercise, has ordered a new plan be developed and is looking for a full-time emergency manager. Some 120 Denver-area agencies staged a tabletop exercise Oct. 19 to practice responding if a radioactive bomb went off. "The experts ruled the exercise was a success," Mayor John Hickenlooper told the Rocky Mountain News. "I hold us to a much higher standard, evidently." Among other problems, the drill revealed faulty radio communications and too few radiation sensors. "I believed our readiness was sufficient. The exercise pointed out we needed more practice, more training," Hickenlooper said. He said emergency drills must be nearly flawless if Denver is to survive devastation anything close to that suffered by New Orleans. The mayor said Denver needs a full-time emergency manager to take over duties that have been handled part-time since 2003 by Deputy Safety Manager Tracy Howard. © Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved Want to email or reprint this story? Click here for ***************************************************************** 34 [NYTr] Are Our Leaders Insane? Radioactive Tank Limps Home Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 17:16:26 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Don Stacey - Nov 20, 2005 [ARE OUR LEADERS INSANE? What other conclusion can one draw? We are actively nuking our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Uranium munitions by the ton are set off over there. It is called "depleted uranium" but it isn't very depleted. It is almost full strength uranium and has a half life of 4.5 billion years. We have created a nuclear wasteland over there and our troops are sickening and dying from it. Their babies are being born with outrageous deformities. AND OUR GOVERNMENT JUST KEEPS DOING IT ! They must be insane! -Don Stacey] San Francisco Bay View - Nov 9, 2005 http://www.sfbayview.com/110905/radioactivetank110905.shtml Radioactive Tank No. 9 comes limping home by Bob Nichols Across the plains of Kansas, destroyed, radioactive Abrams tanks, perched on railroad flatcars, rolled towards an uncertain future. Only one thing was certain. They would be radioactive forever. This would be their everlasting death mask. The Pentagon deceptively calls it "depleted uranium." The Abrams tanks are constructed with a layer of radioactive uranium metal plates. The big tanks fire a giant uranium dart at 2,100 mph, much faster than an F-16 fighter aircraft, mach III to airplane pilots and very, very fast to the rest of us. American taxpayers paid to ship the tanks to Iraq and to return them for disposal or re-building in the United States. The tanks are 12 feet wide and weigh a stout 70 tons, or 140,000 pounds. The enduring vigorous stupidity of the U.S. military pretends that radiation is one of those things that if you can't see it, it can't hurt you. They are thoroughly delusional, of course. A National Academy of Sciences report released June 30, 2005, finds that there is no safe level of radiation. Any radiation is bad. >From America to Iraq and back, these giant radioactive hulks can only sicken and kill Americans. On top of the sheer, unrelenting stupidity of playing with radiation with unsuspecting soldiers, now the neo-con government is involving everyday Americans in their radiation madness. The Pentagon can't even follow simple radiation hazard mitigation instructions. Their own rules and regulations have the force of law throughout the world. Yet they are ignored in the United States. Dr. Doug Rokke Dr. Doug Rokke is the Pentagon's former director of the U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project. When contacted on Oct. 22, he viewed Chris Bayruh's photographs and made this statement about the radioactive tanks in Kansas: "The radioactive damaged Abrams tanks that were left unsecured on a Kansas railroad track are a perfect example of exactly how not to ship damaged radioactive equipment and how not to protect our Army's Abrams tanks from possible sabotage and compromise of classified battle systems." On Oct. 10, prior to the discovery of the radioactive tanks, Dr. Rokke made the following statement. It is eerily predictive of what would happen in Kansas three days later. "U.S. Department of Defense officials continue to deny that there are any adverse health and environmental effects as a consequence of the manufacture, testing and/or use of uranium munitions to avoid liability for the willful and illegal dispersal of a radioactive toxic material - depleted uranium." Dr. Rokke continued, "They [the U.S. military] arrogantly refuse to comply with their own regulations, orders and directives that require United States Department of Defense officials to provide prompt and effective medical care to all exposed individuals." (See Note 1 below.) "They also refuse to clean up dispersed radioactive contamination of equipment as required by Army regulations." (See Note 2.) "Specifically, they are required (see Note 3) to accomplish four things: 1) Military personnel must 'identify, segregate, isolate, secure and label all RCE' (radiologically contaminated equipment). 2) 'Procedures to minimize the spread of radioactivity will be implemented as soon as possible.' 3) 'Radioactive material and waste will not be locally disposed of through burial, submersion, incineration, destruction in place, or abandonment' and 4) 'All equipment, to include captured or combat RCE, will be surveyed, packaged, retrograded, decontaminated and released.' "The past and current use of uranium weapons, the release of radioactive components in destroyed U.S. and foreign military equipment, and releases of industrial, medical and research facility radioactive materials have resulted in unacceptable exposures." Dr. Rokke added, "Therefore, decontamination must be completed as required by U.S. Army Regulation 700-48 and should include releases of all radioactive materials resulting from military operations. "The extent of adverse health and environmental effects of uranium weapons contamination is not limited to combat zones but includes facilities and sites where uranium weapons were manufactured or tested, including Vieques, Puerto Rico, Colonie, New York, and Jefferson Proving Grounds, Indiana. "Therefore, medical care must be provided by the United States Department of Defense officials to all individuals affected by the manufacturing, testing and/or use of uranium munitions. Thorough environmental remediation also must be completed without further delay. "I am amazed," exclaimed Dr. Rokke, "that 14 years after I was asked to clean up the initial DU mess from Gulf War I and almost 10 years since I finished the depleted uranium project, United States Department of Defense officials and many others still attempt to justify uranium munitions use while ignoring mandatory requirements. "But beyond the ignored mandatory actions, the willful dispersal of tons of solid radioactive and chemically toxic waste in the form of uranium munitions just does not even pass the common sense test. "Finally, continued compliance with the infamous March 1991 Los Alamos Memorandum (see Note 5) that was issued to ensure continued use of uranium munitions cannot be justified. "In conclusion," Dr. Rokke urged, "the president of the United States, George W. Bush, and the prime minister of Great Britain, Tony Blair, must acknowledge and accept responsibility for willful use of illegal uranium munitions - their own "dirty bombs" - resulting in adverse health and environmental effects." "President Bush and Prime Minister Blair also should order: 1) medical care for all casualties, 2) thorough environmental remediation, 3) immediate cessation of retaliation against all of us who demand compliance with medical care and environmental remediation requirements, 4) and ban the future use of depleted uranium munitions," Dr. Rokke concluded. A little old lady in tennis shoes Leuren Moret is a world famous scientist and radiation specialist who formerly worked at the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab, where she became a whistleblower in 1991. She has spoken out about the danger of uranium munitions to humanity in more than 42 countries. Moret has appeared in four documentaries about uranium munitions (depleted uranium). "Beyond Treason" debuted in August 2005 and won the Grand Festival Award at the Berkeley Film Festival. The newest film, "Blowin' in the Wind," was nominated during its debut the first week of November in Australia for an Academy Award. Moret was an expert witness at the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan and serves as an adviser and expert witness in court cases regarding radiation exposure. Her statement, made Oct. 24, about the dead tanks in Kansas follows: "Sally Devlin, a little old lady in tennis shoes, went to a public meeting several years ago, held by the Air Force in Pahrump, Nevada. Two officers told the citizens of the town that the Air Force would be moving 80 old target practice tanks and tons of old depleted uranium munitions through their town. "The radioactive bullets had been picked up off the Nellis gunnery ranges by order of the state of Nevada and were being transported to the Nevada Test Site [a nuclear weapons test site] to be buried as radioactive waste. "When Mrs. Devlin politely asked them how they would prevent the residents of the town from being contaminated by the radioactive dust on the tanks and bullets, the officers said, 'We're wrapping them in Saran Wrap.' She told them that would be unacceptable and stopped the Air Force dead in their tracks," Moret concluded. Whether it is Saran Wrap in Nevada or nothing at all in Kansas, the Pentagon just doesn't get it when it comes to uranium radiation dispersing weapons. It is way past time to take all their nuclear weapons and uranium munitions away from them and send them home to get real jobs. They are clearly incapable of protecting this country from all dangers, including those created by our own U.S. military. The U.S. military shows so little regard for Americans in Kansas, one wonders what on earth they have done to Iraq. The U.S. military has distributed an estimated 8 million pounds of weaponized ceramic uranium oxide gas, aerosols and dust on a practically defenseless little country of 26 million people (see Note 6), according to an estimate by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark. What is this lethal radioactive weapon supposed to do? Why was it used? Ceramic uranium oxide gas is a genocidal weapon, for God's sake. It persists in the environment forever. In Leuren Moret's pithy words, "The Iraqis are uranium meat." The politicians, Pentagon staff, generals, commanding officers and others responsible for this war crime must be arrested, tried, convicted and appropriately punished for their crimes against humanity. There is another explanation Another explanation is that the U.S. Army and other branches of the military are far from stupid. They are, in fact, the most lethal and carefully planned military in the history of the world. The extensive use of weaponized uranium oxide gas, aerosols and dust is not an accident or an oversight. They did it on purpose. If this is true, they purposely used a genocidal weapon over at least a 15-year period. No, this is not a callous mistake of empire; it is a calculated act of genocide to weaken the oil- and gas-rich countries of Central Asia, including Iraq. Take your choice: they are either stupid or genocidal monsters. A British group has estimated the weaponized ceramic uranium oxide will account for an additional 25 million cancers in Iraq in the next several years. There are only 26 million Iraqis to start with, minus the nearly 1.7 million killed by war or sanctions since 1991, plus some live births. A National Academy of Sciences report released June 30, 2005, finds that there is no safe level of radiation. The committee dismissed the idea that any radiation could be harmless or beneficial. The radioactive tanks in Kansas and Iraq are the same. They are placed there at great expense by the senior American political and military leadership, with premeditated malice. The bottom line purpose of a 140,000-pound radioactive tank is to kill people. Uranium munitions a war crime Dennis Kyne, noted speaker and writer, is a former drill instructor (DI) and a 15-year veteran of the Army as well as a Gulf War vet (see www.denniskyne.com). Kyne makes a point of how "hot" or radioactive the tanks in Kansas would be if they were hit by "friendly fire" to get beat up so much. They could be contaminated with as much as 30,000 times background radiation. That is what uranium munitions do to a tank, bunker or building. Karen Parker, a prominent U.S. international human rights lawyer, says there are four rules derived from humanitarian laws and conventions regarding weapons: 1. Weapons may only be used against legal enemy military targets and must not have an adverse effect elsewhere (the territorial rule). 2. Weapons can only be used for the duration of an armed conflict and must not be used or continue to act afterwards (the temporal rule). 3. Weapons may not be unduly inhumane (the "humaneness" rule). The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 speak of "unnecessary suffering" and "superfluous injury" in this regard 4. Weapons may not have an unduly negative effect on the natural environment (the "environmental" rule). "DU weaponry fails all four tests," Parker states. "First, DU cannot be limited to legal military targets. Second, it cannot be 'turned off' when the war is over but keeps killing. "Third, DU can kill through painful conditions such as cancers and organ damage and can also cause birth defects, such as facial deformities and missing limbs. Lastly, DU cannot be used without unduly damaging the natural environment. "In my view, use of DU weaponry violates the grave breach provisions of the Geneva Conventions," Parker concluded, "and so its use constitutes a war crime, or crime against humanity." Notes 1. "Medical Management of Unusual Depleted Uranium Casualties," DOD, Pentagon, 10/14/93, "Medical Management of Army Personnel Exposed to Depleted Uranium (DU)," Headquarters, U.S. Army Medical Command, 4/29/04, and section 2-5 of AR 700-48 . 2. AR 700- 48: "Management of Equipment Contaminated With Depleted Uranium or Radioactive Commodities," Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C., September 2002, and U.S. Army Technical Bulletin TB 9-1300-278: "Guidelines For Safe Response To Handling, Storage, and Transportation Accidents Involving Army Tank Munitions or Armor Which Contain Depleted Uranium," Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C., July 1996, http://traprockpeace.org/du_pam_700-48.pdf. 3. Section 2-4 of United States Army Regulation 700-48 dated Sept. 16, 2002, specifies these requirements. 4. IAW Technical Bulletin 9-1300-278, DA PAM 700-48. Maximum exposure limits are specified in Appendix F. 5. http://www.tv.cbc.ca/national/pgminfo/du/doc1.html 6. Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark's estimate, http://www.covertactionquarterly.org/demonize.html Copyright Bob Nichols. Copying permitted if you credit the source and leave everything intact, including notes. Bob Nichols is a Project Censored Award winner and lives in California. He formerly lived in Oklahoma. He is a contributor to OnLineJournal.com, AxisofLogic.com, DissidentVoice.com and other online publications and is a correspondent for the San Francisco Bay View newspaper. Nichols is a former employee of the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant. He can be reached by email at bob.bobnichols@gmail.com. * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 35 Hawk Eye: Wind foils IAAP burn plans Saturday, November 19, 2005 Site updated daily at 11 a.m. CST Line 7 thermal cleanup effort postponed indefinitely. By KILEY MILLER kmiller@thehawkeye.com MIDDLETOWN — Mother Nature doesn't take orders. Not even from the Army. Wintry weather this week forced an indefinite delay in one of the more flamboyant cleanup efforts planned for the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant. Army officials had hoped to set fires Wednesday inside several buildings on Line 7 at the ammunition plant to neutralize explosive materials trapped in the floors and walls. But strong winds blew out the flames before they flickered. A plant spokesman said the burns were postponed without providing a new date. Plexus Scientific Corp., a Virginia–based government contractor, is responsible for the thermal decontamination at the plant, a preliminary step to knocking down buildings the old–fashioned way — with bulldozers and backhoes. In thermal decontamination, wood pallets and other incendiary materials are stuffed into the buildings and set alight. When the internal temperature reaches 500 degrees Fahrenheit, leftover explosives are considered neutralized and the fire is doused. Line 7 was a conventional weapons manufacturing area before being mothballed. It sits near the center of the 19,000–acre ammunition plant. Nearly 30 buildings on the line are pegged for thermal decontamination. Army officials have said fires might flare on other lines in the future as part of the environmental cleanup at the plant, a federally designated Superfund site. Work crews removed 75 tons of asbestos from Line 7 preparing for the thermal decontamination. The Hawk Eye 800 S. Main St., Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 · 1-800-397-1708 · FAX 319-754-6824 · webmaster@thehawkeye.com ***************************************************************** 36 Japan Times: BATTLEFIELD RADIATION DU vet: 'My days are numbered' Sunday, November 20, 2005 By ERIC PRIDEAUX Staff writer Gerard Matthew has broad shoulders and beefy hands. He's built like a bear. Yet as sturdy as this 31-year-old may look, he is a very sick man. [News photo] Iraqi armor in a Baghdad dump in June 2003. Some of the vehicles may have been hit by the depleted-uranium munitions Gerard Matthew blames for his and his daughter's affliction. Matthew suffers, for example, from facial swelling, double and triple vision, muscle weakness, bouts of extreme anger that sometimes cause him to lash out at his wife, erectile dysfunction and, most serious of all, a tumor in the pituitary gland at the base of his brain. "And these are just the big ones," he told the audience at the Foreign Correspondents' Club Japan in Tokyo earlier this month. At home in New York, he said, he's got "a pharmacy" of medication -- and he worries both for himself and his family that his "days are numbered." [News photo] Gerard Matthew hugs his daughter, Victoria. All the more reason to speak at this media venue now, before things get worse. Matthew was a specialist in the U.S. Army National Guard's 719th Transport Unit, and his job, from April-September 2003, was to drive trucks collecting war debris from around southern Iraq. He thinks that Samawah, the city where Japan has some 550 SDF members participating in the U.S.-led "coalition of the willing," was among the many locations he passed through. Matthew believes the dust from spent depleted-uranium (DU) ammunition in his cargo accumulated in his lungs, irradiating his body and causing most of the ailments that trouble him today. Urine tests taken as part of a New York Daily News story investigation in 2004 showed that DU levels in his sample were up to eight times higher than in control samples from Daily News journalists. Matthew showed reporters a letter from the Department of the Army that rejected this claim. Most pertinent to his audience at the FCCJ: Matthew worries that radiological contamination may be afflicting Japanese troops posted to Iraq -- not to mention local Iraqis. "I came all the way to Japan to convey the message," said Matthew, who, with his wife Janise was the guest of Tokyo-based activist group Campaign for Abolition of Depleted Uranium Japan. In other words, he believes that Japanese troops should be warned: "They may be susceptible to it." With Janise, also 31, seated beside him on the dais, the couple together held up glossy photographs of their 1-year-old daughter Victoria, who was born without a right hand. It is a birth defect they both blame on DU. "Yes, the military has paid for my education," said Matthew. "But I would give all of that up to have my daughter with five fingers on her hand." The Matthew family is caught up in a raging worldwide debate over DU that extends into areas both scientific and geo-political. Depleted uranium, an enormously dense and hard biproduct of converting naturally occurring uranium into fuel for nuclear reactors, is used by the U.S. military both in supertough armor plating for fighting vehicles and in "penetrators" -- ammunition fired against armored vehicles and concrete emplacements that, instead of mushrooming on impact as regular bullets do, grows sharper as it bores forward and through. According to the U.S. Department of Defense, 290.3 metric tons of DU projectiles were fired by U.S. forces during the 1990-91 Gulf War. By press time, the department had not responded to repeated requests for comment on Matthew's case and current use of DU by the U.S. military. Whatever the strategic benefits of DU ammunition, critics -- including many in the scientific community -- claim that particles of it released upon impact are easily inhaled by humans, either then or much later, and remain in the body for years, possibly causing cancers and many other health problems. With local Iraqis in mind in particular, Matthew said: "We're hurting innocent civilians, and we don't need to do that." The United Nations would seem to agree. A 2002 working paper by the UN Commission on Human Rights itemized a long list of diseases and birth defects among Gulf War veterans, Iraqis and the offspring of both -- linking them strongly to the use of DU. The same UN working paper concluded that use of DU in warfare contravenes the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the Charter of the United Nations itself; and, "in certain situations of armed conflict," the Genocide Convention. The working paper, if read closely, also suggests violation of the Hague and Geneva Conventions. The Pentagon, for its part, says on its Web site that radiation is not a "primary hazard" with DU "under most battlefield exposure scenarios." Citing its own and several high-profile international studies, it concludes that DU is "40 percent less radioactive than natural uranium," and is "not considered a serious external radiation hazard." That stance is, in large part, supported by the World Health Organization which, in its 2003 fact sheet No. 257, title "Depleted Uranium," said that "for the general population, neither civilian nor military use of DU is likely to produce exposures to DU significantly above normal background levels of uranium." Consequently, some tough questions were to be expected at the Matthews' news conference. "How can you scientifically establish that the syndrome you claim has been caused by depleted uranium was caused by depleted uranium?" asked Naoaki Usui, a freelance reporter who described himself as a proponent of nuclear energy. Matthew fixed his eyes squarely on his questioner. "Look at my daughter, and that should answer your question about the exposure," he said. "My daughter is the evidence." Matthew said that his and Janise's other children from earlier relationships were born without deformity, while genetic screening at a New York hospital turned up no predisposition to birth defects on either side of the family. That being the case, Matthew said that he and eight other soldiers with similar symptoms -- all of whom, except Matthew, were stationed at Samawah -- have each sued the Department of Defense for $5 million. His daughter Victoria, who to date has been denied disability benefits by the Social Security Administration, is also a coplaintiff with her father -- claiming an additional $5 million. The cases are pending. The plaintiffs are not alone in their battle. For years, U.S. and British veterans of the first Gulf War have demanded that their governments grapple more aggressively with the mysterious illnesses collectively known as Gulf War Syndrome -- symptoms of which Matthew says match his own. Movement on this front is afoot: BBC News reported earlier this month that the Pensions Appeal Tribunal in Britain had ruled that Daniel Martin, an ex-soldier and Gulf War veteran, could use Gulf War Syndrome as an umbrella term to cover the diverse health problems afflicting him. As a result, other British veterans hope this will improve their access to disablement pensions. At his FCCJ talk, Matthew said he expected news from his lawyer upon his return home to the Bronx. While he was still here, though, there was something else Matthew wanted to tell the Japanese. Describing his visit to the Hiroshima Peace Memorial some days earlier, he said: "I felt like I made a connection . . . because I was exposed to radiation just like they were. My own government did it to them. "My government probably would not say sorry," he added. "But I say sorry." The Japan Times: Nov. 20, 2005 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 37 NEI Nuclear Notes: Talking About Radiation News and commentary on the commercial nuclear energy industry. Friday, November 18, 2005 Over the past several weeks I've been tackling a vexing topic: How to find a way to communicate effectively with the public about radiation and our environment. It was radiation pioneer Marie Curie who said, "." Unfortunately, most of the anti-nukes don't do much more than obscure honest public debate with bad science and outlandish claims (many which are ). To get a better understanding of the sort of challenge we're taking on, read the following passage from -- a blog written by an ex-pat New Zealander now living in Scotland. New Zealand has been a "nuclear free zone," since late banned nuclear arms and nuclear powered ships from the country in 1985. Though the author of the blog isn't a supporter of using nuclear energy for power production in New Zealand, he thinks : I do find it strange however that 'nuclear' always means bombs. NZ has become irrational over the peaceful use of nuclear for medicine, research and power generation. . . The NZ public has been conditioned to think nuclear-free is an absence of all 'nuclear' applications. This is stupid, radioactives are used every day in every hospital to cure people of cancer, you don't see many Greenpeace demonstrations outside cancer wards do you? The nuclear-free stance is deep in the pysche's of NZers and i wonder if even we know what it means, its wrapped up in so much of how we see the world and ourselves, so i dispair of ever trying to explain to someone else...Some other : Measuring radiation dosage. Radiation dose is measured in rem, which is based on the effect of radiation on the human body. It takes into account both the amount of radiation deposited in body tissues and the type of radiation. A millirem is a thousandth of a rem. Your average radiation dose. In all, the average person in the United States receives about 360 millirem of radiation per year. About 300 millirem comes from natural sources and 60 millirem from manmade sources... Because of their advanced design and sophisticated containment structures, U.S. nuclear plants emit a negligible amount of radiation. In fact, even if you lived right next door to a nuclear power plant, you would still receive less radiation each year than you would receive in just one round-trip flight from New York to Los Angeles. A 1990 National Cancer Institute study, the broadest ever conducted, found no evidence of any increase in cancer mortality including childhood leukemia among people living in 107 counties that host, or are adjacent to, 62 major nuclear facilities in the United States. ***************************************************************** 38 SimiValley Acorn: Toxic residue at Dayton Creek still a mystery, state agency says November 18, 2005 By Daniel Wolowicz danielw@theacorn.com State experts still won’t finger Rocketdyne as the source of perchlorate found at the site of a proposed housing development. After missing last month’s Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL)Workgroup Meeting in Simi Valley, officials with the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) wanted to explain why they weren’t at the meeting and where they stand in their investigation into the perchlorate found in and around the Sterling Homes development property near Dayton Creek in West Hills. In August, perchlorate was again detected in Dayton Creek, a small stream that cuts through property owned by Dallas-based home developer Centex Corporation. Perchlorate, a highly soluble chemical substance used in liquid rocket propellant road flares and fireworks, is known to impair thyroid function. Many believe the perchlorate is run off from Rocketdyne’s test field, located 1.5 miles east of the Centex property. The Santa Susana Field Laboratory is a 2,668-acre parcel in the Santa Susana Hills used by Rocketdyne, the Defense Department, NASA and the Energy Department to conduct rocket, missile and nuclear testing. Pressure from city and state officials forced the developer to obtain a clean bill of health from the DTSC before they can build homes on the 300-acre site. Sara Amir, chief of the cleanup operations in Southern California for DTSC, and John Naginis, a geologist with DTSC, talked with the Simi Valley Acorn to discuss their investigation and the workshop meeting. Q: Why did the DTSC cancel their appointment to speak at the quarterly workshop meeting only days before it was to be held? Sara Amir: We had another public meeting on another contaminated site, and we couldn’t make it to that meeting. It wasn’t a meeting for Centex homes. It was a meeting for Rocketdyne. We were asked by our Sacramento people if we could make it and we said that we had a conflict. . . . We said we had our own public meeting for the Centex homes, so we didn’t think that this was going to be the kind of meeting that we had to definitely be there. For the next meeting on Jan. 11 . . . we can come and provide the briefing. Q: What contact have you had with the public to discuss the investigation on the Centex homes site? Sara Amir: We had a public meeting in August and explained our process of the site cleanup. Many of the people who live around the Centex homes came. People who live in the houses up the creek . . . they were at the meeting, and I know Liz Crawford, the community activist from Physicians for Social Responsibility, was there. We explained what we were going to do and what kind of sampling we were going to take. We told people that if they have any comments, this would be the time to give them. We also made the work plan for sampling available to the community members for review and comment. . . . Usually in our process, we don’t have a public review of our work plan, but because we knew that this site means a lot to the community and people have a lot of experience we wanted to get their comments. DTSC responded to their comments and made them available on the web. Q: Centex hired AllWest Remediation, an environmental consulting firm, to manage the on-site investigation. How does the DTSC ensure that AllWest is providing accurate data? Sara Amir: (AllWest) comes up with the work plan, and they perform the work. We oversee the work as an agency. . . . They cannot go ahead and implement a work plan that hasn’t been reviewed and approved by our department. (AllWest) uses a certified laboratory to do all the tests. We are there when they are taking any samples, and we make sure that everything is according to the work plan that we approve. . . . We also take random split samples and we check it out ourselves. Q: Other than perchlorate, what other toxins were being searched for on the site? Sara Amir: We looked for volatile organic compounds, and we looked for metals . . . such as lead, chromium, arsenic . . . and we also looked for radiation. Q: Any radiation found on the site? Sara Amir: We haven’t done the analysis yet, but we have samples. We have done surveys, but we haven’t found anything that is not usually found in the background. Q: Where was the perchlorate found on the Centex site? John Naginis: We have one area that we discovered or detected perchlorate in the creek bed, and we have several samples defining that area which is about . . . 150 to 200 feet long in the creek bed. We have another sample where we detected perchlorate about 150 feet on a hillside away from the creek bed and then two more samples we detected upstream of the creek bed. . . . Outside of (the creek bed), we found it quite a ways away. Q: Is there a pattern? John Naginis: The pattern seems to indicate that in this one area in the creek bed there is perchlorate on the surface in the soil. Going up the creek, we go long distances without finding it. So it seems like it was limited to the one area inside the creek bed. Outside the creek bed, they appear to be random. Q: How much of the site is contaminated? Sara Amir: We don’t know what percentage of the site is contaminated. Q: Is the perchlorate coming from the Rocketdyne test field? Sara Amir: We really don’t know . . . but we are going to sample all the way to the Santa Susana property (to see) if it’s coming from the Rocketdyne site or if it’s coming from another source. We are being openminded about potential contamination from anywhere. John Naginis: We don’t have anything to link it to Santa Susana. I think the most probable linkage to Santa Susana would be down the drainage, but we do not find perchlorate in the drainage leading up to Santa Susana, at least we haven’t yet. There’s a large area between where we found it in the canyon and Santa Susana, where we haven’t found any perchlorate. . . . We don’t have a real good idea what the source is. Q: Then where is the perchlorate from? John Naginis: It’s actually mysterious to me. I don’t know how it got there. . . . We don’t have a real good idea what the source is. Q: Can you clean up the perchlorate? John Naginis: The cleanup is very straightforward. You remove the contaminated soil and take it somewhere to treat it to destroy the perchlorate. Q: Can the property be made safe for people to live there? Sara Amir: Yes. Q: What does Centex need to do in order to build homes there? Sara Amir: We need to issue a “no further action” to the developer in order for them to be able to build homes. Q: When will you release the full report on your investigation? Sara Amir: We can’t give you a definite answer because we are still in the middle of our investigation. ***************************************************************** 39 SLO Tribune: NRC approves dry casks at Humboldt Bay Posted on Sun, Nov. 20, 2005 By David Sneed The Tribune The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved a request by Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to store used reactor fuel in dry casks at the utility's defunct Humboldt Bay nuclear power plant. The storage facility will be similar to the one under construction at Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant but on a much smaller scale. Diablo Canyon's facility will hold 138 dry casks, while the Humboldt Bay facility will have six. The Humboldt Bay plant shut down because of earthquake safety concerns in 1976 after operating briefly. PG&E has been unable to account for several segments of spent fuel that were cut out of an assembly there for research purposes. Transferring used but still highly radioactive reactor fuel from pools to dry casks has become a standard practice at the nation's commercial nuclear plants. The technique has been used at 36 plants since 1986. ***************************************************************** 40 KRT Wire: Veteran recounts dumping of radioactive waste off U.S. shore Posted on Sun, Nov. 20, 2005 BY JOHN M.R. BULL Newport News (Va.) Daily Press NEWPORT NEWS, Va. - The Army might not know what kind of radioactive waste it dumped with chemical weapons off Virginia in 1960, but Ellis R. Cole is sure it wasn't harmless. The Geiger counter readings were proof of that. Cole said he helped winch hundreds of 55-gallon barrels labeled "radioactive" out of a ship and into the ocean. He was, he said, aboard a small Fort Eustis, Va.-based ship sent that summer to pick up a load of radioactive waste from an Army chemical-weapon development and test base in Maryland and dump it into the Atlantic Ocean. "It was common knowledge on the ship that we were dealing with something that was very dangerous," said Cole, now 64 and living in Lakeport, Fla. "I've been uneasy about it for a number of years. No one seemed to care at the time, but I felt in my heart we did something absolutely wrong." Army records show that a shipment of 317 tons of radioactive waste and 3 tons of Lewisite - a blister agent related to mustard gas - was dumped June 14 and 15, 1960, about 90 miles off the Virginia-Maryland line. Cole said it might have been dumped much closer to shore than Army records showed. Cole came forward after reading a Daily Press investigation revealing that the Army secretly dumped at least 64 million pounds of chemical weapons and 500 tons of unidentified radioactive waste off 11 states from 1945 to 1970, when the practice was halted. He provided a detailed, credible description of one of many Army dumping operations and offered the Daily Press access to his military record for verification. He also agreed to speak to Army chemical-weapons experts. Cole said two holds of the ship were filled with barrels of radioactive waste. He said the ends of the barrels were encased in concrete, which had gaps to hook chains connected to a winch that hoisted the barrels out of the hold and over the side. He said he was 18 at the time and was chosen to be one of the men who went into the holds to hook the barrels onto the winch. The captain issued a "very unusual" order that prohibited anyone from being in the holds for more than two hours at a time, thus limiting radiation exposure, Cole said. On leaving the holds, the workers were examined with a Geiger counter to determine the degree of radiation on them. "It would beep incessantly," Cole said. He was then ordered to shower, a common practice for decades to reduce the effects of radiation exposure. The Geiger counter still went wild. He took eight to 10 showers each time that he left the ship's holds before the Geiger counter didn't detect a dangerous level of radiation, he said. "The more showers I took, the less it beeped until it eventually stopped beeping," Cole said. He said he didn't remember whether he was required to wear a protective suit when in the holds. And he wonders whether the colon cancer diagnosed last year was caused by radiation exposure decades ago. Cole described a method of dumping not previously disclosed. Army records don't indicate that the ends of dumped barrels filled with chemical-warfare agents or radioactive waste were encased in concrete. But it's a plausible method to remove barrels from a ship's hold. Army photographs from the 1940s to the 1960s show forklifts pushing the steel containers and chemical-filled ordnance over the sides of ships. In later years, the Army's preferred disposal method was to scuttle ships packed with chemical weapons. Records also show that radioactive material in those years frequently was mixed with concrete before being dumped into the ocean. Army dumping records don't reveal the origin of the radioactive waste jettisoned. But National Archives records show that large quantities of unidentified radioactive material were transported in the 1950s by the Army's chemical-weapons escort service from a nuclear lab at Oak Ridge, Tenn., to Army bases with chemical weapons slated for ocean disposal. At the time, the thermonuclear, or hydrogen, bomb was being developed at that lab. Army transportation of potentially highly radioactive waste from the lab is known to have continued until 1960. The Army wasn't the only entity to dump radioactive waste off the Virginia-Maryland line in 1960. A 1961 report in the defunct Armed Forces Chemical Journal shows that private industry also dumped at least 8 tons of radioactive waste - some of it highly dangerous nuclear material - in the same location as the Army operation that Cole said he was on. The journal said what was then the Atomic Energy Commission approved the location. (The AEC was superseded in 1975 by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.) Cole told the Daily Press that he was aboard a ship named the Pvt. Carl V. Sheridan, which he described as a 176-foot-long freighter. The Fort Eustis-based ship was ordered to the Army's Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland to pick up its load of radioactive material. The name of the ship couldn't be verified. But an archivist at the Army Transportation Museum said ships of that description, designated freight supply vessels, were based at Eustis in the 1960s. Cole said his ship headed into the Atlantic and north to the Virginia-Maryland line. But the seas were too rough to set up the booms used to lift the heavy barrels from the ship's holds, so the vessel spent the night at Wilmington, Del. The ship headed south the next day, found the seas still too choppy to dump its cargo, and tied up at a dock at Fort Monroe in Hampton, Va. The captain hung a placard - "radioactive" - on the side of the ship, which Cole said he understood to be standard operating procedure at the time. The post commander apparently considered the ship too dangerous to have around and ordered it away from the dock. "They threw us out of port," Cole said. "They made us go out into the (Chesapeake) bay for the night. It was too dangerous for the Army brass at Fort Monroe." The next morning, the ship headed into the Atlantic and steamed north for what the crew estimated to be 60 to 70 miles before dumping its load, Cole said. Army records show that the radioactive waste was dumped about 110 miles north of the fort and 90 miles from shore. If so, either Cole's memory is inaccurate or the Army's records are mistaken and the dumping was much closer to shore than recorded. One thing Cole is clear on: The material that his ship was carrying was dangerously radioactive. "That's something that's bothered me for the last 45 years," he said. "They told me to do it, and I did it. I always felt we were doing something wrong." ***************************************************************** 41 Craig Daily Press: Agency not opening uranium disposal site By Christina M. Currie, Daily Press Writer Saturday, November 19, 2005 Bureau of Land Management officials plan to re-word a notice that led several Moffat County residents to think a federal agency was opening a disposal site for uranium byproducts. The U.S. Department of Energy is asking the bureau for a 160-acre parcel outside of Lay, which is part of a site mined in the 1970s. Umetco Mining Corporation is handling site cleanup. After the cleanup, the energy department will manage the property. The bureau is charged with managing all public land for a variety of users. But the 160-acre site won't be open to the public because uranium byproducts are buried on it. The energy department said it would monitor air and water quality, and work to prevent buried "tailings" from being disturbed and released into the air. Tailings, slightly radioactive, are what remain after the usable portions of uranium are extracted from soil or rock. "We withdraw the land from public entry to protect people in the future," said Steve Schiesswohl, a realty officer for the energy department. The property eventually could be released for surface use, such as grazing, but any future mining would be counter-productive to the department's goals, he said. Future mining is exactly what members of Northwest Colorado Cares -- a citizen group that opposes uranium mining or disposal in Moffat County -- are afraid of. The bureau's federal register notice states that the energy department is requesting the property "to be utilized as a uranium mill tailings disposal site." "We were under the impression it was (bureau) land that was contaminated and not cleaned up," group member Terrie Barrie said. "We thought it was going to be used as a new tailing site. Barrie spoke with bureau representatives late Thursday afternoon and said she was reassured the land transfer wasn't to create a new disposal site. "We just wanted to verify we're all on the same page," she said. "We do have an issue if they're using that property to store tailings." Schiesswohl said he's received several calls from Moffat County residents about the transfer. Residents have until Jan. 26 to comment about the transfer and can request a public meeting. Northwest Colorado Cares was in the process of drafting a comment but may not file it if there is no possibility the land will be used as a uranium tailings disposal site. Information on the transfer is available by calling (303) 239-3706. Christina M. Currie can be reached at 824-7031, ext. 210, or ccurrie@craigdailypress.com. Copyright © 2005 The Craig Daily Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 42 Deseret News: Consultants give up state contracts [deseretnews.com] Saturday, November 19, 2005 Questions were raised about work for Envirocare By Lisa Riley Roche Deseret Morning News A local consulting group paid $16,000 a month by Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. gave up the contracts after questions were raised about lobbying done for Envirocare. Farbman Hopkins &Associates had been handling the governor's fund-raising efforts as well as running the privately financed Utah Policy Partnership, an informal advisory organization that serves as Huntsman's "kitchen cabinet." That ended the same day criticism surfaced about the nuclear waste disposal facility in Tooele County hiring the firm to lobby because of its close ties to the governor. Huntsman responded by saying he would not approve an expansion sought by Envirocare. On Nov. 9, Max Farbman and Greg Hopkins of the consulting group told the governor's general counsel, Mike Lee, by telephone that they were willing to step down. "They offered their resignation and we accepted," the governor's deputy chief of staff, Mike Mower, said. "They though it was the right thing to do. They didn't want to create any kind of problem for the governor," said John Becker, a public relations consultant hired to speak on behalf of Farbman and Hopkins. Becker said the pair were out of town when what he called "some kind of a flap" erupted over their contract to represent Envirocare in Washington, D.C. They did not have a contract to lobby in Utah on behalf of the waste facility. "They never lobbied the governor's office on behalf of any client," Mower said. He said Huntsman appreciated the work they had done for him, "and considers them both great friends." Becker, too, said there weren't "any hard feelings at all" between Farbman and Hopkins and the governor. "They will continue to be supporters of the governor and do anything he wants them to do," Becker said. The Utah Policy Partnership, made up of business and community leaders from Huntsman's transition team including Utah Jazz owner Larry Miller, will continue to be run by Steve Starks. Starks had been a member of the consulting group, but quit the same day Farbman and Hopkins gave up their $6,000-a-month contract to manage the policy partnership, Becker said. Farbman and Hopkins also let go the $10,000 a month they were earning to manage Huntsman's fund-raising efforts, done through the governor's Special Initiatives Office, his political action committee. Mower said the governor "will consider other options in the next few weeks" for running both entities. © 2005 Deseret News Publishing Company [ /] ***************************************************************** 43 allAfrica.com: Namibia: Uranium Mine Under Fire Namibia Economist (Windhoek) Posted to the web November 18, 2005 A South African environmentalist who opposes the construction of the second uranium mine in Namibia said this week that the surge in the price of uranium was based on speculation rather than an increase in demand for uranium oxide. According to Dr David Fig, a researcher on environmental policies and author of books about the nuclear industry, only a few countries like China, India and Finland have plans to built new nuclear reactors. Dr Fig said there is no guarantee that the price of uranium will remain high. Nuclear energy is the last of all sources of energy being given attention by the World Bank, Dr Fig said. "The market is allergic to the industry", Fig said in Windhoek during a lecture on the Langer Heinrich. Construction of the mine began last month. Talking about the risks of the mine, Dr Fig said that since the mine was in a national park, it will effect the environment in the area and have an impact on the tourism industry. He said the amount of radioactive doses from the mine have been underestimated in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). He said the risk was high due to wind and dust storms in the Namib Desert. Another concern raised by Dr Fig was the effect the Langer Heinrich mine will have on the water supply for Swakopmund. The mine is expected to consume 1.3 million cubic meters of water per year, which is about 10% of the annual water consumption of Swakopmund. Most of the water needed by Langer Heinrich will be used for dust suppression. Dr Fig said no studies have been done on the impact the mine will have on the water supply for Swakopmund. Rössing Uranium already uses 3 million cubic meters of water per annum. allAfrica.com your home page | RSS Feed Copyright © 2005 Namibia Economist. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 44 CTV.ca: NDP delegates support uranium refining [ /] Sat. Nov. 19 2005 11:41 PM ET [Canadian] [Saskatchewan Premier Lorne Calvert] Canadian Press REGINA — Saskatchewan NDP Premier Lorne Calvert was pleased that delegates at his party's annual convention supported his government's plan to explore refining uranium in the province. "I never view resolutions or debates as vindications, but I'm of course pleased . . . to see the party - through its process - support that direction," Calvert told reporters Saturday. A resolution that would have called on the government to stop consideration of refining was defeated Friday afternoon in panel discussions behind closed doors. Involvement in the nuclear power cycle is a touchy issues for Saskatchewan's NDP. The province is already one of the world's largest miners of uranium and it's been an economic position of the government to look at options for further development of that industry. But some in the NDP feel that nuclear power and the radioactive waste it generates is not something a left-wing party should support. Uranium has been a frontburner issue for Calvert since he returned from a trade mission to Asia last month and suggested that China's desire to build nuclear power plants presented an opportunity for Saskatchewan's uranium industry. Calvert was asked whether his government would support a nuclear waste disposal site in the province. He said he may consider a proposal if extensive study was done. But a day later, Calvert ruled the storage of nuclear waste out and has remained firm on the issue since. Calvert denied suggestions that party debate on the issues was squelched by keeping the resolution from the convention floor, which is open to the media. Party policy dictates that resolutions defeated in panel are not moved to the public part of the convention. "I'm told there was a lively debate," Calvert said of the panel discussion. "It's been the process for years and years that the resolution are debated in panel." © 2005 Bell Globemedia Inc. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 45 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Nuclear Waste: Shrinking promise [seattlepi.com] [OPINION] Monday, November 21, 2005 SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD It gets harder and harder to assess the federal government's level of commitment to cleaning up decades of nuclear waste in this state. The government's shrinking level of commitment somewhat resembles that of a parent who is only partially keeping up with child support payments. So, how you label the federal behavior depends on your definition of "deadbeat." President Bush this year has proposed cuts in spending on a key cleanup facility, which the government is legally obligated to have in operation by 2011. Congress seems inclined to agree, and included additional cuts of its own. Spending for the plant, which would convert liquid wastes into glass logs, may be slashed by more than $200 million. Gov. Christine Gregoire, state Attorney General Rob McKenna and other officials are right to object and explore the state's legal obligations. This is not a partisan or dry side-wet side issue. Congressional Republicans and Democrats from both sides of the state agree on the need to clean up decades' worth of dangerous wastes, which threaten to contaminate the Columbia River. The Bush administration is hardly the first to have trouble facing the issue. Since a 1989 federal promise to put the waste processing plant in operation, the state already has had to extend the original 1999 deadline three times. But the federal government has responsibilities for past neglect of Hanford-area residents, their health and the environment. Honest people, leaders and governments face their obligations. Tell us what's on your mind. [*] Be the first to post a comment! [SEATTLEPI.COM POLL] Should the federal government save money by slowing down spending on a clean-up facility at the Hanford nuclear reservation? Yes No Not sure or don't care [Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com ©1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer ***************************************************************** 46 BBC: Thousands guard nuclear shipment Last Updated: Sunday, 20 November 2005 [Police guard the French nuclear shipment] The nuclear waste is sealed in glass bricks on the 12-wagon train A controversial nuclear waste shipment has crossed by train from France into Germany along a route guarded by thousands of police. Green activists in France delayed the transport for an hour and more protests are expected in Germany. But authorities say there has been little trouble so far as the train heads from a reprocessing plant in Normandy to Gorleben in north Germany. An activist died amid mass protests at a similar shipment last year. Run over The 12-wagon train is transporting the nuclear waste, sealed in glass bricks, from La Hague in Normandy to the temporary storage facility at a disused salt mine in Gorleben, lower Saxony. Environmental activists fear the storage facility will become permanent and might contaminate the local water supply. The nuclear waste is produced in Germany but sent to France for reprocessing. France insists the waste must return to its country of origin. On Saturday, about 3,000 people protested at the shipment in Hitzacker, northern Germany. At the annual shipment last November, an environmentalist was run over and killed when he chained himself to the railway line at Nancy, eastern France. ***************************************************************** 47 Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Ethics must be applied to Yucca November 19, 2005 Letter: Ethics must be applied to Yucca It is refreshing to hear that the White House staff is receiving education in ethics. All politicians and bureaucrats in the federal government can use ethics and morality in their decisions. Now if they would only apply these lessons to Yucca Mountain and the collusion of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Energy Department and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the setting of radiation standards on Yucca Mountain. Isn't the NRC, which makes the final decision on Yucca Mountain, in an oversight capacity of the DOE and EPA? Why wasn't the state of Nevada invited to at least watch the process? How can the NRC have a date certain on a Yucca Mountain decision in its regulations when science, not politics, is the standard? I wonder if President Bush remembers his 2000 and 2004 campaign promises on Yucca Mountain? If so, we have nothing to worry about: This decision will be based on sound science and the courts. Ethics, not politics, will decide. Frank Perna Las Vegas The writer is a citizen member of Clark County's Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Advisory Committee. The views expressed are his own. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 48 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Yucca Mountain continues to fail Today: November 20, 2005 at 8:1:1 PST Inspector general's report reveals mounting evidence of flawed documentation LAS VEGAS SUN New evidence from the U.S. Energy Department's inspector general underscores -- again -- the vast amount of questionable science and flawed data that has gone into the proposal to build a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain. In a report dated Nov. 9, Energy Department Inspector General Gregory Friedman said investigators examining e-mails sent among scientists for the project found that some of the messages identified concerns that typically would be marked for further review and resolution. Yet the issues raised in these e-mails did not receive that scrutiny. One of the e-mails cited says the project's quality assurance office had "just discovered that (quality assurance) software requirements were being ignored." Another electronic missive suggested back-dating documents. This new information supports ever-growing suspicions among a deepening pool of Yucca critics that scientific data has been fabricated and potential radiation leak risks have been ignored or omitted in the Energy Department's 20-year quest to bury high-level nuclear waste 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The Yucca Mountain project since March has been the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation into allegations that the U.S. Geological Survey falsified underground water data in order to provide support for the project. The House and Senate showed an apparent loss of appetite for the project earlier this month by cutting $200 million from a $650 million budget request. They also approved $50 million to promote recycling, rather than burying, spent nuclear fuel. We can only hope that the truth continues to come out and the funding continues to be cut from this dreadfully flawed and nightmarish project. All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 49 NewsFromRussia.Com: Nuclear waste transport bound for disputed storage site crosses German border 18:35 2005-11-20 A shipment of nuclear wastebound for a disputed storage site in the north of the country crossed Sunday into Germany, where thousands of police were guarding its route from anti-nuclear demonstrators. About a dozen activists greeted the train as it crossed the border from France without incident, said Franz Blang, a police spokesman in the town of Woerth. Earlier Sunday, the train was temporarily delayed after dozens of French protesters threw firecrackers onto the rails. Demonstrations by French nuclear activists remained peaceful, however, as they commemorated a protester who was hit and killed by a train during a similar shipment of nuclear waste a year ago. On Saturday, protesters in the German town of Lueneburg, 50 kilometers (30 miles) southeast of Hamburg, threw rocks at police. Lueneburg is on the stretch of road that is the last leg the nuclear waste will take on its route from a reprocessing plant in La Hague, France, to a temporary storage facility in Gorleben, Germany. The shipment left Saturday from a reprocessing plant in the Normandy coastal town of La Hague to a hotly contested storage facility in Gorleben, Germany. The annual waste transport, due to arrive in Gorleben late Monday, has become a favorite target of anti-nuclear demonstrators, thousands of whom are expected to protest along the route in the coming week. Some 3,100 people turned out in the town of Hitzacker to protest the waste storage, police said, with 40 tractors accompanying the protesters. The storage facility is disliked by local farmers who say they fear having radioactive waste in the area undermines the reputation of their produce. German authorities have dedicated 10,000 officers to patrolling the route before the transport's arrival, AP reported. V.A. Copyright ©1999 by "Pravda.RU". When reproducing our materials ***************************************************************** 50 Eureka Reporter: Dry storage license issued for PG nuclear fuel rod storage Sun. Nov. 20, 2005 Tyson Ritter/The Eureka Reporter The Humboldt Nuclear Power Plant near King Salmon went into service in 1963. It was closed in 1976 after the discovery of an earthquake fault under the facility, and is in the process of being decommissioned. by Nathan Rushton, 11/20/2005 More than 10 years away from completion, efforts to finally decommission the countys only nuclear power plant facility received the go-ahead from the federal government to begin the process. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced Friday that it had issued a 20-year renewable license to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to operate an independent spent nuclear fuel storage installation at its Humboldt Bay power plant. The nuclear reactor at PG&Es Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant near the town of King Salmon has been shut down since 1976 when an earthquake fault was discovered beneath the facility. Company spokesman Lloyd Coker said the company is very pleased the NRC has given a green light on the project. For us, this is a milestone, Coker said. Although the license has been granted by the NRC, Coker said some equipment must be purchased and a considerable amount of time is needed before the dry cask storage containers can be constructed, which isnt likely to begin at the King Salmon site until sometime in 2007. Transfer of the spent fuel rod material from the wet pool into the dry casks by PG&E employees is anticipated to begin in 2008 and will be completed by 2009, Coker said. Until a final resting space is found, the six casks will be stored in an in-ground concrete vault. If we go to 2009 before we get all of the fuel out of there, it will be another three to five years before we get that plant completely decommissioned, Coker said. That means torn down and shipped off to a specialized site. Coker said the federal government was supposed to have a national site for storage of nuclear material for all nuclear power plants 10 years ago. That hasnt happened, so nuclear power plants across the nation have had to take matters into their own hands, he said. In some cases that has meant re-racking or physically arranging the rods to be closer together within the existing wet-pool storage areas, as well as transferring the spent nuclear fuel material to dry cask containers, Coker said. The installation will employ a customized version of the HI-STAR 100 dry cask storage system, which had been previously approved for use by the NRC. The system consists of a steel canister that can hold up to 80 spent fuel assemblies and a steel cask, which can provide additional shielding against radiation during transfer and storage at the site, to hold the canister, according to a news release. The Humboldt Bay facility has room for five casks containing as many as 400 spent fuel assemblies, as well as one additional cask to store other radioactive material. Dry cask storage technology was first used for commercial spent fuel in the U.S. in 1986 and is currently in use at 36 sites. Humboldt County First District Supervisor Jimmy Smith, who lives a stones throw away from the plant, has been following the nuclear plant decommissioning effort since before he was elected to the board, which has been a big issue with many residents in the county, especially to those who live in the shadow of the plant. We want that material out of that pool, Smith said. It is not the most stable site in the footprint of the PG&E plant. With regard to safety, Smith said getting through the NRCs regulatory process has been one of the final hurdles that clears the way to get the nuclear material to a more stable site. Because of the seismic instability of the site, Smith said nobody wants to see the plant go through an earthquake if the storage pool storage facility might fail. Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 51 Salt Lake Tribune Nelson: Disposal by milling is legal, but is it in society's best interest? Opinion Article Last Updated: 11/20/2005 03:35:57 AM Steve Nelson I'd like to compliment my friend and colleague Bill Sinclair on his Nov. 6 op/ed piece regarding the Japanese "ore" that will be milled by International Uranium Corporation in San Juan County. It appears to me that both the Utah Division of Radiation Control and IUC have met their obligations in the handling of this matter, and that the material that has been imported from Japan meets the legal definition of "ore" as established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. I would like to offer not a rebuttal, but an additional perspective on the matter. But first, let me be clear. My purpose is to clarify the issue in terms of a public-policy perspective. It is not intended to be critical of IUC or the DRC, and it would be a mistake to view this as such. Also, although I am a member of the Utah Radiation Control Board, this piece reflects my perspective alone. According to the NRC, ore includes material "in its natural form prior to any processing, such as grinding, roasting, or beneficiating, or refining." DRC must honor this definition. Note, however, that the definition is silent on uranium content. It does not say that the ore must contain enough uranium to be processed profitably. Uranium mills may: a) utilize ore from their own mines, b) purchase ore from other mines, or c) process material from third parties for a fee (toll milling). In the latter case, the mill owner is not necessarily concerned with the quality of the ore, as a fee from milling generates the income. All debris that comes out of the mill goes into a tailings pond for disposal as "waste." Imagine you had a large but worthless landscaping boulder you were eager to be rid of. In theory, you could hire a mill to "process" the boulder as "ore," and you would be rid of it. Your boulder would be crushed and run through the mill and the remnants placed into a tailings pond. The minute your boulder entered the front door of the mill, the "waste" that came out the other end would be the responsibility of the mill and its regulator. Because the Japanese material meets the legal definition of ore, which is being milled for a fee, the spoil material will become the responsibility of IUC to properly manage and the DRC to regulate. You and I would instinctively define "ore" as material that could be processed and the recovered uranium sold for a profit. Such is not the case with the Japanese material as the uranium concentration is too low. To the layperson, calling this material "ore" is like using the word hay to describe a bale of tumbleweeds. But, such is the nature of the NRC definition. Media reports have characterized this material as waste. Yet, I find it ironic that what you and I would call "ore," containing much more uranium and therefore posing a larger hazard, could be transported to the mill without raising an eyebrow. IUC is motivated (and properly so) to profitably operate its mill. The DRC is motivated to protect public health and safety within the parameters of the state's radiation control rules. The Japanese party responsible for the material, however, is under court order to have it removed. Make no mistake, as far as Japan is concerned, this is disposal, and I suspect that they are unconcerned that their actions may be viewed as "disposal by milling" in this country. Again, as Mr. Sinclair notes, IUC and the DRC have strictly followed all legal requirements. Our society, however, may wish to decide whether or not the importation of such material is in our best interests. One argument might be that because the Japanese material is less radioactive than conventional ore, and provides sorely needed economic activity to San Juan County, the importation is a good thing. A counter argument might be that it sets a bad precedent, making Utah a dumping ground for the world. Both viewpoints are probably valid, and for now, legal precedent says that it is OK. --- Steve Nelson teaches in the department of geology at Brigham Young University. © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 52 Detroit News: Junkets 'R' us 11/20/05 By Daniel Howes / And yet, our legislators, the folks we pay $79,650 each, plus $1,200 for expenses, to manage state affairs, can't enact badly needed business tax reform because everyone's positioning for a 2006 election that can't come soon enough. Instead, we've got Republicans touring the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste disposal site; Republicans attending an insurance conference in San Diego (perhaps a future home of Michigan's indigenous insurance companies if Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels doesn't get 'em first); and Lord knows how many lawmakers stalking wily bucks in the north woods. About the only thing that comes close to Michigan's deepening economic crisis, the worst of its kind since the Big War, is its leadership crisis. I mean, you cut a long-promised tax deal and then say there's no deal? Is Lansing the state capital or home to a Midwest revival of the Keystone Kops? Yes, yes, I know about the whisper campaign: The governor and her people can't run a meeting or manage an issue; they don't understand business because few of them have ever run one; they've got a penchant for last-minute surprises; they can't move boldly if it means hacking off friends in organized labor or sullying the boss's national image as a "rising star." Daniel Howes' column appears Sundays, Wednesdays and Fridays. He can be reached at (313) 222-2106 or dchowes@detnews.com. Copyright © 2005 The Detroit News. ***************************************************************** 53 AFP: Protestors greet nuclear waste convoy as it crosses into Germany Sun Nov 20, 2:00 PM ET DANNENBERG, Germany (AFP) - Environmentalists briefly blockaded railway lines in Germany ahead of an oncoming train carrying radio-active nuclear waste from France, police said. Some 150 protestors positioned themselves on the railway tracks near Danneberg in northern Germany, where the shipment is meant to be loaded onto trucks on Monday, but dispersed peacefully. The nuclear waste, which is sealed into glass bricks, is due to be dumped in a disused salt mine in nearby Gorleben but Greenpeace and other environmental groups say it is unsafe and could contaminate the water supply in the region. The passage of the 174.7-tonne cargo from the French re-processing plant at La Hague has been punctuated by protests along the way. On Saturday more than 3,000 activists demonstrated at Hitzacker in northern Germany ahead of the arrival of the 12-wagon train, and on Sunday about as many stood at the border to watch it cross into the country. Police said members of the crowd hurled stones, injuring two officers. Last November, mass protests surrounding a similar shipment ended in tragedy when an environmentalist who chained himself to the railway line at Nancy in eastern France was run over and killed. This year about 15,000 officers had been mobilised on the German side to secure the passage of the train. According to Cogema, the French nuclear company involved, it is the eighth such nuclear waste shipment to be sent to Germany since 1996. The shipments were interrupted in 1998 after a furore erupted when radio-active material was found on the surface of the containers. They resumed again in 2001. The latest shipment coincides with a change in government in Berlin and has prompted considerable political debate. Environmental organisations are concerned that the government will not keep its word and seek an alternative solution but allow the temporary storage facility at Gorleben to become a permanent dumping ground for nuclear waste. The Greens, which were the junior partners in the outgoing coalition government, have charged that the incoming left-right coalition plans to leave the waste at Gorleben and might reverse a policy of phasing out nuclear power in Germany, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reported. The nuclear waste is produced in power plants in Germany, but sent to France because the country has no nuclear re-processing plants. France insists that the high-level waste be returned to the countries that produced it. Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 54 San Francisco Bay View: Radioactive Tank No. 9 comes limping home National Black Newspaper of the Year 11/16/05 by Bob Nichols "RADIOACTIVE" is stenciled on Abrams tanks in these pictures taken Oct. 13, 2005, in Topeka, Kansas. Photo: Chris Bayruh Across the plains of Kansas, destroyed, radioactive Abrams tanks, perched on railroad flatcars, rolled towards an uncertain future. Only one thing was certain. They would be radioactive forever. This would be their everlasting death mask. The Pentagon deceptively calls it "depleted uranium." The Abrams tanks are constructed with a layer of radioactive uranium metal plates. The big tanks fire a giant uranium dart at 2,100 mph, much faster than an F-16 fighter aircraft, mach III to airplane pilots and very, very fast to the rest of us. American taxpayers paid to ship the tanks to Iraq and to return them for disposal or re-building in the United States. The tanks are 12 feet wide and weigh a stout 70 tons, or 140,000 pounds. The enduring vigorous stupidity of the U.S. military pretends that radiation is one of those things that if you can't see it, it can't hurt you. They are thoroughly delusional, of course. A National Academy of Sciences report released June 30, 2005, finds that there is no safe level of radiation. Any radiation is bad. This radioactive tank sitting exposed on a flatbed railroad car in Topeka, Kansas, should have been "encapsulated," according to U.S. Army Regulation 700-48, which has the force of law. Photo: Chris Bayruh From America to Iraq and back, these giant radioactive hulks can only sicken and kill Americans. On top of the sheer, unrelenting stupidity of playing with radiation with unsuspecting soldiers, now the neo-con government is involving everyday Americans in their radiation madness. The Pentagon can't even follow simple radiation hazard mitigation instructions. Their own rules and regulations have the force of law throughout the world. Yet they are ignored in the United States. Dr. Doug Rokke Dr. Doug Rokke is the Pentagon's former director of the U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project. When contacted on Oct. 22, he viewed Chris Bayruh's photographs and made this statement about the radioactive tanks in Kansas: "The radioactive damaged Abrams tanks that were left unsecured on a Kansas railroad track are a perfect example of exactly how not to ship damaged radioactive equipment and how not to protect our Army's Abrams tanks from possible sabotage and compromise of classified battle systems." On Oct. 10, prior to the discovery of the radioactive tanks, Dr. Rokke made the following statement. It is eerily predictive of what would happen in Kansas three days later. "U.S. Department of Defense officials continue to deny that there are any adverse health and environmental effects as a consequence of the manufacture, testing and/or use of uranium munitions to avoid liability for the willful and illegal dispersal of a radioactive toxic material - depleted uranium." This is another of the destroyed radioactive tanks in Topeka, Kansas. Children were playing around the tanks. Photo: Chris Bayruh Dr. Rokke continued, "They [the U.S. military] arrogantly refuse to comply with their own regulations, orders and directives that require United States Department of Defense officials to provide prompt and effective medical care to all exposed individuals." (See Note 1 below.) "They also refuse to clean up dispersed radioactive contamination of equipment as required by Army regulations." (See Note 2.) "Specifically, they are required (see Note 3) to accomplish four things: 1) Military personnel must 'identify, segregate, isolate, secure and label all RCE' (radiologically contaminated equipment). 2) 'Procedures to minimize the spread of radioactivity will be implemented as soon as possible.' 3) 'Radioactive material and waste will not be locally disposed of through burial, submersion, incineration, destruction in place, or abandonment' and 4) 'All equipment, to include captured or combat RCE, will be surveyed, packaged, retrograded, decontaminated and released.' "The past and current use of uranium weapons, the release of radioactive components in destroyed U.S. and foreign military equipment, and releases of industrial, medical and research facility radioactive materials have resulted in unacceptable exposures." Dr. Rokke added, "Therefore, decontamination must be completed as required by U.S. Army Regulation 700-48 and should include releases of all radioactive materials resulting from military operations. "The extent of adverse health and environmental effects of uranium weapons contamination is not limited to combat zones but includes facilities and sites where uranium weapons were manufactured or tested, including Vieques, Puerto Rico, Colonie, New York, and Jefferson Proving Grounds, Indiana. "Therefore, medical care must be provided by the United States Department of Defense officials to all individuals affected by the manufacturing, testing and/or use of uranium munitions. Thorough environmental remediation also must be completed without further delay. "I am amazed," exclaimed Dr. Rokke, "that 14 years after I was asked to clean up the initial DU mess from Gulf War I and almost 10 years since I finished the depleted uranium project, United States Department of Defense officials and many others still attempt to justify uranium munitions use while ignoring mandatory requirements. "But beyond the ignored mandatory actions, the willful dispersal of tons of solid radioactive and chemically toxic waste in the form of uranium munitions just does not even pass the common sense test. "Finally, continued compliance with the infamous March 1991 Los Alamos Memorandum (see Note 5) that was issued to ensure continued use of uranium munitions cannot be justified. "In conclusion," Dr. Rokke urged, "the president of the United States, George W. Bush, and the prime minister of Great Britain, Tony Blair, must acknowledge and accept responsibility for willful use of illegal uranium munitions - their own "dirty bombs" - resulting in adverse health and environmental effects." "President Bush and Prime Minister Blair also should order: 1) medical care for all casualties, 2) thorough environmental remediation, 3) immediate cessation of retaliation against all of us who demand compliance with medical care and environmental remediation requirements, 4) and ban the future use of depleted uranium munitions," Dr. Rokke concluded. A little old lady in tennis shoes Leuren Moret is a world famous scientist and radiation specialist who formerly worked at the Lawrence Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab, where she became a whistleblower in 1991. She has spoken out about the danger of uranium munitions to humanity in more than 42 countries. Moret has appeared in four documentaries about uranium munitions (depleted uranium). "Beyond Treason" debuted in August 2005 and won the Grand Festival Award at the Berkeley Film Festival. The newest film, "Blowin' in the Wind," was nominated during its debut the first week of November in Australia for an Academy Award. Moret was an expert witness at the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan and serves as an adviser and expert witness in court cases regarding radiation exposure. Her statement, made Oct. 24, about the dead tanks in Kansas follows: "Sally Devlin, a little old lady in tennis shoes, went to a public meeting several years ago, held by the Air Force in Pahrump, Nevada. Two officers told the citizens of the town that the Air Force would be moving 80 old target practice tanks and tons of old depleted uranium munitions through their town. "The radioactive bullets had been picked up off the Nellis gunnery ranges by order of the state of Nevada and were being transported to the Nevada Test Site [a nuclear weapons test site] to be buried as radioactive waste. "When Mrs. Devlin politely asked them how they would prevent the residents of the town from being contaminated by the radioactive dust on the tanks and bullets, the officers said, 'We're wrapping them in Saran Wrap.' She told them that would be unacceptable and stopped the Air Force dead in their tracks," Moret concluded. Whether it is Saran Wrap in Nevada or nothing at all in Kansas, the Pentagon just doesn't get it when it comes to uranium radiation dispersing weapons. It is way past time to take all their nuclear weapons and uranium munitions away from them and send them home to get real jobs. They are clearly incapable of protecting this country from all dangers, including those created by our own U.S. military. The U.S. military shows so little regard for Americans in Kansas, one wonders what on earth they have done to Iraq. The U.S. military has distributed an estimated 8 million pounds of weaponized ceramic uranium oxide gas, aerosols and dust on a practically defenseless little country of 26 million people (see Note 6), according to an estimate by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark. What is this lethal radioactive weapon supposed to do? Why was it used? Ceramic uranium oxide gas is a genocidal weapon, for God's sake. It persists in the environment forever. In Leuren Moret's pithy words, "The Iraqis are uranium meat." The politicians, Pentagon staff, generals, commanding officers and others responsible for this war crime must be arrested, tried, convicted and appropriately punished for their crimes against humanity. There is another explanation Another explanation is that the U.S. Army and other branches of the military are far from stupid. They are, in fact, the most lethal and carefully planned military in the history of the world. The extensive use of weaponized uranium oxide gas, aerosols and dust is not an accident or an oversight. They did it on purpose. If this is true, they purposely used a genocidal weapon over at least a 15-year period. No, this is not a callous mistake of empire; it is a calculated act of genocide to weaken the oil- and gas-rich countries of Central Asia, including Iraq. Take your choice: they are either stupid or genocidal monsters. A British group has estimated the weaponized ceramic uranium oxide will account for an additional 25 million cancers in Iraq in the next several years. There are only 26 million Iraqis to start with, minus the nearly 1.7 million killed by war or sanctions since 1991, plus some live births. A National Academy of Sciences report released June 30, 2005, finds that there is no safe level of radiation. The committee dismissed the idea that any radiation could be harmless or beneficial. The radioactive tanks in Kansas and Iraq are the same. They are placed there at great expense by the senior American political and military leadership, with premeditated malice. The bottom line purpose of a 140,000-pound radioactive tank is to kill people. Uranium munitions a war crime Dennis Kyne, noted speaker and writer, is a former drill instructor (DI) and a 15-year veteran of the Army as well as a Gulf War vet (see www.denniskyne.com). Kyne makes a point of how "hot" or radioactive the tanks in Kansas would be if they were hit by "friendly fire" to get beat up so much. They could be contaminated with as much as 30,000 times background radiation. That is what uranium munitions do to a tank, bunker or building. Karen Parker, a prominent U.S. international human rights lawyer, says there are four rules derived from humanitarian laws and conventions regarding weapons: 1. Weapons may only be used against legal enemy military targets and must not have an adverse effect elsewhere (the territorial rule). 2. Weapons can only be used for the duration of an armed conflict and must not be used or continue to act afterwards (the temporal rule). 3. Weapons may not be unduly inhumane (the "humaneness" rule). The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 speak of "unnecessary suffering" and "superfluous injury" in this regard 4. Weapons may not have an unduly negative effect on the natural environment (the "environmental" rule). "DU weaponry fails all four tests," Parker states. "First, DU cannot be limited to legal military targets. Second, it cannot be 'turned off' when the war is over but keeps killing. "Third, DU can kill through painful conditions such as cancers and organ damage and can also cause birth defects, such as facial deformities and missing limbs. Lastly, DU cannot be used without unduly damaging the natural environment. "In my view, use of DU weaponry violates the grave breach provisions of the Geneva Conventions," Parker concluded, "and so its use constitutes a war crime, or crime against humanity." Notes 1. "Medical Management of Unusual Depleted Uranium Casualties," DOD, Pentagon, 10/14/93, "Medical Management of Army Personnel Exposed to Depleted Uranium (DU)," Headquarters, U.S. Army Medical Command, 4/29/04, and section 2-5 of AR 700-48 . 2. AR 700- 48: "Management of Equipment Contaminated With Depleted Uranium or Radioactive Commodities," Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C., September 2002, and U.S. Army Technical Bulletin TB 9-1300-278: "Guidelines For Safe Response To Handling, Storage, and Transportation Accidents Involving Army Tank Munitions or Armor Which Contain Depleted Uranium," Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, D.C., July 1996, http://traprockpeace.org/du_pam_700-48.pdf. 3. Section 2-4 of United States Army Regulation 700-48 dated Sept. 16, 2002, specifies these requirements. 4. IAW Technical Bulletin 9-1300-278, DA PAM 700-48. Maximum exposure limits are specified in Appendix F. 5. http://www.tv.cbc.ca/national/pgminfo/du/doc1.html 6. Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark's estimate, http://www.covertactionquarterly.org/demonize.html © Copyright Bob Nichols. Copying permitted if you credit the source and leave everything intact, including notes. Bob Nichols is a Project Censored Award winner and lives in California. He formerly lived in Oklahoma. He is a contributor to OnLineJournal.com, AxisofLogic.com, DissidentVoice.com and other online publications and is a correspondent for the San Francisco Bay View newspaper. Nichols is a former employee of the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant. He can be reached by email at bob.bobnichols@gmail.com. sfbayview.com San Francisco Bay View National Black Newspaper 4917 Third Street San Francisco California 94124 Phone: (415) 671-0789 Fax: (415) 671-0316 Email: ***************************************************************** 55 Guardian Unlimited: Zimbabwe to Process Newly Found Uranium From the Associated Press [UP] Sunday November 20, 2005 4:16 PM By MICHAEL HARTNACK Associated Press Writer HARARE, Zimbabwe (AP) - President Robert Mugabe said Zimbabwe will turn to nuclear power by processing recently discovered uranium deposits to resolve its chronic electricity shortage, state radio said Sunday. Mugabe, who has close ties with two countries with controversial nuclear programs - Iran and North Korea, spoke of his intention Saturday, the radio station reported. It was not clear how Mugabe intended to use any uranium deposits since the country does not have a nuclear power plant. The president announced plans in the 1990s to acquire a reactor from Argentina, but nothing else was ever heard about the proposal. ``Zimbabwe will develop power by processing uranium, which has recently been found in the country,'' Mugabe said, according to the radio. ``The discovery of uranium will go a long way in further enhancing the government rural electrification program.'' Zimbabwe was not previously known to have any workable deposits of uranium. South Africa has the region's only nuclear power station at Koeberg. Zimbabwe has been plagued by a chronic shortage of foreign exchange since Mugabe's seizure of 5,000 white-owned farms and the collapse of an export-oriented agricultural industry. It currently falls short of generating the 2,100 megawatts it needs daily by 400 to 450 megawatts. Zimbabwe has had great difficulty meeting bills from Mozambique, South Africa and Congo for imports from the regional electric power grid. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 56 UK: News & Star: Council lays out its decommissioning cash demands Published on 19/11/2005 Sellafield: Copeland Council wants job safeguards By Andrea Thompson COPELAND Council is demanding massive compensation unless Sellafield can be decontaminated and restored to green field status after decommissioning. The authority is taking a hard line with the Government in its response to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s first strategy, which will be submitted to ministers by December 31. The council says any industry which despoils land and buildings has a duty to the local community to clean up the contamination and return the site to its original condition. There would need to be clear benefits to the community if the site was restored to a lower standard. The council has also said: Priority should be given to ensuring that the number of employees needed to deliver contracts on West Cumbrian nuclear sites is kept as steady as possible to safeguard employment. Local communities should have a veto over the import of radioactive waste into the area. The council does not accept the proposition that Copeland should retain waste generated locally because it has received benefits from previous nuclear operations. The low level waste repository at Drigg should only be considered a temporary storage site until current uncertainties around climate change, sea levels and coastal erosion are resolved. No further increase in capacity at the repository should be allowed until the industry reaches agreement with the council on a package of measures to compensate for the presence of a radioactive waste facility in its area. Every effort should be made to make Thorp operational again as soon as possible. The NDA should develop clear methods to maximise employment for local people and businesses arising through decommissioning and clean up. ***************************************************************** 57 The Signal: Resin bonds with perchlorate to help clean out contaminated water in Saugus well. Sunday, November 20 2005 Who should be Santa Clarita's next mayor? Hunting a Toxin Lila Campuzano [Signal Staff Writer] It’s called styrene divinyl benzene. It looks like tiny golden globes and smells faintly like motor oil. Its job is making the Santa Clarita Valley’s groundwater near the Whittaker-Bermite site safe once more for drinking. And it’s been hard at work for about a month now at a well in Saugus, although the toxin it’s hunting has yet to make an appearance. The resin is packed into two large tanks next to Bouquet Canyon Road just north of the Santa Clara River. Water pumped from a Valencia Water Co. well dubbed “Q2” runs through both tanks, where the styrene divinyl benzene puts a lock on molecules of perchlorate. Eventually, when the resin maxes out its ability to bond with perchlorate, the compound will be taken away and burned, said Tim Peschman, a product manager for the environmental services division of USFilter. A new batch of the resin will take its place. The process is called ion exchange, and USFilter provided the equipment and know-how. Q2 is the first well in the Santa Clarita Valley to be fitted with a perchlorate-removal system, although it was the most recent well to test positive for the contaminant. Perchlorate is one of several toxins found on the grounds of the Whittaker-Bermite site, some 1,000 acres of land south of Saugus Speedway that were once used for the manufacture of rocket fuel and fireworks. Ammonium perchlorate, a salt, is used as a booster in solid rocket fuel because perchlorate’s four oxygen atoms mean “(the fuel) burns faster and hotter,” Peschman said. But solid rocket fuel has a short shelf life, he said. Before the danger of perchlorate was understood, “about every six months, (workers) would take and jet wash it out of the rockets,” he said. “It winds up on the ground, goes into the soil.” The ammonia and perchlorate separate, and perchlorate easily seeps into the soil, then into groundwater. “Nothing in the ground removes it,” Peschman said. And groundwater simply spreads it out in underground “plumes.” Since Santa Clarita Valley water retailers get about 40 percent to 50 percent of their water from the ground, perchlorate contamination was bad news locally, as well as in many other parts of the country where the defense industry operated through World War II. Local groundwater is mixed with State Water Project water before it is delivered to households. But it wasn’t until 1997 that the effect of low doses of the chemical began to be studied. Part of that delay is due to the fact that small quantities of perchlorate are difficult to detect. Perchlorate, an endocrine disrupter, was found to inhibit the effectiveness of the thyroid gland, especially in pregnant women and their unborn offspring. The discovery came long after Whittaker-Bermite had shut down. Federal health officials haven’t yet set acceptable levels of perchlorate in drinking water. But the state of California says the amount should not exceed 4 parts per billion. One part per billion would be about equal to a grain of sand in an Olympic-sized swimming pool. In the Santa Clarita Valley, several wells around the former Whittaker-Bermite site were found to be contaminated with perchlorate and shut down in 1997. Q2 didn’t show a positive reading until April 2005. “We didn’t know why it showed up in the first place,” since the well draws water across the Santa Clara River from the Whittaker-Bermite site, said Michael Alvord, assistant operations manager for Valencia Water. “Hydrogeological models showed that it was probably (last winter’s heavy rain).” The 250-foot-deep well had been monitored continuously since 1997, Alvord said. Two tests showed an average perchlorate presence of 9.8 parts per billion, Alvord said. The firm immediately shut down the well, notified regulatory officials and called USFilter, which has had ion exchange systems up and running at several California locations. Bob DiPrimio, general manager for Valencia Water, recalled his phone call to USFilter. “I’m interested in an ion exchange process, and I need a permit in two days,” he recalled telling a USFilter official. After the phone was dropped and picked up again, the Minnesota-based firm got right on it, he said last week at a media briefing. “Within a day and a half of pipes and everything arriving, it was up and running,” DiPrimio said. Ironically, the chemical hasn’t been detected in the well water since Q2 reopened in October. “The beauty of this is that we have a system in place” if it does make a reappearance, Alvord said. Added Jeff O’Keefe of the state Department of Health Services: “The ultimate goal is to have containment right at the Whittaker boundary.” Santa Clarita city and local water officials, along with the Whittaker Corp., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, state Environmental Protection Agency and other government entities, have long been studying how to remedy the contamination at Whittaker-Bermite. Groundwater removal is particularly tricky, since the Santa Clarita Valley actually has two underground water supplies centered mostly beneath the Santa Clara River. The more shallow alluvial aquifer runs as much as 200 feet deep and is the water supply tapped by Q2. Water in this aquifer travels relatively quickly. The much deeper Saugus aquifer is held as reserve for drought periods, since it’s more expensive to pump water from this deeper source. This water travels only inches per year. Perchlorate contamination has been found at both levels. Tainted wells are shut down and either replaced or capped until treatment can begin. The same type of ion exchange system being used at Q2 will be put to work on two Castaic Lake Water Agency wells by the end of next year, said Ken Petersen of CLWA. The two wells near the intersection of Magic Mountain Parkway and San Fernando Road tap into the deeper Saugus formation, he said. They have shut down since 1997. Water from those wells will be pumped into pipes and shipped to the Rio Vista Water Treatment Plant, which is just west of Q2. There the water will be treated in the same manner as Q2s. The ion exchange system for the Saugus formation wells will be able to process about 2,200 gallons a minute, Petersen said. Reactivating the Saugus formation wells will pull contaminated groundwater toward those wells and prevent it from flowing downstream, Petersen said. The treatment plant for the two Saugus formation wells will have to run for at least 30 years. Cleanup costs are being covered in part by the Whittaker Corp., which bought Bermite in 1967 and manufactured missiles there for two more decades. A half-million-dollar federal grant also helps, Petersen said. Still, the costs of the operation will exceed the federal grant. Styrene divinyl benzene cost about $175,000 per cubic foot, Peschman of USFilter said. Each tank holds about 250 cubic feet of the tiny golden globes. ©2005 The-Signal.com - Site powered with DynamicBase by ***************************************************************** 58 Seattle Times: Woman in Hanford case brings courtroom to tears Saturday, November 19, 2005 - Page updated at 12:19 AM By The Associated Press SPOKANE  A woman who is blaming emissions from the Hanford nuclear reservation for the thyroid cancer that is killing her brought many in a federal courtroom to tears as she described her pending death. Shannon Rhodes, 64, on Thursday testified that tests earlier this year found two aggressive new tumors growing inside her. One is around her trachea and the other in her lungs. She also has an undiagnosed growth at the back of her skull. The Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, woman coughs frequently, and her family says her strength is failing. "I can feel these tumors now. It scares me. This is the beginning of the end," Rhodes told the 12-person jury as her two grown daughters and her husband held each other and wept. Many other observers in U.S. District Judge William Nielsen's courtroom also began to cry as Rhodes, responding to questions from her attorney Richard Eymann, described her emotions. "I'm not afraid of death. I believe the soul goes on and God will greet me on the other side but the pain, the suffocation ... " Rhodes said. This is the second trial for Rhodes, who is suing the private companies that for decades operated Hanford for the federal government. The site made plutonium for nuclear weapons. Earlier this week, her doctors said her life will probably end within a few years at most. Dr. Vernon Holbert, the Spokane surgeon who operated on her lung mass in 2002, said the tumor "could choke her to death. It will paralyze the nerves to her voice box. Her esophagus, the food tube, will be squashed. She'll get weaker and weaker." Other experts said her end-of-life care will cost between $110,268 and $171,476 for the next one to three years. They said she'd have an estimated 20.2 more years to live if she hadn't gotten terminal cancer, and they estimated economic damages for her shortened life at $218,000 to $278,000. Defense attorneys for E.I. du Pont de Nemours and General Electric, the corporations that operated Hanford for the government during World War II and the Cold War, on Thursday asked only a few questions in cross-examination and did not challenge Rhodes in front of the jury. The defense began presenting its case Thursday. Dr. Arthur Schneider, a thyroid-disease expert at the University of Illinois College of Medicine, discussed a major, recent "pooled analysis" of external radiation studies. That analysis concluded that the risk of thyroid cancer is greatest for children under 16. But the study didn't show a thyroid-cancer risk below 10 rads, a dose lower than Rhodes' estimated dose, Schneider said. "We can't demonstrate a risk below 10 rads, and if there is risk, it's small," he said. In other cross-examination since the trial started on Nov. 7, attorneys for DuPont and GE have vigorously challenged the plaintiffs' scientific experts. They contend Rhodes can't show that her estimated thyroid dose of 6.9 rads of radioactive iodine-131 from Hanford's plutonium plants "more likely than not" caused her thyroid cancer, the legal yardstick being used in the trial. According to her lawyers, 95 percent of Rhodes' radiation dose from Hanford was between 1944 and 1947, when huge clouds of radioactive I-131 were pumped out of Hanford plants during production of the world's first plutonium bombs. The gas settled on pastures, where it was ingested by cows and transferred to the thyroid glands of children when they drank milk. That "milk pathway" is the primary way that people were exposed to the Hanford emissions, studies show. A portion of Rhodes' thyroid gland was removed in 1978 and her parathyroid gland was removed in 2001. The rest of her thyroid was removed in 2003. Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company ***************************************************************** 59 New Mexican: Experts disagree on lab's impact Sun Nov 20, 2005 8:22 pm LANL: Lab retirees tout perks of UC contract By ANDY LENDERMAN | The The U.S. Department of Energy will spend more than $4.4 billion in New Mexico this year. As the sun sets on the old way of managing Los Alamos National Laboratory, one of New Mexico's senior economists and two nuclear-disarmament groups argue about whether that's a good thing for the state. "You take away the lab and their payroll, what happens to Northern New Mexico? It goes back to prehistoric times," said Larry Waldman, an economist with The University of New Mexico's Bureau of Business and Economic Research. And the stability of those federal jobs tends to protect New Mexico from economic recessions that impact the rest of the country, he said. Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico scoffed when asked about the University of California's impact on Northern New Mexico. "Los Alamos County ... pretty much remains isolated and insular with respect to the rest of Northern New Mexico," he said. Coghlan said he lived in Rio Arriba County, just down the hill from Los Alamos, for most of the 1970s. "And there simply is not a conspicuous UC presence in Española or the Española Valley," he said. Greg Mello of the Los Alamos Study Group said the labs "are the worst thing to ever happen to New Mexico. The data shows that as lab funding increased, New Mexico's relative economic performance declined." New Mexico ranked 46 out of 50 states in personal income, per capita, according to a 2003 report from the U.S. Census Bureau. But working at Los Alamos appears to offer a solid path to the middle class. A driver can make more than $40,000 a year; a public-affairs spokesman, more than $70,000 a year; and many team leaders and scientists, more than $100,000 a year, according to a list of lab salaries posted on the University Professional and Technical Employees Web site. In comparison, the average job in New Mexico paid $31,368 in 2004, according to the Bureau of Business and Economic Research. Waldman said the lab's $1.1 billion payroll is good for the entire state. That money goes all over Northern New Mexico. Twenty-four percent of the lab's work force lives in Rio Arriba County, second only to Los Alamos County, home to about 44 percent of the work force. Santa Fe County is third with 22 percent, and Sandoval County is fourth with about 4 percent. "Most of that money is spent here in New Mexico," Waldman said. "That really boosts the New Mexico economy." Technology transfer Some LANL employees have quit their jobs at the lab and founded new companies that employ New Mexicans in nongovernmental positions. Congress required in the early 1990s that the national labs make an effort to take their technology inventions out of the labs and create new businesses. Roger D. Jones was among the first Los Alamos scientists to leave the security of the lab and a steady paycheck. He left in 1995 to work with other ex-scientists on consumer-banking issues and later formed his own company, Comodicast, in 2000. Jones has 15 employees who work on Wall Street trading systems and math problems for pharmaceutical companies. Those positions are among the estimated 270 jobs in existence as a result of the so-called spinoff from Los Alamos, said Duncan McBride, a small-business liaison who works for the lab. The overall success of this transfer of government ideas to the private market could be better, Jones said. "Given the technology, all the technology, it's extremely surprising that there are not more entrepreneurs," he said. There were about 30 companies that came from Los Alamos at one time, Jones said, but that's now down to about six. Waldman said Los Alamos' effort to create new jobs has had "some success, but not a whole lot." He agreed with Jones that Northern New Mexico has not seen technology booms like other places -- Austin, Texas, and the Silicon Valley of California, in particular. New Mexico businesses need more start-up money, known as venture capital, and more business expertise to help them flourish, Waldman said. ***************************************************************** 60 Santa Fe New Mexican: LANL: Lab retirees tout perks of UC contract By ANDY LENDERMAN | The New Mexican November 20, 2005 Tom and Ruth Buhl's three children left Santa Fe and earned college degrees in California. Some scientists quit their jobs and started their own companies. And every day at quitting time, thousands of expensive cars and trucks zip downhill from Los Alamos National Laboratory and spread more than $1 billion into the local economy. The University of California, which now manages the lab, has made a historic impact on Northern New Mexico over the past 60 years, providing a lifeline between a thriving coastal economy and an isolated mountain state. The legacy has meant that some of New Mexico's best students have attended prestigious and competitive schools. Current and former Los Alamos employees enjoy strong salaries, health-care plans and retirement pensions. But nuclear-watchdog groups are not impressed, arguing the university's presence has done little to solve stubborn poverty and educational problems in New Mexico. In any case, the university's old relationship with New Mexico is over. And the future is unclear for the lab's 15,375 employees and contractors, and their families. People like Michael Buhl are thankful for past benefits. As the son of Tom, a lab retiree, Michael earned two degrees from the UC system at a discounted rate. "I think it was good for me to have a chance to get away," he said. "Having said that, I think that the UC schools are some of the best in the country." By next June, the lab will no longer be managed by an academic research institution. Instead, two coalitions, each with a university and a private corporation, are competing for a government contract to manage the lab. An announcement is scheduled Dec. 1. The University of California has teamed with Bechtel National in its proposal to manage the lab. Earlier this week, the university's regents voted to continue a hugely popular benefit for Los Alamos employees -- one that allows their children to attend UC schools for the same cost as a California resident. But the continuation of that benefit hinges on whether the university gets picked for the job. It is competing with a team from the University of Texas and Lockheed Martin Corp. After the Dec. 1 announcement, the new manager will negotiate almost all employee benefits with the government. LANL workers' kids get shot at UC degrees The Los Alamos connection with the University of California meant Ruth Buhl's three children left New Mexico for college. Each child -- Michael, Melinda and Grady -- graduated from various UC schools. More than 208,000 students are in the UC system this year, which has 10 campuses and a $20 billion budget for the 2006 fiscal year. The Buhls saved thousands on tuition costs and earned degrees from good schools to boot. "That's just been a tremendous benefit, going to these schools, and our kids really got a lot out of them," said Tom Buhl, a retired physicist. Ruth Buhl said her family was impressed with how competitive it was getting into a UC school. More than 90 percent of the students are from California. And for her family, getting in was like earning a major scholarship. California residents will pay $7,294 in fees for the 2006-07 school year. Out-of-state students will pay about $26,020. "For my son, my oldest son, that was his No. 1 choice, was UC, San Diego," Ruth Buhl said. "And then our daughter majored in dance, and she applied to a lot of different schools around the country, and UC, Irvine was her first choice. So we were really lucky that it worked out that way." Michael Buhl, 29, earned a bachelor's and master's degree studying physics. He said he was better prepared than other students around the country when he entered graduate school. "I just felt that my undergraduate education there was just really good," Michael Buhl said. Los Alamos employee Bruce Panowski sent two boys to UC, Berkeley. Siler and Jonah Panowski earned degrees in molecular biology. "That would not have been possible if I had not worked at the lab because of the in-state tuition that was afforded us," Bruce Panowski said. " ... It was a savings of about $80,000 for us." Ruth Buhl thinks of other lab families with children in high school now. "And I just feel for them that they might not have that same wonderful benefit that our family had," she said. The lab makes an effort to support education locally as well. The lab employs many students, which peaked at 2,500 in 2003. Of that group, many are from New Mexico. The University of California also helped to establish the Los Alamos Community Foundation, a nonprofit group that gives about $2 million a year to student scholarships, public schools and social-service agencies. The foundation was established in 1997 and has assets of $54 million, director Susan Herrera said. It also sponsors a math-and-science-training program for public-school teachers, which currently has 120 educators enrolled, she said. Contact Andy Lenderman at alenderman@sfnewmexican.com. ***************************************************************** NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: *****************************************************************