***************************************************************** 10/24/05 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 13.247 ***************************************************************** 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 US and UK Preparing to Do Iran 2 AFP: Blair warns Iran on dangers of isolation from the West - 3 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Wants Russia to Push Iran on Nukes 4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Nuclear Dispute Moves to Moscow 5 AFP: Next six-way NKorea nuclear talks expected in second week of No 6 AFP: US increases pressure on North Korea ahead of talks - report - 7 Guardian Unlimited: Rice Warns N. Korea on New Nuclear Demands 8 Korea Herald: Neutral nations want to attend peace process 9 Bush at Bay: Fitzgerald Looks at Niger Forgeries 10 BBC: Ten arrests at Rolls Royce plant that uses nuclear materials 11 Reuters: - RPT-India urges world to focus on Pakistan nuclear role 12 AFP: India calls for action against nuclear proliferators - 13 Guardian Unlimited: Canada: environmental bad boy NUCLEAR REACTORS 14 US: [NukeNet] TVA New Reactor Study Released 15 US: [NukeNet] New Nuke Planned for W. Texas Sacrifice Zone 16 US: [NukeNet] Reminder: Oyster Creek Rally Tonight in Toms River 17 US: NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Environmental Impact Statement fo 18 BBC: 'No case' for new nuclear power 19 Xinhua: Loading begins for nuke in Jiangsu 20 US: NRC: Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Unit 1; Notice of 21 US: Vermont Guardian: Feds withhold Vermont Yankee report from publi 22 US: Hudson Valley News: Legislative Democrats want NRC to look at In 23 Guardian Unlimited: The answer is not written in the wind NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 24 US: Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Ailing veterans blame their MS on Gu 25 US: OERP: Occupational Energy Research Program 26 US: IEER press release: NRC on Depleted Uranium Disposal Plans 27 US: NIOSH Update: NIOSH Will Discuss Energy Research Program at Oct. NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 28 [NukeNet] South Korean Low Level Waste Dump 29 US: [NukeNet] A Tribe Split by Nuclear Waste -- NPR report on PFS 30 US: AFP: Australian Aborigines Wants Full Uranium Debate 31 US: Saratoga Herald Tribune: Nuclear waste too great a hazard 32 AU ABC: NT politicians remain quiet over dump plan. 33 US: NPR : A Tribe Split by Nuclear Waste 34 US: AU ABC: Land Council seeks greater mining contract rights 35 US: AU ABC: ERA grilled about uranium regulations PEACE 36 Vanunu Says It Like It Is US DEPT. OF ENERGY ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 US and UK Preparing to Do Iran Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:02:53 -0500 (CDT) Compliments of Government of the USA in Exile (GUSAE): Free Americans Resisting the Fourth Reich on Behalf of All Species. NOTE: Thanks to Peter Myers for this. -- kl, pp US & UK Manufacturing a Rationale for Air Strikes Against Iran Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 06:41:50 +0100 From: "Rowan Berkeley" IRAN: Aspens Turning, Forged Letters, Fake Terror, Real War by LondonYank, DailyKos, Mon Oct 17, 2005 http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/17/101317/07 (many embedded links in original, and also interesting comments by Kos readers afterwards) The Aspens are turning - turning their sights on Iran. Fake letters. Fake terrorists. Fake exile groups. Fake news. Real bombs. Real war. It's been accelerating all year. Our analysis of Plamegate and serial failures in Iraq aren't slowing them down at all. Being reality-based is sure not going to protect us from the blowback. In this diary I follow the Libby-Miller Aspen trail all the way to Iran. Do not forget that we in the reality-based community are at a disadvantage. While we analyse what has already happened, the Bush administration makes its own reality by moving forward to the next faith-based objective - the Ahwaz region of Iran which holds 90 percent of Iran's proven oil reserves. Emiritus members of the Aspen Strategy Group include: Richard B. (Dick) Cheney, Judith Miller, Condoleezza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, R. James Woolsey They meet each year in August. The neo-con wing of the Aspen Institute began targeting Iran decades ago - even holding a symposium in Persepolis, Iran, in 1975. Now 30 years later, they are ready to move in and realise their ambitions. I think it will be air strikes on the supposed nuclear facilities, but only as a ruse to justify the occupation of the oil-rich Ahwazi region bordering southern Iraq as a "security zone". The USA and UK regimes are manufacturing a rationale for air strikes against Iranian nuclear and military targets. I also expect occupation to the Ahwaz region. The fact that so many are on to their fraud this time has forced them to accelerate beyond prudence. I don't think they care that we know it's a fraud. They just want to have plausible deniability once the bunker-buster bombs have done their damage. They will say it is essential to occupy Ahwazi lands to create a "security zone" to prevent retaliation or aid to Iraqi insurgents. The current US/UK campaign to tar Iran with guilt for bombs around Basra is a key element in this plot. The world may be disgusted and shocked by the carnage and devastation, but America and the United Kingdom can claim that they "had to act on the intelligence available" even if they had to manufacture the intelligence themselves through their agent Chalabi, their tame media pundits like Judith Miller and Michael Ledeen, and plants in fake exile groups in London. While the Aspen Institute may appear bipartisan and include many individuals we approve, such as Al Gore, it provides cover for darker, more sinister enterprises. What are described as "vacations out West" may be meetings of the neo-con wing of Aspens - those "joined at the roots" of the Middle East enterprise. Their August holidays are used to plan the September disinformation campaigns that precede their wars. As Andrew Card famously said in 2002, "You don't launch a new product in August." Ahmad Chalabi - convicted embezzler and fraudster, alleged counterfeiter and known forgery practitioner - is also an Aspen. He is now the Iraqi minister for oil. I believe he is the principal source for all the forged documents we know about - the WMD forgeries before the war, including the Niger uranium letter, and now for the forged Zarqawi-Zawahiri letter and the forged Iranian letters causing problems in the oil-rich Ahwaz region of Iran, conveniently adjacent to southern Iraq. Chalabi first came to the attention of Dick Cheney and the neo-con warmongers through the Aspen Institute according to the Wall Street Journal: "State Department and CIA officials mistrust the wealthy, American-educated Mr. Chalabi, who was convicted in a Jordanian banking scandal more than a decade ago. But Mr. Cheney and his senior staff have remained stubborn advocates of Mr. Chalabi, a man they first got to know in the mid-1990s at the barbecues and golf games held at private seminars hosted by groups such as the Aspen Institute." Chalabi has been involved with Aspen Institute Berlin. Jeff Gedmin, director of the Aspen Institute Berlin, will now become number 2 to John Bolton at the United Nations. Of course, Judith Miller, ASG Emiritus, used Chalabi and pseudo-defectors supplied by his Iraqi National Congress as a principal source for all the warmongering articles published by the New York Times in the run up to invasion in 2002 and 2003. The CIA and Israelis equipped Chalabi with a huge forgery operation in northern Iraq for production of much of the pre-war "intelligence" which supported the WMD threat. I don't have to wonder what it's being used for today with so many forged letters popping up in the region. Chalabi is a frequent visitor in Iran. One journalist even described his summer holidays there as "like the Aspen Institute Persia". We know he passes intelligence to the Iranians, he may also have a hand in setting the stage for invasion of the Ahwazi region. As oil minister in Iraq, the Ahwazi oil fields will come under his control once occupied by the coalition. Ahwaz was part of Iraq at the turn of the last century, and I'm sure Chalabi and his Bushco friends would like its oil to be under Iraqi dominion again. In April Michael Ledeen - yes, the neo-con warmonger Niger uranium forgery guy - called on President Bush to get on with it and attack Iran following riots in the Ahwaz region. In his piece in the National Review he closes with, "Enough already. Let's Roll." Ledeen quotes with approval the founder of a group set up here in Britain just last December: The British Ahwazi Friendship Society. BAFS was first to publish an English translation of a forged letter which was used to start riots in Ahwaz, Iran, and hyped the casualties and arrests in the Western media. I thought then the forgery sounded like Chalabi's work and wrote about it here, here and here. I was almost convinced I had wrongly maligned BAFS founder Mr Brett until I learned that he organised a similar Swazi exile group in 2002 which was implicated in riots, bombs and strikes in Swaziland. See this (Swazi Solidarity), this and this. Too much of a pattern for coincidence in my book, even if the guy pretends to be a bleeding-heart left-winger. Are there British connections to Aspen? Oh yes, my children! Lord Charles Powell. Formerly of the Diplomatic Service and Private Secretary to then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, is a Trustee of the Aspen Institute. His brother Jonathan is Chief of Staff to Prime Minister Tony Blair. Condi was in Britain this weekend. I fear she is marketing the "let's roll" policy to Bush's poodle Tony Blair as Iran headlined their meeting. With an oil crisis already roiling, she ratchets up the hysteria. Judith Miller - who spoke at the Aspen Strategy Group in 2003 on "What About Iran Should (or Shouldn't) Concern You" - will indeed have "work to do", as Scooter suggested. He wants her to focus on areas of interest already to the Aspen Institute: Biological threats and the Middle East. Add to this the Ahwazi bombs of the weekend which killed six and injured scores. Iran blames the British. With British commandos being caught in wigs and costumes, carrying no ID, in a car loaded with explosives, detonators and automatic weapons across the border in Basra last month, the Iranians may have some legitimate grounds for suspicion on their side. We have never been told what these commandos were engaged in - but the bomb-making equipment displayed in the police station afterwards for the media needed little elaboration. Since the Basra fiasco, Britain has loudly accused Iran of involvement in attacks on British soldiers, asserting that the detonator technology used to kill 8 British troops came from Iran. It was revealed yesterday that the detonators are in fact of British military origin, although provided to the IRA and other terrorist groups in a botched sting operation. On BBC Newsnight last week, the foreign secretary Jack Straw indicated that British troops may well be operating across the border in Iran already. The Conservative shadow foreign secretary has written to Tony Blair demanding a clarification of whether British troops are operating in Iran. "I was therefore shocked and disturbed at Jack Straw's response when asked on Newsnight if British troops would be allowed to 'cross into Iran if it's necessary'. The Foreign Secretary replied that 'it's not for me to speculate on the tactics which the British military would use.' "Sending our Armed Forces across an international border clearly is a major political decision, with profound implications for Britain's international relations. It is inconceivable that military commanders would permit their troops to cross an international border without explicit political authorisation to do so. That clearly would be a decision solely for your Government." General MacArthur had a dictum: "When in doubt, attack." I think the Aspens are following that dictum today. While we analyse, they will change our reality. Despite Plamegate and pending indictments and plunging popularity, the Aspens are turning - toward Iran. They are setting the stage to seize the Ahwazi region as a "security zone" - and control at a stroke nearly a fifth of global oil reserves. I pity the Ahwazi region. The Iranian regime may be bad, as Saddam was bad, but the people have homes, schools, jobs, electricity, healthcare, clean water, sewers, food, the rule of law, and relative security. The dominion of the coalition troops and Ahmad Chalabi is guaranteed to be much, much worse in every respect. ======================================================================== ================================================ ***************************************************************** 2 AFP: Blair warns Iran on dangers of isolation from the West - LONDON (AFP) - British Prime Minister Tony Blair warned Iran that the country would face "a much more difficult life" if it did not improve its relations with Western states. "Iran has to realise that there is the possibility of having a different relationship with the Western world but only on the basis of certain very clear things," Blair said in an interview broadcast on Sky News television at 8:00 pm (1900 GMT). "If they don't do this then I think they should understand it is very difficult for people to have a different relationship with them," Blair said. "And if they continue to do it, they continue to really defy proper rules of behaviour in the international community, then life will become a lot more difficult." However Blair attempted to play down fears of military action against Tehran while not excluding it totally. "People are asking 'are we about to go and invade Iran?' It is important that fear is laid to rest. Nobody is talking about that, nobody is planning for it, nobody is wanting to do it," the British prime minister said. However Blair added: "You don't ever take any option off the table." Iran denies allegations by the United States that it has sought to develop nuclear weapons, and insists it needs nuclear energy to replace oil stocks when they run out. Talks on the nuclear issue between Iran and the so-called EU-3 -- Britain, France and Germany -- broke down in August after Tehran ended a freeze on uranium fuel cycle work. Earlier this month Iran reiterated its refusal to suspend uranium fuel work, as sought by the three European states as a precondition of resuming talks with Tehran. The United States and the EU-3 have been lobbying members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear watchdog, to refer Iran to the UN Security Council over its nuclear activities. ***************************************************************** 3 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Wants Russia to Push Iran on Nukes From the Associated Press [UP] Monday October 24, 2005 12:16 PM AP Photo MOSB101 By JUDITH INGRAM Associated Press Writer MOSCOW (AP) - The U.S. national security adviser met with Russia's foreign minister on Monday, as Washington pushes diplomatic efforts to confront Iran over its nuclear program. Iran's foreign minister held separate talks in the Russian capital. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley met with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and other senior officials at the start of his two-day visit. The United States has been trying to rally support for bringing Iran before the U.N. Security Council for possible economic penalties if it does not provide answers and allay fears about its nuclear program, which the U.S. says is a covert drive to build nuclear weapons. ``We are conducting a wide discussion with Russia on this topic,'' Hadley was quoted as saying by the ITAR-Tass news agency before his meeting with Lavrov. ``Our positions are similar, and we are agreed on the basic points,'' he said. However, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice failed earlier this month to break through Moscow's opposition to hauling Iran before the Security Council. She did say, though, that Moscow was trying to push its ally Iran back to the bargaining table. Lavrov and Hadley alluded to the recent series of intense consultations between Russia and the United States. ``We had an opportunity to discuss a number of topical international issues with U.S. Secretary of State Rice in Moscow, including the situation around Iran, Syria and Lebanon. We exchanged views on the situation in Central Asia on the results of Ms. Rice's trip to that region and ahead of my own trip into the same area,'' Lavrov said. Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki later met with Lavrov on Monday. Russia has urged Iran to resume talks with the European Union over its nuclear program. Talks between Iran and the EU's three negotiating partners - Britain, France and Germany - collapsed in August after Iran resumed uranium reprocessing work. Lavrov opened the talks with Mottaki by expressing satisfaction ``that our political dialogue is developing intensively.'' Iran insists its nuclear program is for the peaceful purpose of generating power. Russia is building an $800 million nuclear reactor in the Iranian city of Bushehr that is scheduled for launch by the end of 2006. U.S. officials fear Iran could use the project to help develop a weapons program, but Moscow has dismissed the American concerns. President Vladimir Putin has said he was convinced Iran does not want nuclear weapons, but urged Tehran to do more to prove that to the international community. Hadley was due to meet with Putin later in the day. Hadley also said that the United States and Russia had similar views on the necessity of getting North Korea to take steps to realize the agreements reached so far at the six-party talks on that nation's nuclear program. ``We have common interests here. We understand one another,'' ITAR-Tass quoted him as saying. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Nuclear Dispute Moves to Moscow From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday October 25, 2005 12:16 AM AP Photo MOSB101 By JUDITH INGRAM Associated Press Writer MOSCOW (AP) - The diplomatic maneuvering around Tehran's disputed nuclear program moved to Moscow on Monday as the top U.S. security official and Iran's foreign minister held separate consultations with top Russian officials, and Tehran agreed to resume contacts with Europe. But Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki also reiterated Tehran's warnings that Iran might refuse U.N. watchdog agency inspections if its case is brought before the U.N. Security Council. ``If Iran's nuclear dossier is brought to the U.N. Security Council, Iran may give up the voluntary fulfillment of the additional protocol to the nuclear non-proliferation agreement,'' Mottaki was quoted as saying by the RIA-Novosti news agency, referring to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. ``Even if Iran's nuclear dossier is brought to the U.N. Security Council, Iran will not give up its lawful right to create its own nuclear fuel cycle.'' The simultaneous visits came as Washington was pressing efforts to confront Iran over its atomic energy program, which the United States suspects is a cover for nuclear weapons development. U.S. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley had meetings with five top-level officials, including President Vladimir Putin, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Alexander Rumyantsev, the head of Russia's atomic energy agency, which is directing construction of a $800 million nuclear reactor in the Iranian city of Bushehr that is scheduled for launch by the end of 2006. ``We are conducting a wide discussion with Russia on this topic (of Iran),'' Hadley was quoted as saying by the ITAR-Tass news agency. ``Our positions are similar, and we are agreed on the basic points.'' However, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice failed earlier this month to break through Moscow's opposition to hauling Iran before the Security Council. She did say, though, that Moscow was trying to push its ally Iran back to the bargaining table. Lavrov and Mottaki met Monday afternoon, after the Russian foreign minister had received Hadley, and said that Tehran would resume contacts with European countries over the disputed nuclear program - though they did not say what form those contacts would take. Talks between Iran and the EU's three negotiating partners - Britain, France and Germany - collapsed in August after Iran resumed uranium conversion, a precursor to enriching it for use in a nuclear reactor. The two ministers called for all questions concerning Iran's disputed nuclear program to be handled through the IAEA. Lavrov said the goal was to find a ``mutually acceptable decision'' to secure Iran's rights concerning the peaceful use of atomic energy - one that ``would not leave any doubts as to the peaceful character of such activity.'' Russia's Kommersant daily reported Monday that Russia was proposing to Tehran that it stop independent work in enriching uranium. In exchange, Moscow would establish a joint venture with Iran on Russian territory to enrich uranium for use in Iranian reactors. ``The problem is that Tehran has not expressed the least interest in this proposal and is insisting on its own right to engaging in producing nuclear fuel,'' Kommersant commented. ^---- Correspondent Maria Danilova in Moscow contributed to this report. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 5 AFP: Next six-way NKorea nuclear talks expected in second week of November Monday October 24, 08:33 AM SEOUL (AFX) - The next round of six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program will probably be held in the second week of November, a senior South Korean official said. 'The fifth round of six-party talks, which will be held in early November, probably in the second week, will focus on how to implement the joint statement,' Unification Minister Chung Dong-Young told members of the National Assembly, according to his office. At the latest round of talks involving the two Koreas, the US, Japan, China and Russia in Beijing in September, North Korea agreed to a statement of principles under which it would give up its nuclear weapons in return for energy and security guarantees. But shortly after, Pyongyang warned it would not dismantle its nuclear arsenal before the US supplies a light-water reactor to allow it to generate power. The US says that Pyongyang must first disarm before getting incentive bonuses, including the nuclear reactor. The nuclear crisis flared up in Oct 2002 after the US accused North Korea of running a secret uranium-enrichment program. Copyright © 2005 AFP AFX. All rights reserved. Republication or ***************************************************************** 6 AFP: US increases pressure on North Korea ahead of talks - report - Mon Oct 24, 8:19 AM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - US President George W. Bush's administration is urging nations from China to the former Soviet states to deny overflight rights to aircraft from North Korea that the United States says are carrying weapons technology, The New York Times reported. Citing two senior administration officials, the newspaper said that at the same time, the administration is accelerating an effort to place radiation detectors at land crossings and at airports throughout Central Asia. The devices are intended to monitor the North Koreans and the risk that nuclear weapons material could be removed from facilities in the former Soviet states, the report said. The new campaign was speeded up this summer after a previously undisclosed incident in June, when American satellites tracked an Iranian cargo plane landing in North Korea, according to The Times. The two countries have a history of missile trade -- Iran " /> Iran's Shahab missile is a derivative of a North Korean design -- and intelligence officials initially suspected the plane was picking up missile parts. The paper said that rather than watch silently, senior Bush administration officials began urging nations in the area to deny the plane the right to fly over their territory. China and at least one Central Asian nation cooperated, according to senior officials. The officials said they believed the Iranian plane left without its cargo, but they were not sure, the report said. Nonetheless, the new effort underscored the efforts the administration is undertaking to curb the North's exports of missile parts, drugs and counterfeit currency that are widely believed to be its main source of revenue and the way it finances its nuclear program, The Times noted. In interviews, the officials insisted that the more aggressive tactics would enhance the effort by the United States to continue negotiations over disarming North Korea, which have lasted for two years and resulted last month in a statement of broad principles to disarm, but no agreement about when or how, the paper pointed out. ***************************************************************** 7 Guardian Unlimited: Rice Warns N. Korea on New Nuclear Demands From the Associated Press [UP] Tuesday October 25, 2005 12:46 AM AP Photo OTTH101 OTTAWA, Canada (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned Monday that North Korea should not bring any new demands to international disarmament talks and said the communist nation's claim to a nuclear power reactor ``remains an abstraction.'' North Korea agreed last month to abandon its nuclear weapons program and dismantle weapons, but details of the deal are still unclear. North Korea appeared to back away from some pledges in the days after the deal was signed. The next talks, which involve China, Japan, the two Koreas, Russia and the United States, are scheduled for November, but no date has been set. ``I assume they are going to come back. If they come back it's without preconditions, because that's the only basis on which the talks will be restarted,'' Rice told reporters en route to a brief diplomatic visit to Canada. One sticking point is Pyongyang's demand that in exchange for giving up its nuclear program it is provided with a light-water nuclear reactor to meet its dire energy needs. Light-water reactors are believed to be less easily diverted for weapons use. The United States, however, says this issue should be tackled only after Pyongyang has verifiably dismantled its weapons efforts. ``The light water reactor issue continues to be an abstraction,'' Rice said. Last week, former U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson said North Korea is committed to unconditionally resuming talks on its atomic weapons program and returning to the international nuclear nonproliferation pact. Richardson, the governor of New Mexico, was in Pyongyang this week at the invitation of the government, said the North had also pledged to allow outside oversight of its disarmament. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 8 Korea Herald: Neutral nations want to attend peace process Sweden, Switzerland and Poland reaffirmed their commitment to peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, by stating their hopes of taking part in the peace process during their annual meeting in Berne, Switzerland, earlier last week Switzerland's Foreign Ministry carried statements on its website about the meeting of the three countries' Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission in Korea. The countries stressed that the armistice agreement after the 1950-53 Korean War was "only a legal instrument for the avoidance of hostilities on the Korean Peninsula as long as it is not superseded by a comprehensive peace treaty." The three countries emphasized the necessity of their influence in the peace process as a way to provide channels of communication to settle the conflict on the peninsula. The statement said the parties went over the results of the recent round of the six-nation talks involving the United States, Japan, Russia, China and two Koreas and said it was "an important step forward." Sweden, Switzerland and Poland also welcomed the North's willingness to abandon its nuclear weapons. "They (the three countries) further share the opinion that the continuation of the six-party process in early November 2005, as agreed in the Joint Statement, is necessary for the implementation of the principles described in the Joint Statement," the statement said. The NNSC was established about five decades ago through the Armistice Agreement of 27 July 1953. (aibang@heraldm.com) By Annie I. Bang 2005.10.25 ***************************************************************** 9 Bush at Bay: Fitzgerald Looks at Niger Forgeries Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 02:10:53 -0500 (CDT) http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/102405A.shtml Bush at Bay: Fitzgerald Looks at Niger Forgeries By Martin Walker UPI Monday 24 October 2005 Washington - The CIA leak inquiry that threatens senior White House aides has now widened to include the forgery of documents on African uranium that started the investigation, according to NAT0 intelligence sources. This suggests the inquiry by special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald into the leaking of the identity of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame has now widened to embrace part of the broader question about the way the Iraq war was justified by the Bush administration. Fitzgerald's inquiry is expected to conclude this week and despite feverish speculation in Washington, there have been no leaks about his decision whether to issue indictments and against whom and on what charges. Two facts are, however, now known and between them they do not bode well for the deputy chief of staff at the White House, Karl Rove, President George W Bush's senior political aide, not for Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby. The first is that Fitzgerald last year sought and obtained from the Justice Department permission to widen his investigation from the leak itself to the possibility of cover-ups, perjury and obstruction of justice by witnesses. This has renewed the old saying from the days of the Watergate scandal, that the cover-up can be more legally and politically dangerous than the crime. The second is that NATO sources have confirmed to United Press International that Fitzgerald's team of investigators has sought and obtained documentation on the forgeries from the Italian government. Fitzgerald's team has been given the full, and as yet unpublished report of the Italian parliamentary inquiry into the affair, which started when an Italian journalist obtained documents that appeared to show officials of the government of Niger helping to supply the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein with Yellowcake uranium. This claim, which made its way into President Bush's State of the Union address in January, 2003, was based on falsified documents from Niger and was later withdrawn by the White House. This opens the door to what has always been the most serious implication of the CIA leak case, that the Bush administration could face a brutally damaging and public inquiry into the case for war against Iraq being false or artificially exaggerated. This was the same charge that imperiled the government of Bush's closest ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, after a BBC Radio program claimed Blair's aides has "sexed up" the evidence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. There can be few more serious charges against a government than going to war on false pretences, or having deliberately inflated or suppressed the evidence that justified the war. And since no WMD were found in Iraq after the 2003 war, despite the evidence from the U.N. inspections of the 1990s that demonstrated that Saddam Hussein had initiated both a nuclear and a biological weapons program, the strongest plank in the Bush administration's case for war has crumbled beneath its feet. The reply of both the Bush and Blair administrations was that they made their assertions about Iraq's WMD in good faith, and that other intelligence agencies like the French and German were equally mistaken in their belief that Iraq retained chemical weapons, along with the ambition and some of technological basis to restart the nuclear and biological programs. It is this central issue of good faith that the CIA leak affair brings into question. The initial claims Iraq was seeking raw uranium in the west African state of Niger aroused the interest of vice-president Cheney, who asked for more investigation. At a meeting of CIA and other officials, a CIA officer working under cover in the office that dealt with nuclear proliferation, Valerie Plame, suggested her husband, James Wilson, a former ambassador to several African states, enjoyed good contacts in Niger and could make a preliminary inquiry. He did so, and returned concluding that the claims were untrue. In July 2003, he wrote an article for The New York Times making his mission - and his disbelief - public. But by then Elisabetta Burba, a journalist for the Italian magazine Panorama (owned by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi) had been contacted by a "security consultant" named Rocco Martoni, offering to sell documents that "proved" Iraq was obtaining uranium in Niger for $10,000. Rather than pay the money, Burba's editor passed photocopies of the documents to the U.S. Embassy, which forwarded them to Washington, where the forgery was later detected. Signatures were false, and the government ministers and officials who had signed them were no longer in office on the dates on which the documents were supposedly written. Nonetheless, the forged documents appeared, on the face of it, to shore up the case for war, and to discredit Wilson. The origin of the forgeries is therefore of real importance, and any link between the forgeries and Bush administration aides would be highly damaging and almost certainly criminal. The letterheads and official seals that appeared to authenticate the documents apparently came from a burglary at the Niger Embassy in Rome in 2001. At this point, the facts start dribbling away into conspiracy theories that involve membership of shadowy Masonic lodges, Iranian go-betweens, right-wing cabals inside Italian Intelligence and so on. It is not yet known how far Fitzgerald, in his two years of inquiries, has fished in these murky waters. There is one line of inquiry with an American connection that Fitzgerald would have found it difficult to ignore. This is the claim that a mid-ranking Pentagon official, Larry Franklin, held talks with some Italian intelligence and defense officials in Rome in late 2001. Franklin has since been arrested on charges of passing classified information to staff of the pro-Israel lobby group, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee. Franklin has reportedly reached a plea bargain with his prosecutor, Paul McNulty, and it would be odd if McNulty and Fitzgerald had not conferred to see if their inquiries connected. Where all this leads will not be clear until Fitzgerald breaks his silence, widely expected to occur this week when the term of his grand jury expires. If Fitzgerald issues indictments, then the hounds that are currently baying across the blogosphere will leap into the mainstream media and whole affair, Iranian go-betweens and Rome burglaries included, will come into the mainstream of the mass media and network news where Mr. and Mrs. America can see it. If Fitzgerald issues no indictments, the matter will not simply die away, in part because the press is now hotly engaged, after the new embarrassment of the Times over the imprisonment of the paper's Judith Miller. There is also an uncomfortable sense that the press had given the Bush administration too easy a ride after 9/11. And the Bush team is now on the ropes and its internal discipline breaking down, making it an easier target. Then there is a separate Senate Select Intelligence Committee inquiry under way, and while the Republican chairman Pat Roberts of Kansas seems to be dragging his feet, the ranking Democrat, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, is now under growing Democratic Party pressure to pursue this question of falsifying the case for war. And last week, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, introduced a resolution to require the president and secretary of state to furnish to Congress documents relating to the so-called White House Iraq Group. Chief of staff Andrew Card formed the WHIG task force in August 2002 - seven months before the invasion of Iraq, and Kucinich claims they were charged "with the mission of marketing a war in Iraq." The group included: Rove, Libby, Condoleezza Rice, Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin and Stephen Hadley (now Bush's national security adviser) and produced white papers that put into dramatic form the intelligence on Iraq's supposed nuclear threat. WHIG launched its media blitz in September 2002, six months before the war. Rice memorably spoke of the prospect of "a mushroom cloud," and Card revealingly explained why he chose September, saying "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August." The marketing is over but the war goes on. The press is baying and the law closes in. The team of Bush loyalists in the White House is demoralized and braced for disaster. ***************************************************************** 10 BBC: Ten arrests at Rolls Royce plant that uses nuclear materials Last Updated: Monday, 24 October 2005 [Rolls-Royce protest at Raynesway in Derby] The protest lasted about six hours A group of anti-nuclear protesters who chained themselves together have been arrested for public order offences outside a Rolls-Royce plant in Derby. About 40 campaigners are staging demonstrations at the factory to oppose the use of nuclear materials at the firm's Raynesway site. A rally organiser said 10 activists were arrested on Monday morning. Derbyshire Police spokesman James Allen said dozens of officers are in the area to prevent any problems. Fuel rods The protesters said nuclear fuel rods produced at the factory are used in the UK's Trident nuclear weapons system. Campaigner Zina Zelter said: "If Rolls Royce refused to make the nuclear reactors for Britain's nuclear weapons system Trident, then Britain would be unable to threaten the world with its nuclear weapons." She called on Rolls Royce to produce an emergency evacuation plan for people living and working within a two-mile radius of the factory. CND spokesman Tom Cuthbert, who was at the protest, said: "We are very glad the protest did pass off peacefully. "To have this sort of material and activity so close to a city centre is asking for trouble." He said the arrests were probably made after demonstrators strayed off a designated assembly area set for them by police. In a statement, Rolls Royce officials said: "Our Raynesway facility operates within strict guidelines set by the Environment Agency, Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) and Health and Safety Executive. "Its emergency procedures are regularly reviewed by the NII, which has accepted Rolls-Royce findings that there is no reasonably foreseeable off-site hazard." ***************************************************************** 11 Reuters: - RPT-India urges world to focus on Pakistan nuclear role 24 Oct 2005 11:22:39 GMT Source: Reuters CRISIS PROFILE: What is the conflict in Kashmir about? By Y.P. Rajesh NEW DELHI, Oct 24 (Reuters) - Stepping up a campaign to project its record as a responsible nuclear state, India urged global powers on Monday not to gloss over rival Pakistan's role in encouraging Iran's controversial atomic programme. New Delhi, hoping to be officially recognised soon as the world's sixth atomic power, also said its proliferation record was much better than some recognised nuclear nations and urged the world to partner India and not target it. The comments by Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran were the first by New Delhi to strongly target Pakistan's alleged role as a nuclear proliferator. It comes amid hectic efforts by India and the United States to push a controversial civil nuclear agreement. "The international community must focus not merely on recipient states but on supplier states as well," Saran said, referring to the transfer of prohibited nuclear supplies. "Otherwise our global non-proliferation effort would be undermined by charges of motivated selectivity and discrimination," he said in a lecture on non-proliferation. Saran said the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) should clarify the role of disgraced Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who admitted last year to leaking nuclear secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea. "We see no reason why there should be an insistence on personal interviews with Iranian scientists but an exception granted to a man who has been accused of running a 'global nuclear Wal-Mart'." PARTNER OR TARGET? Under the sweeping India-U.S. deal announced in July, Washington hopes to boost New Delhi's nuclear power programme to meet its growing energy needs. In trying to do so, President George W. Bush has reversed nearly 30 years of efforts to oppose India's nuclear programme. India, through its latest comments, was aiming to reassure sections of the U.S. Congress opposed to the landmark deal and some countries such as Sweden and Japan who are wary of India's entry into the 44-nation Nuclear Suppliers' Group, officials said. Saran was also hoping to blunt strong criticism from Indian communist parties who shore up the federal coalition and have been outraged by New Delhi's vote against old friend Iran's nuclear programme at the IAEA last month, they said. Indian analysts have said that New Delhi -- known for its good non-proliferation record even though it is not a member of the global Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -- had so far not projected its nuclear case well while neighbour Pakistan was getting away despite A.Q. Khan's shocking admissions. Saran said global apprehension and negative perception about India's nuclear policy were misplaced. "In considering its approach towards the resumption of full civil nuclear energy cooperation with India, the international community has to ask itself whether India is a partner or a target for the global non-proliferation regime," Saran said. "It clearly cannot be both at the same time. Our view is that India's commitment and India's record points to it being a partner," he said. Source: Reuters ***************************************************************** 12 AFP: India calls for action against nuclear proliferators - Mon Oct 24, 6:15 AM ET NEW DELHI (AFP) - India urged the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to take action against illegal proliferators of nuclear weapons technology such as Pakistan's disgraced scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan. The UN atomic watchdog should focus on the distributors of nuclear technology as much as the recipients, like Iran, said foreign secretary Shyam Saran "With respect to the Iran nuclear issue, we welcome Iran's cooperation with IAEA in the accounting for previously undeclared activities," Saran told a conference in New Delhi on nuclear non-proliferation on Monday. "... but it is important that remaining issues which involve Pakistan-based A.Q. Khan are satisfactorily clarified as well. "We see no reason why there should be an insistence on personal interviews with Iranian scientists but an exception granted to a man who has been accused of running a global 'nuclear Wal-Mart'," he said. Iran was put on notice last month by the IAEA, which warned the Islamic nation it would be hauled before the UN Security Council if it persisted with its uranium enrichment activities. The United States suspects Iran is using its nascent nuclear power program to develop the capability to build nuclear weapons, a suspicion Tehran says is unfounded. India, which voted in favour of the IAEA motion paving the way for Iran's referral to the Security Council, has been subdued in its criticism of arch-rival Pakistan, whose nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan last year admitted to having leaked nuclear secrets to Iran, North Korea and Libya. New Delhi, which began a peace process with Islamabad in January 2004, demanded an investigation into the illegal transfer of nuclear secrets but refrained from criticising its nuclear rival over its lenient treatment of Khan. Khan became a national hero after he helped Pakistan come out of the nuclear closet in May 1998, within days of India conducting five atomic tests. After Khan made a public confession last year, Pakistan's President General Pervez Musharraf gave him a conditional pardon. Islamabad has consistently refused to allow the IAEA to question Khan about the nuclear black market. In March, Pakistan confirmed that Khan provided Iran with centrifuges but again insisted the government was not involved in the deal. Centrifuges are needed to enrich uranium for atomic warheads. Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 13 Guardian Unlimited: Canada: environmental bad boy Ottawa dispatch Canada: environmental bad boy 'Sluggish, asleep at the wheel, haywire and incontinent.' A leading green country a decade ago is found severely wanting in a new report, writes Anne McIlroy Monday October 24, 2005 Canada's international reputation as a boy scout on environmental issues has been in decline for well over a decade, and now a new report ranks it 28th out of 30 OECD countries on key indicators such as cutting greenhouse gas emissions and smog. The damning report was commissioned by the David Suzuki Foundation, an environmental group based in Vancouver, and prepared by a team of scientists at Simon Fraser University. It found that Canada was the worst or second worse performer in the OECD on eight of 29 environmental indicators including per capita production of volatile organic emissions, one of the main components in smog, per capita generation of nuclear waste and energy use per unit of GDP. Article continues Concerning global warming, Canada's emission of gases that trap heat in the atmosphere has increased by more than 20% above 1990 levels. This is despite its ratification of the Kyoto accord, according to which it agreed to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases to 6% below 1990 levels by 2012. Canada was "lethargic, sluggish, asleep at the wheel, in the ditch, haywire, incontinent", Jim Fulton, executive director of the Suzuki Foundation, told a press conference in Ottawa. And that was just on global warming. Only Belgium and the US ranked lower than Canada in their environmental performance overall. Turkey was the least blameworthy but, the report says, that is because its economy is less developed than other nations in the OECD. The same went for Poland, ranked fourth, and the Slovak Republic, fifth. The report says it makes more sense to compare Canada to countries with stronger economies. Switzerland was ranked second, Denmark third; Germany, Austria, Sweden, Italy and the Netherlands were sixth to 10th respectively; the UK was 18th. Canada's environment minister, Stephane Dion, while conceding the country had room to improve on the environment, was critical of the report when it was released last week. "Who can give a lot of confidence to a study that said the country that had the best performance regarding the environment is Turkey," he asked. "Mexico is 13th. Mexico! Would you drink Mexico City water from the tap?" The report considered the consumption of drinking water per capita rather than its quality. Canadians drink double the OECD average; Danes use one-10th the water Canadians consume. Mr Dion noted that other studies, by the World Economic Forum and the Conference Board of Canada, ranked the country in the middle of industrialised nations concerning its green credentials. "I'm not saying we're second, I'm saying we are better than Mexico," Mr Dion said. There was, however, some sunshine for Canada in the report. The country has decreased its production of municipal waste by 25% over the past decade, while the OECD average was an increase of 9%. However, the study ranked Canada 14th on sewage treatment: only 72% of the population has sewage treatment, compared to 96% in the Netherlands. The cities of Victoria, Halifax and St. John's - all provincial capitals - pump raw sewage into the ocean. Why is Canada such a laggard? The report says geography and climate may be factors. It is a big, cold country; it takes a lot of energy to ship goods from city to city and to keep homes warm in the winter. However, the study, one of several to have condemned Canada's commitment to green issues in the past few years, says poor public policy has also played a role. Mr Suzuki, one of Canada's best-known environmentalists and the founder of the organisation that commissioned the report, said he hoped Canadian voters would make the environment an issue in the upcoming federal election, expected early next year. Polls show Canadians want their country to be a world leader on the environment. In previous years, Canada played an important part in international efforts to protect the ozone layer, and the former prime minister Brian Mulroney pushed for a treaty to protect plant and animal species at the Earth Summit in 1992. But the Liberals, who have been in power since 1993, have neglected the environment. They ignored global warming for years, perhaps hoping the Kyoto agreement would founder before they had to take action. "It's time we stopped ignoring the environment," Mr Suzuki said. "Let's not let another election go by without making this a high priority." edna.mcilroy@sympatico.ca Useful links David Suzuki Foundation Liberal party of Canada Conservative party of Canada Canadian government Canada.com CBC Newsworld The Globe and Mail [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 14 [NukeNet] TVA New Reactor Study Released Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:39:41 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) love the optimism about the cost estimates being the "upper bound." also note that while the study was of an ABWR, NuStart (the consortium of nuclear utilites et al) will seeking a COL for an AP1000. cheaper yet? we'll see. Brendan Hoffman Organizer, Nuclear Energy & Waste Critical Mass Energy and Environment Program Public Citizen p: 202.454.5130 f: 202.547.7392 bhoffman@citizen.org www.citizen.org/cmep =============================== Tennessee Valley Authority Releases its Cost and Schedule Estimate for a Twin Unit General Electric Advanced Boiling Water Reactor at its Bellefonte Site in Alabama http://www.nuclear.gov/NucPwr2010/NP2010TVABellefonte.html The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has received a final report from the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) on the cost and schedule estimate to build a twin unit General Electric Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) at its Bellefonte site in Alabama. TVA, along with team members Toshiba, Bechtel, General Electric, Global Nuclear Fuels-America and the United States Enrichment Corporation, completed the 13 month study to determine and present in detail, the engineering, procurement and construction schedule, (EPC) and economics for building the twin unit ABWR. The overall conclusion of this cost and schedule study is that two ABWR nuclear units can be constructed at the Bellefonte site on a 40 month schedule for each reactor. This time frame is the duration from installation of the first reactor structural concrete to fuel load. The engineering, procurement and construction cost for the two units is $1611/KW for the 1371MWe certified ABWR plant design that incorporates some technology advancements developed during the Japanese and Lungmen ABWR construction. A higher power ABWR incorporating other power increase design features identified in this report would increase the output to 1465MWe reducing the EPC cost to $1535/KW. These EPC costs would be the basis for a firm fixed price offering to TVA. The results of this study provide the nuclear power industry with a very detailed estimate for construction time and cost, based on 2004 dollars, of building a new ABWR nuclear plant. This estimate should establish an upper bound for the cost of a new nuclear power plant since the newer passive reactor designs are expected to be simplified and more economical to build. The completion of this report will also assist TVA in determining its path forward in installing new nuclear capability at the Bellefonte site in Alabama. This study was funded under an interagency agreement by the Nuclear Power 2010 program (NP 2010) in August 2004. The NP 2010 program is a Presidential initiative for government/industry cost-shared efforts to expand the use of nuclear energy in the United States and implemented by the Department's Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology. Final Report: http://np2010.ne.doe.gov/reports/Main%20Report%20All5.pdf _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 15 [NukeNet] New Nuke Planned for W. Texas Sacrifice Zone Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:39:27 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Andrews looking to build nuclear reactor Ruth Campbell Midland Reporter-Telegram 10/23/2005 Next generation' reactor would only be used for research and testing, would not generate energy. By Ruth Campbell Staff Writer Andrews residents do their homework. That's one reason city and county officials say they're willing to take risks that might send other communities running for the hills. During the past 10 to 15 years, the city and county have obtained Waste Control Specialists, a low-level radioactive waste depository on the Lea County, N.M., border, and next door to that is the proposed site of Louisiana Energy Services uranium enrichment facility. Now the University of Texas of the Permian Basin and the city and county of Andrews is working with General Atomics of San Diego, Calif., on a very high-temperature test reactor, considered the next generation of nuclear reactor. Construction of the test reactor, which wouldn't generate electrical power, would cost about $100 million and engineering cost would be $3 million, said James Wright, technical project director for the nuclear proposal at UTPB. The Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club and Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition, both in Austin, have to do research into the test reactor but are against anything nuclear. Andrews residents are reacting positively, so far, to the proposal, city and county officials said. A couple of years ago, the community participated in a strategic plan to boost the local economy and improve quality of life. "We're just forward thinking a little bit," County Judge Richard Dolgener said. "We're able to negotiate different things for public policy that work for us." Nuclear energy will likely be the primary source of energy for the world in the future with fossil fuel supply on the decline, Andrews City Manager Glen Hackler said. The proposed facility would do one-of-a-kind research if safety and security issues can be addressed, he said. "There is a stigma that goes with having a nuclear waste landfill, but you get prestige with a nuclear research facility affiliated with the UT system and one of the renowned firms, General Atomics," he said. He said the city and county still have a "great deal" of due diligence to do before approving the test reactor, but it isn't as much of a "mountain to climb" as bringing in WCS. Dolgener said more public meetings will be conducted and civic groups can invite Wright and UTPB President David Watts to speak about the project. Hopefully, he said the matter can be brought to the public so they know what it is and can feel it and touch it. "I think it's good for the region. It's good for the University of Texas of the Permian Basin. We need to stretch our wings here and show what a major four-year university can do," Dolgener said. Wright, who worked for the director of Los Alamos National Laboratory and was one of three people in charge of internal research and development, said this technology is the next generation of nuclear reactor. It can operate at least 1,000 degrees centigrade (approximately 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). The reactor cannot have a core meltdown because it is supposed to automatically shut down when it reaches 1,500 degrees centigrade. The Andrews County reactor would act as a technological demonstration for one at Idaho National Lab outside Idaho Falls. Design would generate electricity at twice the efficiency of regular electric plants. The powder-like spent fuel is encased in three layers of ceramic to be safe for up to 500 years, Wright said. The pellets can withstand temperatures of 2,000 centigrade. It would also deter proliferation as it would cost billions to remove the uranium from the pinhead-sized pellets. He said General Atomics, with which UTPB has a letter of agreement on the project, will supply the technology and help the university through the funding process with the federal government and other sources. General Atomics would operate the reactor when it's done, he said. The permitting process will probably cost $60 million and whole project including engineering and construction, will take six years. "It would open up a whole new realm of industrial processes that will help us create new technologies," Wright said. If developed, the facility would bring more than $400 million in direct investment to the state to be provided by the U.S. Department of Energy. UTPB is now raising $3 million for preconceptual design to attract government funding -- half to be spent by the university and half by General Atomics. Utilities also won't buy into the reactor without seeing a prototype. Wright said he expects at least $40 million a year in operating funds from the government until at least 2040 and with that money coming in, he said visiting scientists would be doing plenty of research there. "This project actually fits the national laboratory model and we've designed it that way," he said. Along with boosting scientific endeavors in the area, Wright said having the reactor here would enhance UTPB and help build other non-scientific programs. The school would likely add an engineering program and increase the number of people in physics and chemistry. "This facility will be unique in the world. It will help ensure Texas leads development of new nuclear and hydrogen technology," Wright said. Sierra Club Communications Director Donna Hoffman said the organization needs to research the reactor, but basically doesn't support any new nuclear facility or nuclear power as a viable source of energy because of the threat to the public health and the waste it creates. "There's no known safe method of storage," Hoffman said. SEED Executive Director Karen Hadden said the very high-temperature reactor sounds like an "extremely bad idea." She said there aren't any built in the United States sand she doesn't see "any good reason for it to be considered for the region." "We don't need any more nuclear energy in the country. We need more renewable energy like wind and solar. Wind has been productive for West Texas," having augmented tax bases around the basin. Radioactive materials always carry a risk to workers and the environment, Hadden said, adding that some nuclear plants in the nation are leaking. Reader Opinions: E C Oct, 23 2005 It always amazes me how facts can be distorted in order to improve public relations. In the case of the test nuclear reactor, the method of encasing the nuclear fuel is supposed to stop proliferation because of the cost to remove it. As we have seen with today's terrorists, they can turn a jet into a bomb, why not encapsulated nuclear fuel? Also, there are no emissions from a nuclear plant, but aren't emissions better than waste that requires 10000 years to be safe? And why is a judge in Andrews dictating public policy that affects all neighboring communities? http://www.mywesttexas.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=15438094&BRD=2288&PAG=461&dept_id=475626&rfi=6 _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 16 [NukeNet] Reminder: Oyster Creek Rally Tonight in Toms River Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:39:36 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Now Is the Time to Close the Loop! Come Rally for Clean Water and a Healthy Ecosystem in Barnegat Bay! When: Monday, October 24, 2005 5:00p.m. *** one hour before the NJDEP public hearing *** Where: Ocean County Administration Building, 101 Hooper Avenue, Toms River Who: NJPIRG, NJ Sierra Club, NJ Environmental Federation, Jersey Coast Anglers Association, Save Barnegat Bay RSVP: Suzanne Leta, NJPIRG Advocate at sleta@njpirg.org or 609-394-8155 x310 Oyster Creek’s water permit, issued every five years by the NJ DEP, has been expired for a year and a half. The plant’s current cooling system, in violation of the Clean Water Act, intakes 1.4 billion gallons a day and kills 13 million fish and shellfish and an estimated tens of millions of additional larvae annually. The best way to solve this problem is to require the plant to install a closed-loop cooling system that reduces water intake and discharge by over 95%. A closed-loop system will also eliminate fish kills caused by thermal shock from the discharge, stop the dumping of over 365 tons of toxic chlorine into the bay annually, and create hundreds of jobs during construction. Unfortunately, the NJ DEP’s draft permit describes the closed-loop system as the “preferred alternative,” but also gives Exelon a fall back option—the “restoration” of 3,500 acres of wetlands. This draft permit is simply unacceptable, and we need your help to ensure that the NJ DEP’s final permit is one that requires Oyster Creek to complete installation of a closed-loop cooling system by the end of 2008. Your attendance at the rally will send a clear message to the NJ DEP that the best way to address the needs of the marine population of Barnegat Bay, Oyster Creek and Forked River is to require Oyster Creek plant to comply with the Clean Water Act and install a closed-loop cooling system right away. Please bring your family and neighbors! RSVP to Suzanne Leta at sleta@njpirg.org or 609-394-8155 x310 Suzanne Leta Clean Energy Advocate NJPIRG 11 N. Willow St Trenton, NJ 08608 609 394 8155 x310 sleta@njpirg.org _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 17 NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Environmental Impact Statement for Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant License Renewal Application News Release - Region I - 2005-05 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 No. I-05-054 October 24, 2005 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will conduct two public meetings on Tuesday, Nov. 1, on the environmental review related to the license renewal application for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Members of the public are invited to attend and comment on environmental issues they believe the NRC should consider during its review of the applicants proposal to extend by 20 years the operating license for the plant, located in Lacey Township (Ocean County), N.J., and operated by AmerGen. There will be two sessions held that day at the Quality Inn at 815 Route 37 in Toms River, N.J. The first session will begin at 1:30 p.m. and continue until 4:30 p.m. The second session, which will follow the same format as the first meeting, will get under way at 7 p.m. and continue until 10 p.m. The NRC will host an open house beginning 1 hour before the start of each meeting to provide members of the public with an opportunity to talk informally with agency staff. However, formal comments must be expressed during the transcribed meetings. Both sessions will start with an overview and an NRC staff presentation on the environmental review process for license renewal applications. After the NRC presentation, members of the public will be given the opportunity to present their comments on environmental issues they consider worthy of review. As we noted at a public meeting we held on Aug. 24th regarding the application, there are several opportunities for members of the public to raise concerns or offer comments on the proposed license extension for Oyster Creek. The meetings scheduled for Nov. 1st will be one such opportunity and we look forward to receiving the publics input, said Michael Masnik, the NRC project manager who is leading the environmental review. Under NRC regulations, the original operating license for a nuclear power plant has a term of 40 years. The license may be renewed for up to an additional 20 years if NRC requirements are met. The current operating license for Oyster Creek is due to expire on April 9, 2009. AmerGen submitted a license renewal application for Oyster Creek on July 22. As part of its application, the company submitted an environmental report. The application can be reviewed via the NRCs web site at: www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/oys tercreek.html. It is also available for review at the NRCs Public Document Room in Rockville, Md., which can be reached by phone at 1-800-397-4209, and at the Lacey Branch of the Ocean County Library, located at 10 E. Lacey Road. An existing NRC document, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants (NUREG-1437), assesses the scope and impact of environmental effects that would be associated with license renewal at any nuclear power plant site. The document for which the NRC will gather information at the Nov. 1st meetings will be a supplement to that generic environmental statement that is specific to Oyster Creek. It will contain a recommendation regarding the environmental acceptability of the license renewal action. At the conclusion of the information-gathering process, the NRC staff will prepare a summary of the conclusions reached and significant issues identified. A copy will be sent to each person who participated in the scoping process. The summary will also be available on the NRCs web site through the Public Electronic Reading Room at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html and at the library in Lacey. Help in accessing documents through the Reading Room is available by contacting the NRCs Public Document Room at 1-800-397-4209 or by e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov. The NRC staff will subsequently prepare a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) supplement for public comment and will hold a public meeting next summer to solicit comments. After consideration of comments on the draft report, the NRC will prepare a final EIS supplement. Interested individuals may register to attend or present oral comments at the Nov. 1st meetings by contacting Mr. Masnik at 1-800-368-5642, ext. 1191, or by e-mail to OysterCreekEIS@nrc.govby Oct. 24. Those who wish to offer comments may also register at the meetings within 15 minutes of the start of each session. Individual oral comments may be limited by the time available, depending on the number of persons who register. Last revised Monday, October 24, 2005 ***************************************************************** 18 BBC: 'No case' for new nuclear power Last Updated: Monday, 24 October 2005 [A centrifuge, an essential component for enriching uranium, which can be used as fuel for a civilian nuclear power reactor. ] Wales needs to consider all energy options, says Andrew Davies Nuclear energy is not a commercial proposition in Wales, claims the economic development minister. Andrew Davies said Wales must instead capitalise on the 250m tonnes of coal that remains underground. Last week, Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks said the review of energy policy announced by the prime minister would include civil nuclear power. Friends of the Earth said nuclear power was "unacceptable" but the assembly should do more to cut carbon emissions. Mr Davies told BBC Wales that he had been in talks with Mr Wicks to highlight the need for investment in "clean coal" technology. He said that he must follow the UK government's policy on energy as it was not a fully devolved matter, but that was a situation he would like to change. [Wind turbine] The minister said all options must be considered including wind He said: "We feel strongly that we need a stronger role. "I did make the case to Malcolm Wicks that we're in an anomalous position. For example the Cefn Croes wind farm... we had no formal role. "Our role was very proscribed and restricted and we think that this is inappropriate considering the importance of energy production in Wales." Mr Davies also said that all energy options had to be considered because Wales needed a wide range of energy sources. Friends of the Earth Cymru has called on the assembly government to create a new ministerial position for Energy and Climate Change. The green campaign group said it believed new technology in renewable marine energy, such as tidal and wave power, was not being developed as a way for a drive for nuclear power to succeed. Civil nuclear power FoE Cymru director Julian Rosser said: "We need to be reduce the amount of electricity that we use - the assembly has been less effective in pushing energy efficiency. "In the long tem, we need to reduce the amount of energy in transport. That is not something the assembly is making any efforts on at all, what we're seeing is more road-building going on." Energy Minister Mr Wicks addressed the British Wind Energy Association conference in Cardiff last week to say renewable energy sources would remain a "crucial part of the mix" of the government's review of energy policy. He said: "We will be looking across the board, and that includes civil nuclear power, with proposals to be published next year." The last nuclear power plant to be built in Wales, the Magnox plant at Wylfa, on Anglesey, is due to end of production in 2010. A 1979 survey found 250m tonnes of good quality coal in Wales, but the pit closure programme during the 1980s has led to only 20m of it being mined. ***************************************************************** 19 Xinhua: Loading begins for nuke in Jiangsu www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2005-10-24 14:58:55 LIANYUNGANG, Jiangsu Province, Oct. 24 (Xinhuanet) -- The Tianwan nuclear power station in this coastal city of east China's Jiangsu Province started nuclear operation Sunday morning, as fuel loading for its No.1 generator, which began last week, is proceeding smoothly. The Tianwan station boasts so far the largest generators in installed capacity in China, sources at the power station said. The nuclear power station, also the largest Sino-Russian economic cooperation project, obtained approval for fuel loading from the State Nuclear Security Bureau early last week. It began loading on Oct. 18 and has since loaded 86 sets of nuclear fuel assembly into the reactor core. The whole loading process will last 10 days, involving a total of 163 sets of nuclear fuel assembly, the sources said. Construction work started in October 1999 on the Tianwan nuke project. Its first phase includes two pressure water reactor generators, each with an installed capacity of 1.06 million kilowatts. The sources said the nuke site can accomodate eight generators each with an installed capacity of one million kW or more and with a combined capacity of 8-10 million kW. Upon completion, the powerstation will generate 60-70 billion kWh of electricity a year and realize more than 25 billion yuan (3.08 billion US dollars) in annual output value. Started in the 1980s, China's nuclear power industry now has generators with a total installed capacity of 6.7 million kW, with10 generators under construction with combined capacity of some 9.3 million kW. Currently, nuclear power accounts for 2.3 percent of electricity generated nationwide annually, yet the proporation has reached 13 percent in economically developed Guangdong and Zhejiang provinces, as against the 16-percent average of the world. China plans to build 31 nuclear power stations by 2020, and increase the total installed capacity of all nuke projects to 40 million kW. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 20 NRC: Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Unit 1; Notice of FR Doc E5-5854 [Federal Register: October 24, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 204)] [Notices] [Page 61475-61477] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr24oc05-85] Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-14 and NPF-22, issued to PPL Susquehanna, LLC (PPL, the licensee), for operation of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Unit 1 (SSES 1), located in Berwick, Pennsylvania. The proposed amendment would revise the SSES 1 Technical Specification (TS) Section 2.1.1.2 with regard to the Unit 1 Cycle 14 (U1C14) minimum critical power ratio (MCPR) safety limit (SL) for two- loop operation from 1.08 to 1.09 following implementation of a redesigned core. The change to the MCPR SL is necessary due to control cell friction issues which necessitate a U1C14 mid-cycle core redesign and unit shutdown to implement. The exigent amendment request is being made following PPL's determination, based in part, on testing performed the weekend of September 30, 2005, that a mid-cycle core redesign was the most prudent course of action to ensure safe, reliable operation for the remainder of U1C14. Additionally, PPL requests the proposed change on an exigent basis to avoid unnecesary delays in the Unit 1 restart following its upcoming maintenance outage. Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for amendments to be granted under exigent circumstances, the NRC staff must determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed change to the MCPR Safety Limits does not directly or indirectly affect any plant system, equipment, component, or change the processes used to operate the plant. Further, the revised U1C14 MCPR Safety Limits are generated using NRC approved methodology and meet the applicable acceptance criteria. In addition, the effects of channel bow were conservatively addressed by increasing the amount of channel bow assumed in the MCPR SL calculation. Thus, this proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. Prior to the restart of U1C14, licensing analyses will be performed on the redesigned core (using NRC approved methodology referenced in Technical Specification Section 5.6.5.b) to determine changes in the critical power ratio as a result of anticipated operation occurrences. These results will be added to the MCPR Safety Limit values proposed herein to generate the MCPR operating limits in the U1C14 Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). The COLR operating limits thus assure that the MCPR Safety Limit will not be exceeded during normal operation or anticipated operational occurrences. Postulated accidents are also analyzed to confirm NRC acceptance criteria are met. Therefore, this proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. This proposed change to the MCPR Safety Limits does not directly or indirectly affect any plant system, equipment, or component and therefore they do not affect the failure modes of any of these items. Thus, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a previously unevaluated operator error or a new single failure. Therefore, this proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. Since the proposed change does not alter any plant system, equipment, component, or the processes used to operate the plant, the proposed change will not jeopardize or degrade the function or operation of any plant system or component governed by Technical Specifications. The proposed MCPR Safety Limits do not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety as currently defined in the Bases of the applicable Technical Specification sections, because the MCPR Safety Limits calculated for the remaining U1C14 operation preserve the required margin of safety. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 14 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 14-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice period, such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 14-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received. Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 [[Page 61476]] a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner/requestor is aware and on which the petitioner/requestor intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petitioner/requestor must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner/ requestor to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101, verification number is (301) 415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to Bryan A. Snapp, Esquire, Assoc. General Counsel, PPL Services Corporation, 2 North Ninth St., GENTW3, Allentown, PA 18101-1179, attorney for the licensee. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated October 14, 2005, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e- mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of October 2005. [[Page 61477]] For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Richard J. Laufer, Section Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5-5854 Filed 10-21-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 21 Vermont Guardian: Feds withhold Vermont Yankee report from public By Kathryn Casa | Vermont Guardian Posted October 21, 2005 Federal regulators released their the long-awaited draft report on a proposed power uprate at the Vermont Yankee, but only to the nuclear power stations owners, not the public claiming the information it contains is proprietary. The Nuclear Regulatory Commissions safety evaluation was also sent Friday to the Advisory Commission on Reactor Safeguards, a quasi-independent panel within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that is scheduled to convene at the Quality Inn in Brattleboro Nov. 15-16 to hear arguments filed by the state of Vermont and the New England Coalition. Both parties are formally designated as intervenors in the case before the NRC, in which Vermont Yankee officials are seeking approval to increase power output at the plant by 20 percent. In a letter sent Friday to NRC staff, New England Coalition technical advisor Ray Shadis said the limited time his organization will have to review the report strikes us as unfair. He said intervenors will have little time to review the highly technical information before they must respond to it on Nov. 15. The intervenors had also not been informed about the specifics of the meeting, including how much time and in what format they would be allowed to respond, Shadis complained. The full committee of the ACRS will also meet in closed session at the end of the month, or in early December, at NRC headquarters in Rockville, MD, to discuss the questions, which must either be answered or dismissed before the uprate application can be decided. The Vermont meetings will be open to the public. Although the agenda was not complete on Friday, according to a preliminary schedule, both morning sessions will be set aside for technical presentations by the NRC staff and Entergy to address the question of containment overpressure, steam dryer cracking and the results of the NRC inspection of the plant. The afternoon sessions are expected to be set aside for interested parties and members of the public to voice their views. People who wish to speak may contact ACRS staff member Ralph Carusa in advance at (301) 415-8065. There will also be a sign-up sheet at the meeting. Speakers will be heard in the order that they sign up. Caruso said no signs will be allowed at the meeting. Vermont Guardian PO Box 335 Winooski, VT 05404 site map| contact information| privacy policyNorthern Vermont: PO Box 335, Winooski, VT 05404 Southern Vermont: 139 Main Street, Suite 702, Brattleboro, VT 05301 Contact: 802.861.4880 (ph) | 802.861.6388 (fax) | 877.231.5382 (toll-free) ©2005 Vermont Guardian | ***************************************************************** 22 Hudson Valley News: Legislative Democrats want NRC to look at Indian Point Monday, October 24, 2005 The Democratic caucus of the Orange County Legislature is calling on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to take a very serious look at all safety features at Indian Point to correct any inadequacies that might exist. The lawmakers request comes after the latest round of warning siren tests for the nuclear power plant failed last week when two-thirds of the sirens did not work on a backup system. You dont get a second chance to warn people if there is an incident that will affect the safety and welfare of people in Orange County, said Democrat Minority Leader Anthony Marino. The safety and welfare of the residents of Orange County cannot be disregarded regardless of what it will cost to protect them. Entergy must have a first line series of warnings and a second testing must be done as soon as possible to see that this is so. Last week, County Executive Edward Diana demanded that the problems be fixed and that a new fail safe system promised by IP owner Entergy be put in place as soon as possible. Entergy said it will seek to move up its timetable and have it installed by the end of next year. HEAR today's news on MidHudsonRadio.com, the Hudson Valley's only Internet radio news report. ***************************************************************** 23 Guardian Unlimited: The answer is not written in the wind With the North Sea energy bounty gone, ministers face chilling reality this winter Larry Elliott, economics editor Monday October 24, 2005 The Guardian Remember the three-day week? It was such a long time ago that Tony Blair was an Oxford undergraduate and the Tory Tony Blair - David Cameron - was seven. Industry, though, is worried that we could be heading right back to 1973-74 because a tough winter will lead to such severe shortages of power that the only way the government will be able to ensure the public keeps warm is by pulling the plug on business. Energy, according to Sir Digby Jones, is now the biggest issue troubling his CBI members - bigger than the state of the economy, pensions or the threat from China. What is more, it goes far deeper than whether power supplies to industry are disrupted this winter, damaging though that would be. The crisis has a number of strands. One is that energy is becoming dearer. Sir Digby says that his members are paying double what they were two years ago; at a time of cut-throat competition, business is forced to absorb that increase in its profit margins. A second is that the days when Britain was self-sufficient in energy are coming to an end. Oil exports and imports are now broadly in balance, while gas is already being imported. Sir Digby's worry about this winter - contested by ministers and some in the energy industry - is that inadequate planning has meant there is not enough storage capacity for imported gas, and a cold snap lasting a week or two would exhaust reserves. Within a couple of years this problem will be overcome with the opening of a pipeline from Norway and other new sources of imports. But this will only help to keep existing gas capacity going; it will not solve the problem of replacing clapped-out coal and nuclear plants. The reason gas has become crucial is that between now and 2020 a chunk of Britain's coal-fired and most of its nuclear power stations will have closed - and they currently account for more than 50% of power generation. In the medium term, the UK will rely heavily on gas from Russia and the Middle East, with all that means in terms of vulnerability to political instability and higher prices. Finally, there is the question of climate change and Britain's obligations to meet its pledges to cut carbon emissions. The plan is to increase the power generated by renewable sources to 20% of total output by 2020. In practice, the government is banking on a huge increase in wind power, considered by many energy experts to be absurdly optimistic. Denmark, for example, generates 16% of national demand from wind power and is seen as the example for Britain to follow. Back-up One of the main drawbacks, however, is that sometimes the wind doesn't blow and at other times it blows so hard that the turbines have to be shut down. The really cold spells in winter tend to be associated with high pressure and little or no wind. In those circumstances, you either have alternative sources of supply - in Denmark's case hydroelectric power from Norway and Sweden - or you have a big problem. The more wind power you have, the more back-up you need, and if that back-up capacity is only being used part of the time it will be expensive to build and could be more environmentally damaging to run. The Renewable Energy Foundation concluded that "over-deployment of randomly intermittent renewables, such as wind power, to the exclusion of firm generating plant, such as tidal and biomass, may actually make the overall system more dependent, not less, on fossil systems". The energy consultant Hugh Sharman puts it even more starkly. In a forthcoming article for the Institution of Civil Engineering, he says wind power will "do nothing" to offset the inevitable loss of firm generating capacity, and £40bn-£50bn needs to be spent by 2020 on new generating capacity from a diversity of sources. "At the time of writing, and considering that almost nothing of substance is being considered, this is a frightening challenge," he says. So what next? The first option is the status quo: expand the use of gas and wind power. That does not sound especially sensible, and there is evidence that the government is uneasy about having all its eggs in two baskets. That's why the second option - a return to nuclear - is gaining support. The government's chief scientist, Sir David King, said last week that an expansion of nuclear power might be needed both to meet environmental targets and to avoid over-reliance on Russian gas. He is one of the prime minister's most trusted advisers, so his words carry weight. The downside of the nuclear option is that it is expensive, solves one environmental threat by creating another, has problems with waste disposal and plant decommissioning and, unless the government can circumvent planning laws, would take a long time to bring on stream. A third option would be to approach the problem from the other end. At present the assumption is that the supply of energy has to increase to meet ever-rising demand. The alternative would be to say that we already consume too much energy and the aim should be to cut back. For this to happen, there would need to be a proper, all-embracing international agreement, including both the developed and the developing world, not the botched job that led to the limited Kyoto deal. By far the best worked-out method of securing a global accord is the contraction and convergence model, which sets a ceiling on greenhouse gas emissions consistent with preventing global warming and establishes a timetable for apportioning the right to pollute equally to everybody on the planet. A year or so ago, campaigners for the model thought they were getting somewhere with the government, but ministers appear to have gone cold on the idea, perhaps because spelling out the facts to the public is politically unpalatable. Balanced portfolio The Engineering Employers Federation today calls for an expansion of nuclear power as part of a balanced energy portfolio. Its director general, Martin Temple, says: "Energy is now right at the top of the agenda and there is no time to lose in putting in place a long-term strategy that will provide a competitive, reliable and secure supply, and generate significant reduction in emissions. Failure to do so will mean relying on new technology and energy efficiency to come to our aid, which alone is unlikely to deliver on any of these fronts." There are no soft options. After the last three-day week we took the bounty from the North Sea and blew it. After three fat decades, a reality check looms. larry.elliott@guardian.co.uk [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005 ***************************************************************** 24 Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Ailing veterans blame their MS on Gulf War [seattlepi.com] Wednesday, September 28, 2005 Their mission now is to spread the word about other illnesses By MIKE BARBER SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER On a morning at Westlake Center, they were a couple of wives and moms spending quality time downtown, meeting at a coffee shop to catch up on their lives. Yet Julie Mock, 38, of Woodinville and Elizabeth Burris, 50, of Tacoma are also sisters-in-arms, exposed accidentally to deadly nerve gases. As veterans of the 1991 Persian Gulf War, they are among perhaps 450 men and women across the country who blame their multiple sclerosis on that war's poisonous stew. Dan DeLong / P-I Elizabeth Burris, left, and Julie Mock were both exposed to a toxic plume during the Persian Gulf War. Though overshadowed by today's costlier war in Iraq, Persian Gulf War veterans are still taking casualties. Of the 700,000 U.S. troops who served there in 1991, a disproportionate number experienced serious neurological disorders. More than 65 percent have sought health care for service-related ailments. Nearly 200,000 are receiving disability compensation -- twice the rate as vets from World War II, Korea and Vietnam. The federal government this summer began notifying about 300,000 veterans of the latest neurological problem linked to service in Iraq in 1991 -- brain cancer. It was the third time the government had warned veterans about neurological problems. Brain-cancer death joined amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, commonly known as Lou Gehrig's disease, and fibromyalgia among the attacks upon nervous systems stemming from the Gulf War. In addition, Mock says, "The rate of multiple sclerosis is rising among Gulf War veterans. ... Our population of veterans is becoming increasingly ill and, after years of pushing onward, are finding ourselves too ill to work." Mock and Burris qualified for service-connected disabilities with multiple sclerosis because they documented their symptoms within a seven-year window after their honorable discharges. They are concerned about many more veterans, however, who fall outside that window. "There is a higher percentage of male Gulf War veterans than women, and men don't typically go to the doctor as quickly as women," Mock says. The two credit having their disease declared service-related with being near a Veterans Affairs "Center of Excellence" for multiple sclerosis in Seattle, one of three in the nation. The other two are in Portland and Baltimore. What's needed, they say, is a serious outreach effort and review of cases to encompass veterans who live elsewhere. "Some of our folks are so broken down that they can't think straight for themselves. If there are no family members to help, they get lost in the system," Burris says. [Map] A former Army corporal during Desert Storm, Mock today is president of a lobby and information clearinghouse, National Gulf War Veterans Resource Center Inc. Burris, a former Army captain, is a co-founder with Ed Butler of Missouri, a former Army nurse who now has multiple sclerosis, of the MSVets Web site on Yahoogroups.com. "I would like to see an honest records-review of all those cases, and to look again at fibromyalgia cases with neurological examinations," says Burris. A catchall condition of musculoskeletal pain and fatigue, fibromyalgia is suspected of masking cases of multiple sclerosis. MS involves an attack upon the central nervous system. Myelin, the protective covering that allows nerves to do their job, is destroyed. In its place is left scar tissue called sclerosis that results in a diverse range of painful, debilitating and baffling symptoms. To fight chronic fatigue from their conditions, MS sufferers take Ritalin, a stimulant. The problem is determining when MS stems from environmental or other sources. Dr. Steven Hunt, director of the Department of Veterans Affairs Deployment Health Clinic in Seattle and at American Lake in Pierce County, is sympathetic to the veterans' needs but also cautions that it is difficult for researchers to establish relationships between diseases and exposure with absolute certainty. "Veterans in combat who were exposed to any kind of environmental (toxins) need to be followed long term, not just when they come back for a few years," he says. For Mock, the statistical evidence is plain and personal. Three of 36 soldiers who served in detachments nearby in Iraq have been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis and one is ill with an undiagnosed condition. Nationally, one in every 700 people has the disease. "The (chemical) alarms went off but no one did anything. We just stood there in shirtsleeves. You couldn't see the plume. It was just a mist," Mock recalls of the day she was exposed. In August, the American Journal of Public Health published a study on thousands of troops who were exposed to the nerve agents sarin and cyclosarin in March 1991 when U.S. forces blew up two Iraqi ammunition caches at Al Khamisiyah. [Burris on the bus] [Zoom] Dan DeLong / P-I Elizabeth Burris rides the bus back to Tacoma after meeting fellow vet Julie Mock in Seattle. Because of her MS, Burris finds driving to Seattle too tiring. The study, commissioned by the Pentagon and conducted by the Institute of Medicine, concluded that troops exposed to the plumes from the burning caches were twice as likely to die from brain cancer as those who were not exposed. The military has been contacting 300,000 veterans exposed in the hazard area, including soldiers who served 14 years ago with several medical units from Fort Lewis. Mock and Burris never served together, either overseas or in the Fort Lewis medical units. They became acquainted two years ago when Burris invited Mock to a Seattle conference for Gulf War veterans. "I was shocked to find so many people feeling like I felt, using canes. Just a roomful of what seemed like aged people," Mock said. Both women were energetic before and during their service. After 1991, their strength waned. Joints seemed to disintegrate, becoming rheumatic and inflamed. There were night sweats, red-hot tingling sensations, headaches that lasted a week and sensitivity to heat and chemicals. In Iraq, Burris had commanded a truck company refueling U.S. Marines on missions that exposed her to toxins in and out of the Al Khamisiyah plume. Her list of environmental suspects includes not only the cloud but also disease-carrying sand fleas, mandatory inoculations against chemical and biological weapons and burning oil wells with choking smoke that blocked the sun for days. Depleted uranium dust, harmful when inhaled or ingested, or even the phosgene poison gas that can be given off by Teflon in armor burning at high temperatures, are also on her list. When she returned home from Iraq, Burris says, "I just knew something was wrong, an inner voice thing." Her husband, Clarence, a former Navy officer, said she seemed completely changed. "I believe I was totally poisoned. I was horribly chemically sensitive. I couldn't go into stores with a lot of plastics or new buildings. I would feel horribly sick," she says. Mock, meanwhile, was an Army dental hygienist serving 30 miles from Iraq's southern border. She never saw the burning oil wells nor was she near depleted uranium. Her unit, however, was within the Al Khasimiyah plume. "A lot of us began having rashes when we were still in Iraq," recalls Mock. The U.S. military at first did not believe the destroyed Iraqi munitions caches contained chemical weapons. United Nations weapons inspectors later found sarin was in Iraqi rockets there. Mock, who left the Army in December 1991, attributed spontaneous rashes to the harsh desert environment until her hair began to fall out in clumps. Her stamina over the next three years steadily decreased. Limbs went numb. On occasion, Mock wears a leg brace when MS causes her foot to drop. Her need to rest, while also trying to be a mom, "was simply debilitating," she says. "It's amazing the impact this has had on my life," Mock says. "It altered my future. Our family used to do things like hike together. Now I lag behind everyone. My older son remembers when I could do those things. Now he's angry." After serving in the Army off and on since 1973, Burris left to become an occupational therapist in 1995. Fatigue cut short her career. Burris now works a few hours occasionally to keep her license current. She also keeps active by sewing quilts for wounded soldiers from the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. While harboring strength to help rear a family, Mock channels her fury into a force within the Gulf War veterans resource center, the Paralyzed Veterans of America and other efforts. "It's anger that keeps me going," she says. "I've got to do something constructive with it. Nobody is standing up for us." MORE INFORMATION + To reach Julie Mock and Elizabeth Burris, write: juliemock@ngwrc.orgor MSVets.com@Yahoogroups.com. + For a list of military units considered to have been exposed to the Al Khamisiyah sarin plume in 1991, which includes several medical groups that were from Fort Lewis, see http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct1996/n10261996_9610266.html. + For information about the recent Institute of Medicine study of brain cancer deaths in Gulf War veterans and help with health issues, see www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/news/jul05/news_20050726_001.shtml. P-I reporter Mike Barber can be reached at 206-448-8018 or mikebarber@seattlepi.com. Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com ©1996-2005 Seattle Post-Intelligencer ***************************************************************** 25 OERP: Occupational Energy Research Program (2006-101) | CDC/NIOSH The NIOSH Occupational Energy Research Program was developed to conduct relevant, unbiased research to identify and quantify health effects among workers exposed to ionizing radiation and other agents; to develop and refine exposure assessment methods; to effectively communicate study results to workers, scientists, and the public; to contribute scientific information for the prevention of occupational injury and illness; and to adhere to the highest standards of professional ethics and concern for workers’ health, safety and privacy. The primary reasons OERP was developed are to; more fully understand radiation cancer risk factors in occupational cohorts, To evaluate the significance of health outcomes in the DOE and other radiation exposed workers, and to inform workers, the scientific community, and the public of the health risks associated with exposures to radiological, chemical, and other stressors. Entire Document 2006-101.pdf (619KB; 2 pgs) [ ] [2006-101 Cover] Related Resources/Publications: Occupational Energy Research Program National Academies review of OERP http://www4.nas.edu/ cp.nsf/Projects+_by+_PIN/ NRSB-O-05-01-A? OpenDocument NIOSH Office of Compensation Analysis and Support (OCAS) ***************************************************************** 26 IEER press release: NRC on Depleted Uranium Disposal Plans For Immediate Release, Friday, October 24, 2005 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Deals Blow to Depleted Uranium (DU) Disposal Plans Shallow Burial in Low-Level Waste Dumps Would Far Exceed Radiation Dose Limits, Independent Research Shows DU Poses Long-Term Risks Comparable to Plutonium-Contaminated Wastes Takoma Park, Maryland, October 24, 2005: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has handed a stinging reversal to advocates of a New Mexico uranium enrichment facility by requiring licensers to hear testimony from Dr. Arjun Makhijani, an independent expert, on the environmental impacts of disposing of depleted uranium (DU), a waste material that will be generated by the plant. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), the NRC staff, and LES, the corporate consortium that is seeking the plant license, had sought to exclude the Dr. Makhijani's testimony. Earlier this week the NRC ruled that the ASLB had improperly excluded the testimony and that it should be considered in license hearings scheduled to begin at the NRC headquarters near Washington D.C. on Monday, October 24. "The NRC ruling that environmental impacts need to be explicitly taken into account in the enrichment plant licensing process completely undermines the premise on which the NRC staff prepared its Environmental Impact Statement for the LES plant," Dr. Makhijani explained. "The staff's position and that of LES had been that an environmental impact calculation was unnecessary since DU was Class A waste, the least radioactive and risky low-level category, which could therefore be disposed of in large amounts in shallow burial facilities, such as the one run by Envirocare near Clive, Utah." Dr. Makhijani is principal author of two reports on DU prepared for interveners in the NRC license hearings and president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER), in Takoma Park, Maryland. The interveners are the Nuclear Information and Resource Service and Public Citizen. The NRC ruled that its staff and ASLB had been wrong in concluding that the present low-level waste regulations allowed large amounts of DU, such as those from a commercial enrichment plant, to be classified as Class A low-level waste without an explicit environmental impact analysis. An IEER analysis showed that peak radiation doses from burying LES wastes in shallow trenches would produce peak radiation doses at least a hundred times higher than the legal limit of 25 millirem per year. IEER also concluded that proposed DU disposal sites Utah and in Andrews County, Texas are unsuitable and should not be used for wastes the LES plant would generate. "Land near Clive, Utah, and near the other proposed waste disposal facility in Andrews County, Texas, has been used for grazing in the past," added Dr. Brice Smith, Senior Scientist at IEER and co-author of the DU reports. "Use of the either site for food crops or ranching in the future could result in radiation doses that are thousands of times larger than the allowable limits." The NRC also ordered its staff to examine whether existing low-level waste classification regulations need to be amended in order to take into account the impact of disposing of large amounts of depleted uranium as a generic matter separate from any particular licensing process. "This NRC decision not only throws the LES plant into question, it also raises the same issue about wastes from a plant proposed by the U.S. Enrichment Corporation for Ohio," Dr. Makhijani said. "It creates a large new uncertainty about DU disposal methods and costs. The industry will have to go back to the drawing board on costs and methods of DU disposal." IEER's analysis shows that DU waste disposal would very likely not comply with radiation protection rules at any shallow land burial facility. It also found that Waste Control Specialists, the company seeking a license for low-level waste disposal in Texas, is not qualified to receive or handle uranium waste because its application shows no understanding of some of the basic radiological characteristics of uranium. Putting DU in a proper chemical form, uranium dioxide, treating and encapsulating it for durability, and disposing it of in deep geologic repository would cost $2.5 billion or more for the DU projected to be generated by the proposed LES plant. IEER's reports on depleted uranium disposal risks and costs are available on its web site at http://www.ieer.org/reports/du/LESrptfeb05.pdfand http://www.ieer.org/reports/du/LESrptupdate.pdf -30- On this site: + Costs and Risks of Management and Disposal of Depleted Uranium from the National Enrichment Facility Proposed to be Built in Lea County New Mexico by LES(February 2005) and update to this report(July 2005) + Article summarizing the Feb. 2005 report, Science for Democratic Action, June 2005 + Article about uranium enrichment, Science for Democratic Action, March 2005 Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Comments to ieer[at]ieer.org Takoma Park, Maryland, USA Posted October 24, 2005 ***************************************************************** 27 NIOSH Update: NIOSH Will Discuss Energy Research Program at Oct. 27 Public Meeting Contact: Fred Blosser (202) 401-3749 October 24, 2005 The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) will hold a public meeting on Oct. 27, 2005, in Washington, D.C., to discuss current research and potential future studies under NIOSH's occupational energy research program. The research program conducts and supports rigorous scientific studies to address questions as to whether employment in nuclear facilities may be associated with increased risk for cancer and other adverse health effects. It is administered under a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. Department of Energy. The meeting will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Washington Court Hotel, 525 New Jersey Avenue N.W., Washington, DC 20001. Further information about the meeting is available from Patty Gudlewski, NIOSH Division of Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations, and Field Studiesk at 513-841-4419 or by e-mail at . NIOSH originally announced the meeting and invited stakeholder participation in the Federal Register on Aug. 17, 2005. The Federal Register notice is available at More information on the NIOSH Occupational Energy Research Program is available at . ***************************************************************** 28 [NukeNet] South Korean Low Level Waste Dump Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:39:34 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) To all people concerned about the problems of nuclear energy I received the request below from friends in South Korea. The South Korean government is pressing ahead with its plan to hold an undemocratic vote regarding a low level radioactive waste dump site. I urge you to read the attached letter and to support this campaign. The citizens' vote is scheduled for November 2nd, so there is not much time left. Please send the protest letter to the President of South Korea as soon as possible. Masako Sawai Citizens' Nuclear Information Center 3F Kotobuki Bdg, 1-58-15, Higashi-Nakano, Nakano-ku, Tokyo 164-0003 Phone: 81-3-5330-9520 Fax: 81-3-5330-9530 http://cnic.jp/english/ cnic@nifty.com Urgent message from South Korean Activists against Nuclear Waste Dump Site Please send Korean environmental and democracy activists international support for our campaign to stop an illegal nuclear waste vote scheduled to take place November 2nd! Background South Korea, the world’s sixth-largest nuclear power-producing nation, now operates 20 nuclear power plants, which provide roughly 40 percent of its total electricity needs. However, since 1978, the Korean government has built only nuclear power plants ­ it has not built any nuclear waste dump sites. The reason is simple: we are a small, densely populated country, andlocal communities and environmental groups have successfully campaigned to stop construction at every site that has been proposed. Most of our nation’s citizens recognize that a nuclear dump site will never be a “good neighbor”, and they have quickly joined our protests. What’s Happening Now But in 2004, the Korean government got smarter. Realizing that public opposition to high-level dumps is difficult to overcome, governmentannounced that it would build a low and mid-level radioactive waste dump site ­ but would not attempt to store high-level waste at this site. Further, the government is offering a huge financial windfall to the site selected:US$300 million to any community that would accept a low and mid-level radioactive waste dump. An additionalUS$5-10 million will go to the site annually. Finally, the headquarters office of Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power Corporation will be relocated to the host area, providing jobs and more economic incentives. The government has actively promoted the dump site with a campaign of lies, telling communities that the radioactive waste dump will not contaminate the surrounding environment, poses no health risks to those living near the site, and will encourage economic development in the area. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE NOT OPPOSING THE DUMP SITE! Instead, they are competing for it! The reaction of many local governments to the central government’s proposal has typicallychanged from ``NIMBY'' (not-in-my-backyard) to ``PIMFY'' (please-in-my-front yard), because of the supposed economic benefits. Many local governments (small cities and rural areas) find these incentives attractive because they foresee both development and economic prosperity from government’s funding of the dump site. The candidate cities and counties are Pohang, Yeongdeok, and Gyeongju along the eastern coast and Gusan in the western coast. Based on the results of regional voting scheduled to take place on November 2, 2005, the site with the highest popular vote will become the national dumpsite, given that at least one-third of that region’s residents cast a vote. Serious Problems This process is fraught with many serious problems. First, the candidate sites have not been screened for geological stability and environmental impact. One of candidate sites, for example, is expected to be under water during heavy rains, is near a national park and protective zone for cultural properties, and is on an active earthquake fault-line. Another site is located near the source of the region’s water supply. Second, democracy in anelection process has disappeared. Local governments which want to be selected for the nuclear waste dump site have mobilized their own public servants to campaign illegally. They have given money to people to buy “yes” votes and manipulated the application of absentee ballots. Because of these blatant abuses of government authority and financial corruption, we strongly insist that the Korean government immediately stop the election. You Can Help Us! We are asking for the help of the international community to shine a light on these abuses and help us stop the voting and the dump. We ask our friends-YOU- to spread this message of our concern and hope as much as you can and to send letters to South Korean President Rho Moo-Hyun. Write President Roh today, please! Here is a sample letter to President Roh.Please modify or add your own comments if you with. His e-mail address is president@president.go.kr and please also send a CC to ma@kfem.or.krso that we can see how many people in the international community are supporting us. We appreciate your help and cooperation a lot­ lives are at stake, and the government should not be allowed to “buy” a dump site locationthat may be dangerous to our citizens and future generations. All the best, Ma Yong-Un International Campaigner Korean Federation for Environmental Movement-Friends of the Earth Korea(KFEM-FoE Korea) * A sample of letter for the message is below. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- Phase Out Nuclear Energy. Promote Renewable Energy. Respect Democracy! Dear Honorable President Roh Moo-Hyun, I am writing you to express my surprise and concern about the illegal, anti-democratic, and unsafe process your government is undertaking to build a mid- and low-radioactive waste dump sitein South Korea. The South Korean government should know that no nation has been able to create a technology to isolate these harmful and fatal materials for the full period of nuclear waste toxicity. Radioactive waste remains deadly for up to hundreds of millions of years. In order to protect ourselves and our future generations, we will have to spend enormous amounts of money to monitor and safe-keep the waste. Nuclear power and its wastes are not clean and sustainable, but costly and dangerous. Instead of bribing communities to accept deadly waste and spending large sums to construct burial sites for the waste, the Korean government should instead spend its resources on phasing out nuclear power plants and developing and promoting safe, clean, and sustainable renewable energy sources. We urge you to stop the undemocratic voting process to choose a site for nuclear waste disposal and respect democracyand your own people, so that the world will respect South Korea’s example of wise leadership. I will look forward to seeing your wise decision soon. Yours sincerely, Your name Your organization Country _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 29 [NukeNet] A Tribe Split by Nuclear Waste -- NPR report on PFS Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:39:39 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) My co-worker Mary Olson caught this report on Friday morning and alerted me to it: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4967885&sourceCode=RSS ---Kevin Kamps, NIRS _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 30 AFP: Australian Aborigines Wants Full Uranium Debate Monday October 24, 2:56 PM CANBERRA (Dow Jones)--The Northern Land Council, which represents aborigines in Australia's Northern Territory, Monday called for an open debate of uranium-related issues. The council wants a transparent debate to ensure that traditional owners are informed about issues arising from mining, such as global warming, said council chairman John Daly. "The scientific community broadly accepts that the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is contributing to global warming," Daly said in a statement. "The only responsible course is that Australia carefully consider all options, including uranium mining for overseas nuclear power," he said, adding that this will provide much-needed certainty for all stakeholders. Daly was commenting ahead of a scheduled attendance by council representatives before a parliamentary committee that is examing Australia's uranium industry. Hearings are being held Monday in Darwin, the territory's capital. The inquiry is examining the global demand for Australian uranium, the strategic importance of these resources and the potential implications for greenhouse gas emission reductions. The Northern Land Council was established in 1973 to represent traditional Aboriginal landowners and Aboriginal people in the northern area of the Northern Territory. A day after the federal government assumed control for approval of uranium mining in the Northern Territory on Aug. 4, Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane said "no new mines will be approved without the consent of the traditional owners and full satisfaction of all environmental and safety legislation". Three uranium mines currently operate in Australia, including the Ranger mine in the Northern Territory. Ranger is owned and operated by Energy Resources of Australia Ltd. (ERA.AU), which is a 68.4%-owned subsidiary of Rio Tinto Plc. (RTP). Ranger is located about 230 kilometers east of Darwin in the Kakadu National Park, with the project area leased from traditional owners. ERA expects the mine to close in 2008 and processing of ore to finish in 2011. It plans to hold talks in mid 2006 with indigenous communities about the possible development of the nearby rich Jabiluka uranium deposit, which is reportedly opposed by some traditional owners. Australia hosts about 40% of known world resources of uranium but only accounts for about 22% of global production of the fuel. By Ray Brindal, Dow Jones Newswires, 612 6208 0902; ray.brindal@dowjones.com -Edited by Ian Pemberton Copyright © 2005Dow Jones &Company Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 31 Saratoga Herald Tribune: Nuclear waste too great a hazard op heraldtribune.com The Bush administration and Gov. Jeb Bush are advocating the use of nuclear energy to solve our present energy crisis. Are they aware, or do they just not care about the health hazards of nuclear wastes? Some 30 years ago, this issue was brought to my attention. A news item in your Oct. 12 newspaper reported, "Scientists and environmentalists said Tuesday \[Oct. 11\] that proposed standards for the federal government's Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage site in Nevada could have 'disastrous' public health effects for generations to come." The Environmental Protection Agency was court-ordered to amend its standards on radiation emissions for the next 1 million years. Your story noted, "Under the amended standards, the Yucca Mountain site can emit up to 15 millirem of radiation per year for the first 10,000 years. However, from then on until 1 million years, the site will be allowed to radiate up to 350 millirem every year. "A standard chest X-ray gives off 10 millirem every year. "Kevin Kamps, a nuclear waste specialist with the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, said such high levels of radiation would create 'nightmarishly unacceptable' cancer rates in people living around Yucca Mountain." New nuclear plants have not been built since the accident at Three Mile Island some years ago. "Not in my back yard" has been the response of other communities as to permanent nuclear waste storage. At the present time, nuclear wastes are in many different localities in the United States. Even to have one location for permanent storage does not lessen the health danger for the rest of us. These wastes will be transported over our highways. We will all be exposed along the way to the added danger of cancer as well as the unthinkable possibility of nuclear accidents on our roads. Explore solar and wind energy. Patricia C. Haupt Sarasota Last modified: October 24. 2005 12:00AM ***************************************************************** 32 AU ABC: NT politicians remain quiet over dump plan. 24/10/2005. ABC News Online Northern Territory Chief Minister Clare Martin and the Country Liberal Party's two representatives in Federal Parliament are remaining tight-lipped about their meeting in Darwin this morning. Ms Martin discussed the prospect of a national nuclear waste dump being built in the Territory with the Member for Solomon Dave Tollner and Senator Nigel Scullion. Mr Tollner and Senator Scullion have refused to comment, saying they will not divulge the details of a private meeting with the Chief Minister. Ms Martin has made no public comment on the waste dump since Friday, when the Northern Land Council castigated the Territory Government for its handling of the issue. ***************************************************************** 33 NPR : A Tribe Split by Nuclear Waste [Listen to this story...] by David Kestenbaum [Neighbors Leon Bear, tribe chairman, and Margene Bullcreek no longer talk.] View Gallery A lease to temporarily store nuclear waste on the Skull Valley Goshute reservation has divided the community. Neighbors Leon Bear, tribe chairman, and Margene Bullcreek no longer talk. Morning Edition, October 21, 2005 · On a nondescript patch of desert in Utah live two neighbors who no longer talk to each other. Nuclear waste is the source of their disagreement. Leon Bear and Margene Bullcreek, with about a dozen others, live on the Goshute Native American reservation in Skull Valley. Leon Bear wants to rent out the reservation to store much of the nation's spent nuclear fuel. Bullcreek, who lives across the street from Bear, hates the idea. But after eight years of review, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is now putting the finishing touches on a license. If the project goes ahead, some 4,000 canisters of nuclear waste could be brought to the reservation and stay there for up to 40 years. ***************************************************************** 34 AU ABC: Land Council seeks greater mining contract rights 19:44 (ACST)Monday, 24 October 2005. 20:44 (AEDT)Monday, 24 The Northern Land Council (NLC) has told a federal parliamentary inquiry that the Land Rights Act needs to be changed for Aboriginal people to really benefit from uranium mining. NLC chief executive Norman Frye told the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry and Resources that elements of the NT Aboriginal Land Rights Act prevent traditional owners from signing direct commercial agreements with resources companies to mine their land. "We want all the constraints removed out of the Land Rights Act so that we really can play on the same landscape as everybody else," he said. Mr Frye says media magnate Kerry Packer was able to negotiate 10 per cent royalties from a mine on his land and, if the NLC could get a similar agreement, they would be doing it as well. In a later submission, the Minerals Council told the hearing that the changes Mr Frye advocated were not needed for Indigenous people to sign commercial agreements with mining companies. Meanwhile, the NT Environment Centre has attacked the regulation of Australia's nuclear mining industry at the parliamentary committee hearing. Environment Centre coordinator Peter Robertson criticised the regulators ability to police safety at the Ranger uranium mine. Mr Robertson told the hearings that links between the Office of the Supervising Scientist, the mining industry and the NT Department of Mines and Energy were too close. "One of the concerns we've had for example is that over the years there have been quite a steady flow of personnel between senior management of the Office of Supervising Scientist and the uranium mining company itself," he said. Opposition resources spokesman Martin Ferguson told Mr Robertson he was making serious allegations and asked him to provide evidence of maladministration by the regulator. Mr Robertson replied that his words were being twisted. ***************************************************************** 35 AU ABC: ERA grilled about uranium regulations 07:44 (ACST)Tuesday, 25 October 2005. 08:44 (AEDT)Tuesday, 25 A federal parliamentary inquiry has questioned mining company Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) about the way uranium mining is regulated. The House of Representatives committee looking into uranium mining held hearings in Darwin last night. The Northern Territory Environment Centre told the hearings that the mining regulators, including the Office of the Supervising Scientist and Northern Territory Department of Mines, were too close to industry. Opposition resources spokesman Martin Ferguson put the allegation to the managing director of ERA. "Because there's been suggestions that the supervising scientist is not rigorously doing their job in terms of putting their finger on your company with respect to the requirements of health and safety and environmental safety etcetera," he said. "What do you have to say about these comments made today by the Environment Centre of the Northern Territory?" ERA managing director Harry Kenyon Slaney said the Office of the Supervising Scientist conducted investigations at the Ranger uranium mine in late 2003 that led to the company being prosecuted. He told the hearings the regulator was transparent and rigorous in its audit of ERA. "I led the company through its first prosecution in its history and it wasn't a particularly enjoyable experience," he said. "If you want to draw the inference that the supervising scientist is in some way in our pocket, it's difficult to see why they would follow that course of action." Northern Territory Mining Minister Kon Vatskalis did not make a submission to the committee or attend the hearings in Darwin, and instead sent three officials to answer questions. Committee member Jackie Kelly grilled the Territory Government's uranium officer Keith Taylor about links between auditors of the Ranger uranium mine and its operators. "Have any of them gone on to work for ERA or related companies?" she said. Mr Taylor replied: "I couldn't give you an answer to that one, not to my knowledge... again I'm not aware of these people's backgrounds... but as far as I'm aware, no." ***************************************************************** 36 Vanunu Says It Like It Is Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:01:56 -0500 (CDT) Forwarded with Compliments of Government of the USA in Exile (GUSAE): Free Americans Proclaiming Total Emancipation and Working Towards Democracy. NOTE: All honor to Mordechai Vanunu. -- kl, pp Mordechai Vanunu on Nuclear Inspections for Iran But Not Israel From: "Graham Jukes" Date: October 20, 2005 6:41:00 PM EST Subject: Transcript of radio interview with Mordechai Vanunu From: mark glenn Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 12:37 PM Below is the transcript of an eye-opening interview that took place between peace activist Mordechai Vanunu and talk-show host Hesham Tillawi on the television program Current Issues. TILLAWI: Well, I do believe that we have Mordechai Vanunu with usMordechai, are you with us? VANUNU: Yes. TILLAWI: Good Morning, I know that it is 4 oclock in the morning there in Jerusalem. Folks, Mordechai Vanunu has spent 18 years in an Israeli jail for telling Israeli nuclear secrets. He was lured to Rome by Israeli agents and kidnapped and then sent back to Israel where he spent 18 yrs in prison and 11 of those years in solitary confinement. That is true, Mordechai? VANUNU: Yes, that is right. TILLAWI: Now, Mordechai, I have a question for you. What was it that you really felt that you must tell the world about, what was it about the Israeli nuclear program that you felt to yourself, you know I cannot continue like this, I cannot remain silent on this, I have got to tell the world about it. What was it? VANUNU: Well, the most important point is that it was the same situation that we have right now, namely that these people continue to lie and to cheat the world as well as their own citizens by denying the truth, by declaring that they do not have atomic weapons while at the same time I was working there helping to produce them. At that time there were more than 200 atomic weapons, in 1986, and it was at that time that they started to produce the most horrible of all weapons, the hydrogen bomball of this in secret, in lying and in cheating the world and all of its citizens. So I said to myself It is impossible to keep these secrets. I must report about them and to try and stop it. TILLAWI: Mordechai, there are a lot of nations that have nuclear weapons. What is it about Israel having them that makes you so nervous? VANUNU: Because Israel wants to use them, to cause genocide and holocaust on other innocent citizens. It has always been a part of Israels secret policy. And also by having them, Israel will use them as a threat to avoid making peace with the Arab world as well as imposing her policies on those peoples. As long as she has them, she will continue on in her policies of not making peace, of occupation and of neglecting the Palestinian suffering caused by the refugee camps that have existed for more than 50 years. TILLAWI: One of the Israeli professors said a few months ago that we have the nuclear capability of hitting every major European city, is that true to your knowledge? VANUNU: Yes, it is true. They can bombard any city all over the world, and not only those in Europe but also those in the United States, and by this threat what they are doing is to send a secret message to any leader and to any government that they have the ability to use them aggressively and to blackmail them, to blackmail Europe and the United States, every where, in every state around the world. It was Europe and the United States who helped them get this power, and now that Israel has it, she is coming back and saying to them We will not obey any orders that you give us. No international law, no international agreement, no UN resolutions, and all because of these atomic weapons that they have. TILLAWI: Where do you live now, Mordechai? VANUNU: Since my release in 2004 I am not allowed to leave the country, all this after serving 18 years. So I decided that I wanted to be someplace where I will not see the ugliness of Jewish society, so I decided to stay in East Jerusalem among Palestinians and among foreigners. Right now I am staying in the guesthouse of St. Georges Cathedral, the Anglican Church. I cannot leave Israel, so I am living amongst the Palestinians and under Israeli occupation, because East Jerusalem is part of the occupation since 1967. TILLAWI: Now, you also have converted from Judaism to Christianity, is that right? VANUNU: Yes TILLAWI: Now, I have a question for you, and I do not want to put you on the spot, but two things happened in your life that are profound. The first is that, according to some people, you betrayed Israel and in their eyes you are considered a traitor, but that is not what I want to ask you about. What I do want to ask you is this: What is the process that went through your head twice in your life? One of them is when you decided to expose the nuclear capability of Israel, your own country, and the other one which is also profound was when you changed your religion to Christianity. Now, those two things are profound and I do not think that there are too many people in the world who have two major shifts in their lives like these. What made Mordechai Vanunu betray his country and then change his religion? VANUNU: Yes, this is a very good question and very important. You are right, it is not usual to have a person come to these hard conclusions. As far as my conversion, it started at the very early age of 15 or 16. I was raised in the Jewish religion and in a Jewish family. Israel and Judaism were considered as one nation, one big family, one tribe. I began criticizing and rejecting Judaism over the point of view that these Jews are teaching injustice through their Judaism. In the same way that Jesus Christ also criticized Judaism 2,000 years ago, I was unwilling to accept what they teach, and later converted to the opposite of Judaism. The Jewish tribe teaches that there is only one Chosen people of God. They teach of their superiority, taking literally word-by-word the writings in the old bible. And I decided therefore that after 2,000 years these ideas were nonsense. There are 6 billion people around the world, and all of them are equal, all are part of the human race. There is no such thing as a super race. We should all respect and love each other, and that was the beginning of my rejecting Judaism and my accepting of Christianity, of following the teachings of Jesus Christ and of accepting humanity. I am not a religious man, I am not going to become a priest. I did all of this for my humanity and for my beliefs. So, I chose my own way and began criticizing the Jewish faith. Those who teach Judaism run the lives of those under them, telling them what they must do every hour of every day, issuing many orders about everything, from waking up in the morning to going to sleep, but at the same time they do not teach them to respect other human beings, to accept non-Jews and to believe that non-Jews are like them. They teach that only the Jews are the chosen people. So, this is Judaism, a collection of primitive traditions thousands of years old that have not changed. The world has changed in the last 2,000 years and the Jewish people need to accept and understand this change, and especially if they want a democratic country. You cannot have a state and run it as they did 2,000 years ago. They came to Palestine in the name of the Bible and in the name of their god and took this land that was promised to them thousands of years ago. In the name of this god, they took the land, expelled the people and gave them hard, cruel, barbaric lives for the last 60 years. This way of thinking, this faith cannot exist within this new age, and it was this that also led me to expose Israels nuclear secrets. TILLAWI: Mordechai, you have been living amongst the Palestinians for a while now. What do you think, are they the terrorists that we have all been hearing about? VANUNU: I have been living amongst the Palestinians now for 15 months, but I have been following the Palestinian situation now since the 1980s. Now I am here living among them, watching them, meeting with them, eating with them, enjoying life with them and seeing how the Israelis have succeeded in portraying them all over the world as terrorists. But this is not true. They are very peaceful people and lovers of peace. TILLAWI: What do you think should happen? How do you think that this conflict should be settled? VANUNU: Well, if the Jewish people want a solution, it can happen only by one way, and this is by accepting the Palestinians and by treating them as equal human beings. If the Israelis want peace, then the proof that you want peace is by respecting the people of the other side and seeing them as equals. The Jews must stop seeing themselves as being part of a master race. The only solution is one state, one society where everyone has equal rights and have the same rights in all categories. If the Jews have the right of return based on what happened 2,000 years ago, then the Palestinians have the right of return after 50 years as well. With one state, there will be no more conflict over land and there will be no more enemies. Israel will then not need atomic weapons because she will learn to live in peace with her neighbors instead of trying to live as a racist supremacist state. The Israelis are not willing to accept this though because they want a Jewish state. Therefore, a secular, non-religious state is the only solution. TILLAWI: Of course, Israel will not accept this option because of demographic concerns. VANUNU: Yes, that is true and has always been part of Israels plan. This has been the reason for Israel not accepting refugees and for isolating the Palestinians in places such as Gaza. TILLAWI: What do you think of the Gaza withdrawal? VANUNU: The Gaza withdrawal was nothing but a big piece of propaganda trying to show how the Jews were being forced off their land. Of course, what they do not say is the fact that this land was Palestinian land and that it was taken from them by force. So the Zionists used this for brainwashing the people in the United States into thinking about Jewish suffering. But secretly the plan is to use this as a way of isolating 1.4 million Palestinians. The demographic issue is very strong in the mind of the Jewish people and so what they want to do is to eventually move all the Palestinian people into this very small area. All the while, the Sharon government continues to build more settlements in the West Bank. TILLAWI: Back in 1999, 35 members of Congress wrote a letter to President Clinton a concerning you. His response to that letter was I share with you your concern over Vanunus plight and over Israels nuclear program. We have repeatedly urged Israel to adhere to the treaty and to accept comprehensive international atomic energy safeguards and inspections. To your knowledge, have the Israeli nuclear sites ever been inspected by an international nuclear agency? VANUNU: No, it has never opened its program to international inspections. TILLAWI: So, why are we after Iran then to open its doors to inspections, but no one is asking Israel to do the same? Why is that? VANUNU: This is a very strange situation that has been developed and accepted by the Western states since the 1960s. It goes back about 40 years. My view is that Europe and America are and have been under a long-term agenda of blackmail by the Israelis. In the first case, the Israelis constantly bring up the Holocaust and what happened to the Jews during WWII, blaming the West for it and then using this as the justification for possessing nuclear weapons as a way of preventing this from ever happening again. TILLAWI: Mordechai, do you know how many Atomic Weapons they possess? VANUNU: At the time that I first revealed Israels nuclear weapons program, they had more than 200 atomic weapons and were able to produce every year about 40 kilograms of plutonium. This amount can be used in making 10 atomic weapons each year. What that means is that since 1986 they were able to make another 200. TILLAWI: In your opinion, against whom do the Israelis plan to use these weapons? VANUNU: Their target has always been the Arab states. TILLAWI: How real do you think this threat really is? VANUNU: It is very, very real. Very, very close. Its easy. Its simple. All that they need is one crazy leader in the government. They may use it one day to make the world see that they are very powerful and thus force the world to let them continue on with their racist apartheid state for the Jewish people while not accepting any other solutions and to continue rejecting any real solutions for these problems involving the Palestinian people. TILLAWI: Now, what is your situation? You have a trial coming up soon? VANUNU: My situation now is that they have renewed my restrictions for the second year. I cannot leave the country and I cannot speak to foreigners. I am not allowed to speak to you, but I continue to give interviews, so they came and arrested me on November 11th and questioned me and now have put me in a trial. It began a few weeks ago and will continue on through next year. They are accusing me of giving interviews to foreign media. I also am not allowed to go into the occupied territories, so I cannot go into Bethlehem. That is the situation now. I am facing trial and am under restrictions. TILLAWI: So, in other words you will be getting into trouble for speaking with us tonight? VANUNU: No, it was for interviews that I gave before. For speaking to you tonight Tillawi I will have to face another trial. TILLAWI: Mordechai, I want to thank you for being with us. It has been a very informative interview, and I just want to say thank you again and good luck to you. VANUNU: Thank you very much and good luck to you and to your audience, and I hope to be with you all one day soon. Thank you. TILLAWI: Okay folks, that was Mordechai Vanunu, former Israeli nuclear scientist who told the world what was happening in Israel. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------ ***An audio version of this program can be accessed by going to www.currentissues.tv and clicking on the photo of Mordechai Vanunu. Please tune in to Current Issues every Thursday evening at 9pm eastern time to hear the latest and most important news with regards to what is taking place in the Middle East. It is a no-holds-barred program that isnt afraid to tell the truth about the dangers that mankind is facing with regards to Zionism and its policies. Hesham Tillawi can also be heard Tuesday evenings at 9pm eastern time on the internet radio program entitled The Crescent and Cross Solidarity Hour with co-host Mark Glenn. The live program is dedicated to an examination of what is taking place in the Middle East and around the world from a Christian/Muslim perspective. An easy to install player program is required in order to listen to the show, which can be accessed at the following site: http://www.live365.com/downloads/player365/index.html ======================================================================== ======================== ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************