***************************************************************** 01/04/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.03 ***************************************************************** 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 BBC: Iran nuclear research troubles EU 2 Xinhua: Iran remains tough on nuclear fuel work 3 Xinhua: US freezes assets of 2 Iranian nuclear companies 4 Xinhua: Iran rejects British report on nuclear ambition 5 AFP: US freezes assets of two Iran nuclear firms 6 UPI: Commentary: Iran target 7 AFP: Iran vows no nuclear research negotiation ahead of EU talks - 8 AFP: Iran to resume suspended nuclear research 9 AFP: Western agencies say Iran out to build nuclear missile 10 AFP: US rejects NKorea demand for lifting sanctions 11 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Envoy Decries N. Korea's Conditions 12 US: Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Clamps Down on Iranian Companies 13 IHT: EU acknowledges holes in its energy policies - 14 Indian Express: Clash of two nuclear pacts 15 Japan Times: INDIA-U.S. NUCLEAR TALKS: Deal harms Indian interests NUCLEAR REACTORS 16 US: Platts: Talks may occur in next year on first new US power react 17 Xinhua: India, Japan agree to further co-op in energy sector 18 US: Register-Guard: Trojan's implosion 19 US: NRC: Sunshine Federal Register Notice 20 US: Beaver County Times Allegheny Times: Public meeting on Shippingp 21 US: NRC: blishes Clarification of Fire Protection Requirements for E NUCLEAR SECURITY 22 Guardian Unlimited: Clandestine nuclear deals traced to Sudan 23 Reuters: Venezuelan thieves steal another radioactive unit 24 AFP: CIA gave Iran nuclear design in botched plot - new book - 25 Guardian Unlimited: Intelligence report claims nuclear market thrivi NUCLEAR SAFETY 26 US: [du-list] Deployed Gulf War vets more likely to have illness 27 US: Former Pentagon Expert On DU Radiological/Biological War Crimes 28 US: [NukeNet] High levels of Strontium 90 found in goat's milk 5 29 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Utah will test water for rocket fuel chemical 30 US: Journal Star News: Uranium expert will speak at forum NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 31 US: Bradenton Herald: Tallevast group - Holes a hazard 32 US: Platts: 2006 seen as important year for fuel market 33 Irish Examiner: Nuclear waste a hazard forever 34 Pahrump Valley Times: Hard work or smart work for politicians? 35 Oxfam America: US Fails to Respond to UN Request; Western Shoshone P PEACE US DEPT. OF ENERGY 36 edmontonsun.com: Alberta's nuclear daze ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 BBC: Iran nuclear research troubles EU Last Updated: Wednesday, 4 January 2006 [A general view of Iran's first nuclear reactor, being built in Bushehr] Iran faces the threat of sanctions if it does not halt its nuclear plans European nations have called on Iran to reverse its decision on Tuesday to resume nuclear fuel research, part of its controversial nuclear programme. Germany said it viewed the announcement with "concern" and said it could "throw into doubt the exploratory talks" scheduled to be held on 18 January. France said Iran's decision was "very worrying" and would violate UN demands. The US and EU do not want Iran to produce fuel suitable for use in nuclear bombs. "We strongly urge Iran to go back on this announcement which, if it were implemented, would clearly run counter to the demands of the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) board of governors," French Foreign Ministry spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei told reporters. "Full doubts remain about the goals of Iran's nuclear program." German foreign ministry spokesman Martin Jaeger echoed Mr Mattei's comments. "We view the latest announcement from Iran that it will restart its research and development work with concern," he told a press conference. 'Not negotiable' The two members of the EU3 negotiating team, which also includes the UK, were reacting to comments made on Tuesday by Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani. [Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani] Mr Larijani warned Europe not to push Iran towards its 'second scenario' Talking to Iranian Jam-e Jam TV, Mr Larijani said Iran's nuclear fuel research was "not negotiable". "The suspension of Iran's nuclear research was a mistake and an irrational decision," Mr Larijani said. Iran suspended research in November 2003. "Nuclear research is not related to industrial production and there is no need for others to be concerned about Iran's nuclear research," he added. IRAN'S NUCLEAR STANDOFF September 2002: Wor begins on Iran's first nuclear reactor at Bushehr December 2002: Satellite photographs reveal nuclear sites at Arak and Natanz. Iran agrees to an IAEA inspection September 2003: IAEA gives Iran weeks to prove it is not pursuing atomic weapons November 2003: Iran suspends uranium enrichment and allows tougher inspections; IAEA says no proof of any weapons programme June 2004: IAEA rebukes Iran for not fully co-operating with nuclear inquiry November 2004: Iran suspends uranium enrichment as part of deal with EU August 2005: Iran rejects EU proposals and resumes work at Isfahan nuclear plant January 2006: Iran announces it will resume nuclear fuel research under the supervision of the IAEA. "If the West is concerned about Iran's deviation towards developing nuclear installations, it can be certain that no deviation will occur from nuclear research." Iran says the research will be supervised by the IAEA. Mr Larijani also denied Iran was trying to seize the initiative before the next stage of talks with the EU3 on Iran's nuclear programme scheduled to be held in Vienna at the end of the month. "We are not pessimistic about the talks, but at the same time, we warn Europe not to push Iran towards the 'second scenario'," he said. But Mr Larijani did not elaborate on what Iran's 'second scenario' was. "Our scenarios are planned in such a way that, if we lose, others in the region will lose too." ***************************************************************** 2 Xinhua: Iran remains tough on nuclear fuel work www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2006-01-05 05:07:56 TEHRAN, Jan. 4 (Xinhuanet) -- Iran, a country accused by Washington of developing nuclear weapons secretly, remains tough and resolved on its nuclear fuel cycle program in defiance of EU warnings and Russia's compromise suggestion. Ali Larijani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, said on Wednesday that Tehran's decision to resume work on nuclear fuel research was "not negotiable." "We have stated that the research work is not included in the negotiations, and research is different from and has nothing to do with the actual industrial production," Larijani was quoted by the state television as saying. Larijani's remarks came one day after Mohammad Saidi, deputy chief of Iran's Atomic Energy Agency, announced that Iran had decided to resume research work on nuclear fuel in a few days. Saidi stressed that activities to be resumed were just related to research and had nothing to do with the actual production, noting that the research would be carried out under the supervision and cooperation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday that Iran had informed the IAEA of the decision, adding that the Islamic Republic would "not retreat even one step" from its decision to resume the nuclear fuel work. IAEA Director General Mohamed Elbaradei on Tuesday reiterated the agency's position that it was important for Tehran to keep all work related to uranium enrichment suspended in order to remove suspicions of the international community over its nuclear program. The United States also urged Tehran to abide by agreements reached with the European Union. France and Germany, two members of the so-called European trio which has been negotiating with Iran on its nuclear program for more than two years, on Wednesday issued warnings that Iran's rigid mentality would have a negative impact on a new round of negotiations. French Foreign Ministry spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei said that Paris strongly called on Iran to draw back its decision because the resumption of fuel research would run counter to demands of the IAEA and impose serious doubts on the continuation of the negotiations. Mattei was echoed by his German counterpart Martin Jaeger, who warned that Iran's hardline decision had raised serious concerns and would endanger the talks with Europe. The European trio, with Britain as another member, is scheduled to hold a new round of negotiations with Iran on Jan. 18, expecting that Iran will accept a Russian proposal to conduct uranium enrichment activities in Russia. Last month, Moscow put forth its proposal to establish a joint venture in Russia to enrich uranium for Iran, but Tehran has rejected it as an immature structure which needs to be complemented and supported. A Russian delegation will arrive in Iran on Saturday to persuade the Islamic Republic on the proposal and Russia's nuclear chief is also set to visit Iran in February. However, Iran has posed an uncompromising stance on its position that uranium enrichment must be carried out in its own territory. Iran also announced on Sunday that it had developed a key technology to separate uranium from its ore with the so-called "mixer-settler," marking a significant step closer to the country's ambition to construct and run nuclear fuel cycle independently. Enriched uranium, a key material for nuclear fuel cycle, can also be used to build atomic bombs. The EU fears that Iran's complete command of uranium enrichment could lead to military purpose, while Tehran regards enrichment as an undeniable right enshrined in the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 Xinhua: US freezes assets of 2 Iranian nuclear companies www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2006-01-05 05:31:56 WASHINGTON, Jan. 4 (Xinhuanet) -- The United States has frozen the assets of two Iranian companies linked to the Islamic republic's nuclear drive, the Treasury Department said on Wednesday. The Treasury Department said that the two Iranian companies -- Novin Energy Co. and Mesbah Energy Co. -- were fronts for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, which it designated as a weapons of mass destruction (WMD) proliferator in June. "Identifying and designating supporters of WMD proliferation disrupts the networks that are vital to illicit weapons programs," said Stuart Levey, the Treasury's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence. "We will continue to expose and isolate the individuals and entities that facilitate these networks," he said in a statement. Washington took the action one day after Iran informed the International Atomic Energy Agency that it planned to resume research and development into its "peaceful nuclear energy program" next Monday. The United States and its European allies argue Iran is making atomic fuel for use in weapons, but Iran says its nuclear program is dedicated solely to generating electricity. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 Xinhua: Iran rejects British report on nuclear ambition www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2006-01-05 06:02:15 TEHRAN, Jan. 4 (Xinhuanet) -- Iran on Wednesday rejected a British report on its nuclear ambition as forged and ridiculous, the official IRNA news agency said. "It is clear that damaging international atmosphere and disseminating forged information is merely in benefit of those who want to impede the current trend of negotiations (between Iran and the European Union)," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi was quoted as saying. "Such reports aim to exert pressure on Islamic Republic of Iran, but Iran will continue its work to achieve peaceful technology in the framework of its national interests and rights, without being influenced by such propaganda," Asefi added. The British daily Guardian reported on Wednesday that a confidential intelligence report based on data obtained by British, French, German and Belgian agencies showed that the Iranian government "has combed Europe for parts to build both nuclear bombs and ballistic missiles." The United States accuses Iran of making nuclear weapons under the disguise of civil usage, a charge rejected by Tehran as politically motivated. Iran also rejected a Russian proposal to transfer its uranium enrichment work, a key process for nuclear fuel cycle construction, to Russia. Tehran announced on Tuesday that it will resume nuclear fuel research in the coming days, despite EU warnings that it could endanger bilateral talks due on Jan. 18. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 AFP: US freezes assets of two Iran nuclear firms Wed Jan 4, 1:57 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - The US government froze the assets of two Iranian companies linked to the Islamic republic's nuclear drive, officials said. The Treasury Department" /> Treasury Departmentsaid the duo -- Novin Energy Co. and Mesbah Energy Co. -- were guilty of fostering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Its action came a day after Iran" /> Iraninformed the International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy Agencythat it planned on January 9 to resume research and development into its "peaceful nuclear energy programme". The United States and European Union" /> European Union, suspecting the Iranian civil nuclear programme is a cover for developing an atomic bomb, have demanded that Iran refrain from all nuclear enrichment activities. The Treasury said the two Iranian companies were fronts for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, which it designated as a WMD proliferator in June. "Identifying and designating supporters of WMD proliferation disrupts the networks that are vital to illicit weapons programmes," said Stuart Levey, the Treasury's undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence. "We will continue to expose and isolate the individuals and entities that facilitate these networks," he said in a statement. The Treasury action against the Iranian firms was taken under a presidential executive order that bans US citizens from any transaction with a designated entity, and freezes any assets the entity may have in the United States. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 6 UPI: Commentary: Iran target United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - 1/4/2006 3:01:00 PM -0500 By ARNAUD DE BORCHGRAVE UPI editor at large WASHINGTON, Jan. 4 (UPI) -- If anyone has any doubt about the kind of nuclear work Iran has been doing for the past 18 years, it must be a case of naiveté compounded by gullibility. Nor should there be any uncertainty about what Iran's mullahocracy would do with a nuclear weapon. All of Iran's leaders since Ayatollah Rohollah Khomeini replaced the shah in Feb. 1979 have made clear the objective is the destruction of Israel. In Iran's last presidential race, western governments and media favored Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. He was a "known" quantity and a "moderate." Michael Rubin, the editor of the Middle East Quarterly and a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, pricked that soap bubble. Four years ago, when he took the podium at Tehran University to deliver the Friday sermon, Rajsanjani forecasted that one day the Islamic world would be equipped with nuclear weapons that only Israel possessed (in the Middle East. At that point, he explained, "the strategy of the imperialists will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything." And, added the "moderate" former president Rafsanjani, "It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality." Another prominent "moderate," courted by Europe's democracies, was former Iranian president Mohammed Khatami. "In the Koran," he declared in a homily Oct. 24, 2000, "God commanded to kill the wicked and those who do not see the rights of the oppressed." The Bush administration argues a small minority of terrorists that have perverted the meaning of Islam have hijacked the Islamic religion. But didn't Khatami speak for Shiite Islam when he said, "If we abide by the Koran, all of us should mobilize to kill." This is not Osama bin Laden or sidekick Ayman al-Zawahiri or Abu Musab al-Zarqawi speaking on behalf of militant Islam, but a man who at the time he invoked the Koran to kill infidels was regarded in the West as the "moderate" President of Iran. Possession of a nuclear weapon is fundamental to Islamist belief. No odes to world peace if they do this, or dirges to world catastrophe if they do that, are going to deflect the mullahs' core belief as dictated by Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Fundamental to Israeli defense doctrine is that no weapon of mass destruction can be tolerated in any Middle Eastern arsenal. Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew, the geopolitical sage of the orient, said in a UPI interview three months before 9/11, the biggest threat on horizon 2010 is "an Islamist bomb and mark my words, it will travel." Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, currently under the control of pro-Western President Pervez Musharraf, was developed by the same man who began assisting Iran's nuclear efforts 18 years ago. Dr. A.Q. Khan, also known as Dr. No for the nuclear black market he created for the benefit of America's enemies, began imparting his nuclear know-how to Iran in 1988. Israel believes if Iran resumes its weapons-grade uranium enrichment process, March 2006 becomes a critical month for the acquisition of its first nuclear weapon. All is not well in Pakistan either. Radical clerics won a major victory against Musharraf by refusing to expel foreign students in madrassas, the Koranic schools where hatred of America and Israel, is still being taught. Tehran started the new year by announcing it doesn't like a Russian compromise proposal and will resume nuclear fuel research shortly. Iranian agents have also been scouring Europe for missile parts, says a 55-page intelligence assessment dated July 1, 2005. Leaked to The Guardian in the U.K., it draws upon material gathered by British, French, German and Belgian agencies. Iran, says this report, has developed an extensive web of front companies, official bodies, academic institutes and middlemen dedicated to obtaining - in Western Europe and in former Soviet republics, the expertise, training and equipment for nuclear programs, missile development, and biological and chemical weapons arsenals. The document, says the Guardian, lists scores of Iranian companies and institutions involved in the arms race. It also details Tehran's determination to perfect a ballistic missile capable of delivering warheads far beyond its borders. Iran is trying to extend the range of its Shahab-3 missile, which has a range of almost 1,000 miles, capable of reaching Israel. Taking their cue from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who declared Israel "should be wiped off the map" and that the World War II Holocaust was a figment of Zionist propaganda, Iranian commentators are pushing the envelope to nauseous absurdity. Tehran TV political analyst Hosein Rouyvaran said Nazi concentration camps were "detention centers" where no more than 250,000 Jews died and where "for hygienic reasons, they used to burn the bodies of those who died of typhus or contagious diseases (in crematoria)." Gas chambers, this moron explained, were "for disinfecting the clothes and the possessions of the prisoners. © Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 7 AFP: Iran vows no nuclear research negotiation ahead of EU talks - Thursday January 5, 03:41 AM TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran has vowed that its decision to resume nuclear fuel research is not negotiable, causing EU negotiators to cast doubt on the prospect of fresh talks aimed at convincing Tehran to halt enrichment activities. A day after Iran notified the UN atomic watchdog of its decision to "start research on the technology of nuclear fuel in a few days," the country's chief official for the nuclear file, Ali Larijani, said the decision was "not negotiable." His comments followed similar remarks late Tuesday by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was quoted by state television as saying Iran would not "step back" on its decision to resume nuclear fuel work. The increasingly hardline tone from Iranian leaders came despite calls from the International Atomic Energy Agency, Europe and the United States to maintain its suspension of enrichment-related activities. Germany, a member of the EU-3 negotiating team that also includes Britain and France, said it viewed Iran's latest announcement with "concern," and added that it could "throw into doubt the exploratory talks" to be held in Vienna on January 18. France also urged Iran to withdraw plans to resume research on its nuclear programme, warning that future talks could be put on hold. "We firmly call on Iran to retract this announcement which if carried out would clearly go against the demands of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) ... and place in serious doubt the continuation of discussions started on December 21 in Vienna," foreign ministry spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei said. A Western diplomat said that Tehran's gesture "is the sign that shows Iran's negotiations with the EU are on their last legs." However Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki insisted on state television that "Iran is ready for negotiations with the European Union." The negotiating process has been increasingly fragile since Tehran restarted uranium ore conversion last year, a precursor step to enrichment. Though Iran did not specify exactly what kind of research it aimed to restart in the coming days, the deputy chief of Iran's atomic energy agency said the Islamic republic had "voluntarily" suspended such activities for around "the past two-and-a-half years." The timeframe roughly corresponds to when Iran ceased enrichment activities in October 2003, a suspension which was sealed in an agreement between Iran and the European troika in November 2004. The United States threatened Tuesday to seek international action against Iran if it resumed nuclear fuel research, suggesting the world's patience with Tehran could be wearing thin. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack accused the Iranians of doing a "bob and weave" in negotiations, and said that "if Iran takes any further enrichment-related steps, the international community will have to consider additional measures to constrain Iran's nuclear ambitions. "Trying to draw a line around something being pure research with respect to enrichment activities is not something that we're going to buy, and I don't think the international community will either," he added. However, Larijani retorted that "Iran has said for a long time that the question of research did not form part of the negotiations." Iran's position is that "research has its own path, and has nothing to do with the industrial production of fuel." The United States charges that Iran's nuclear program is a cover for developing an atomic bomb. Iran has vigorously denied the accusation, insisting the program is solely intended to meet its civil energy needs. The United States has been hoping to refer Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions though it has backed efforts by the EU-3 to wean Iran off its nuclear ambitions with a package of economic and security incentives. Meanwhile, Tehran has said a Russian delegation is to visit on Saturday to discuss Moscow's proposal to enrich Iranian uranium in Russia. Iranian leaders have said the proposal would only be feasible if it acknowledged Iran's right to enrich uranium on its own territory. Copyright © 2006 AFP. All rights reserved. All information ***************************************************************** 8 AFP: Iran to resume suspended nuclear research 03/01/2006 20h57 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivers a speech ©AFP - Atta Kenare TEHRAN, Jan 3 (AFP) - Iran announced it would resume nuclear fuel research after a suspension of over two years, prompting the UN atomic watchdog to warn Tehran that it must maintain a freeze on sensitive nuclear work. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that Iran would not "step back" on its decision to resume nuclear fuel work, state television reported. "Our country will go forward on the nuclear path with patience, wisdom and planning," the hardline president was quoted as saying after a parliament session on the state budget. "We will not make a step back on our path," he said, adding that he had informed the UN atomic agency of Iran's intent in a letter. Iran's student-run news agency ISNA further quoted Ahmadinejad as rejecting Western influence on Iranian policies because "research has no restrictions or red lines." "We cannot base our national interest on their policy," he said. IAEA flag in front of the International Atomic Energy Agency headquarters ©AFP/File - Joe Klamar The deputy head of Iran's atomic energy agency, Mohammad Saidi, also said the UN nuclear watchdog has already been informed of the step, which risks creating further strains in talks with European negotiators. "In a letter, the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) has been informed that Iran will start research on the technology of nuclear fuel in a few days, with the cooperation and coordination of the agency," Saidi told state television. "We think our experts have undergone lots of losses during this period (of suspension). Many of our researchers have lost their jobs," he added. Saidi did not specify exactly what the research concerned, but said that the Islamic republic had "voluntarily" suspended such activities for around "the past two-and-a-half years." This timescale would correspond to the date when Iran announced in October 2003 that it was temporarily suspending uranium enrichment, a process that can be used to create nuclear fuel for reactors and also the cores of atomic bombs. Iran's suspected nuclear installations FLASH GRAPHIC ©AFP iactiv Diplomats have said that were Iran to resume enriching uranium it would deal a fatal blow to the negotiating process, already fragile after Tehran restarted uranium conversion last year -- the precursor step to enrichment. In a statement confirming receipt of the letter, the IAEA said its director general Mohammed ElBaradei "recalls the importance placed by the IAEA Board that Iran maintains its suspension of all enrichment-related activity as a key confidence building measure." It said "he continues to call on Iran to take the steps the IAEA requires to resolve outstanding issues regarding the nature of Iran's nuclear programme." However Saidi insisted that the decision was not linked to the production of nuclear fuel. "This issue... has nothing to do with production of nuclear fuel. These two are separate things from one another. No decision has been made about nuclear fuel production." Iranians of the People's Mujahadeen organization demonstrate against Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime ©AFP/File - Thierry Monasse The IAEA said it was seeking clarifications from Iran as to the "implications" of the decision. France on Tuesday called on Iran to reverse its move, saying if Iran was to observe a suspension on enrichment it also had to halt research. "We would like Iran to abide by the suspension of all activities related to the enrichment and reprocessing... which includes centrifuges and research," foreign ministry spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei said. Meanwhile, a delegation from Moscow is to visit Tehran on Saturday amid continued Russian efforts to break the deadlock between Iran's insistence on maintaining its right to enrichment and EU demands it renounces the practice. "A Russian delegation led by Deputy Foreign Minister (Sergei) Kisliak, is due to come on January 7 to discuss the Russian proposal," said foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi. Moscow has suggested allowing Iran to conduct uranium enrichment in Russia, giving it access to the nuclear fuel cycle while guaranteeing its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. Two Iranians work at the zirconium production plant at Isfanhan ©AFP/File - Henghameh Fahimi However Asefi reaffirmed Iran would not consider the offer unless it acknowledges the country's right to conduct uranium enrichment operations in Iran, so far the key sticking point in negotiations with the European Union. "It's not a structured proposal it is still an idea, we have to discuss it. There are ambiguities but if it says that enrichment can only happen in Russia it's not acceptable, but if it's a parallel and complementary plan we will consider that." The United States accuses Iran of trying to master the civil nuclear fuel cycle as a cover for a military programme to obtain atomic weapons -- a charge vehemently denied by Tehran. Iran is set to have new talks with EU negotiators on January 18 but both sides have acknowledged that wide differences remain. + Àðàáñêèé Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2006 ***************************************************************** 9 AFP: Western agencies say Iran out to build nuclear missile 04/01/2006 07h29 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad delivers a speech ©AFP - Atta Kenare LONDON (AFP) - Iran has been scouring Europe for nuclear bomb technology, a British newspaper said, citing a report by Western intelligence agencies. Iranian scientists are hunting parts for a new ballistic missile capable of hitting Europe, with "important requests and acquisitions... registered almost daily," the 55-page assessment concludes, according to The Guardian daily. Pakistan and Syria have also been shopping for the chemicals and technology required to enrich uranium and develop rocket programmes, it reported. Chinese front companies have played a key role in North Korean arms procurement endeavour while Russia is identified as crucial to Iran's military programmes, The Guardian added. The newspaper said the document was dated July 1, 2005 and included material from British, French, German and Belgian agencies. It has been used to brief European government ministers and warn top industrialists to be vigilant when exporting expertise or equipment to "rogue states", according to The Guardian. Iran announced on Tuesday it would resume nuclear fuel research after a suspension of over two years, prompting the UN atomic watchdog to warn Tehran that it must maintain a freeze on sensitive nuclear work. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that Iran would not "step back" on its decision to resume nuclear fuel work, state television reported. The United States accuses Iran of trying to master the civil nuclear fuel cycle as a cover for a military programme to obtain atomic weapons -- a charge vehemently denied by Tehran. The assessment says Iran has created a complex network of middlemen and front companies to obtain the training, expertise and equipment required to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons arsenals. "In addition to sensitive goods, Iran continues intensively to seek the technology and know-how for military applications of all kinds," it adds, according to the newspaper. The Guardian said: "It emphasises that west European engineering firms, germ laboratories, scientific think-tanks and university campuses are successfully preyed on by multitudes of middlemen, front companies, scholars with hidden agendas and bureaucrats working for the Iranian, Syrian or Pakistani regimes." It said the report came from a leading European Union intelligence service and seemingly represents the pooled knowledge of at least four major EU member states. It details "how countries such as Iran, Syria and North Korea operate a vast network of traders, phoney companies, state institutions and diplomatic missions internationally to procure the means to develop chemical, biological, nuclear and conventional weapons." Two Iranians work at the zirconium production plant at Isfanhan ©AFP/File - Henghameh Fahimi Former Soviet states are targeted for their experts while western Europe is the principal place for purchases, the newspaper said. The assessment said Pakistan had been buying far more components and materials than were needed for spare parts in its nuclear programme. Iran, Syria and Pakistan are benefiting from North Korea's military strength and exports, the document reportedly asserts, noting that "the export of arms equipment is currently reckoned to be North Korea's most important source of income." Iran is set to have new talks about its nuclear activities with EU negotiators on January 18 but both sides have acknowledged that wide differences remain. + Àðàáñêèé Copyright Disclaimer ©AFP 2006 ***************************************************************** 10 AFP: US rejects NKorea demand for lifting sanctions Wed Jan 4, 1:39 AM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States ruled out lifting sanctions against North Korea" /> North Koreaas a condition for resuming six-nation nuclear disarmament talks. "It is not a subject to negotiation," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said, accusing Pyongyang of trying to delay talks aimed at ending the Stalinist state's nuclear weapons drive. The sanctions are "protecting our national interest and combating their illicit activities" such as alleged counterfeiting, drug trafficking and exporting military technology, McClellan said. "We are going to continue to take action to stop them from engaging in illicit activities," the spokesman said. North Korea reiterated earlier on Tuesday that it would refuse to return to the six-party talks unless Washington removed the sanctions. In September, North Korea had agreed to dismantle its nuclear weapons program in exchange for diplomatic and economic benefits and security guarantees. In November, however, Pyongyang said US sanctions were an obstacle to negotiations, involving the United States, two Koreas, China, Russia and Japan. "I think that this latest statement by the regime in North Korea is yet another in a long list of pretext for delay," McClellan said. "The other parties to the talks have made clear to North Korea that they expect North Korea to make good on the agreed to statement, and to give up its nuclear weapons and programs promptly and verifiably." The US Treasury Department" /> Treasury Departmentin September told US financial institutions to cut all ties with a Macau bank, Banco Delta Asia, which it accused of being a willing front for North Korean counterfeiting. A month later the US blacklisted eight North Korean companies allegedly involved in the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Rodong Sinmun, mouthpiece of the the North's ruling communist party, urged the United States to unblock talks by removing the sanctions. "It is impossible to go to six-way talks and sit face-to-face with a counterpart who seeks to isolate and stifle us," it said in a Korean-language dispatch monitored Tuesday by South Korea" /> South Korea's Yonhap news agency. US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the sanctions against North Korea were not linked to the nuclear diarmament issue. It is "important and perfectly reasonable" to take actions "to protect American currency, because there were concerns about counterfeiting, there were concerns about money laundering," he told reporters Tuesday. "The six-party talks is focused on the specific issue of denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula. So we view these two issues as mutually exclusive," he said. White House spokesman McClellan said the United States wanted to see a resolution to the nuclear issue based on principles that were agreed upon by all parties to the talks. "We want to see progress made on moving forward on the principles that were agreed to," he said. "All five parties to the talks have made it very clear to North Korea that they need to abandon their nuclear weapons ambitions, and dismantle their programs," he said. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Envoy Decries N. Korea's Conditions From the Associated Press [UP] Wednesday January 4, 2006 12:32 PM By JAE-SOON CHANG Associated Press Writer SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - The U.S. ambassador in Seoul urged North Korea on Wednesday to stop attaching conditions for resuming talks on its nuclear program, a day after the communist country renewed its demand that Washington lift sanctions against it. ``The United States is ready to return to the table without attaching any new conditions, and we expect North Korea to do the same,'' Alexander Vershbow said at a forum in Seoul, according to the text of his speech provided by the U.S. Embassy. The prospect of resuming negotiations have become increasingly unclear as North Korea disputes the U.S. sanctions, imposed for the communist country's alleged currency counterfeiting and other illicit activities. The talks, which involve the two Koreas, the United States, Russia, China and Japan, were last held in November. On Tuesday, the North said resuming negotiations would be ``impossible'' while Washington maintains the sanctions. ``The U.S. sanctions are obviously the fundamental element that disrupts the six-party talks,'' said the Rodong Sinmun, the North's ruling Workers Party newspaper, referring to the nuclear talks that involve the two Koreas, the U.S., China, Japan and Russia. In September, Washington placed sanctions on a Macau-based bank for allegedly helping the North distribute counterfeit currency and engage in other illegal acts. It sanctioned eight North Korean companies the following month, claiming they were fronts for proliferating weapons of mass destruction. North Korea called the allegations a ``sheer lie'' and threatened to boycott the nuclear talks. Washington says it has convincing evidence of the North's counterfeiting, but stresses the issue is a law enforcement matter unrelated to the nuclear talks. ``I don't see in what way (the sanctions) are preventing North Korea from going back to the six-party talks,'' State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Tuesday. On Wednesday, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon also said the two issues were separate, adding his country would try to ensure the sanctions dispute ``won't become an obstacle to progress'' in the nuclear talks. In September, the North pledged to give up its atomic programs in return for aid and security assurances. But negotiations stalled as the North made new demands, including nuclear reactors for power generation, which Washington says are unacceptable. Vershbow urged North Korea to honor its commitment to disarm, saying it will lead to a better future for the country. ``I sincerely hope that 2006 will be the year in which North Korea's leaders end their country's self-imposed isolation by getting out of the nuclear business,'' he said. ``If they do, my government is ready to fulfill its commitments'' such as beginning the process of normalizing relations with Pyongyang, he said. Later in the day, the North said it doesn't believe the U.S. promise to coexist with the communist country. ``Tension on the Korean Peninsula is rising because of U.S. imperialists' reckless tactic designed to topple our republic,'' said the Rodong Sinmun in a commentary carried by the official Korean Central News Agency. The dispute flared in October 2002, following U.S. allegations that the North was running a secret nuclear weapons program in violation of international agreements. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 12 Las Vegas SUN: U.S. Clamps Down on Iranian Companies Today: January 04, 2006 at 12:51:40 PST By JEANNINE AVERSA ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration acted Wednesday to tighten the financial clamps on two Iranian companies suspected of helping to proliferate weapons of mass destruction through involvement in the country's nuclear program. The action taken by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control targets Novin Energy Co. and Mesbah Energy Co. The department ordered U.S. banks to freeze any bank accounts or other financial assets found in the United States that belong to these two companies. The U.S. government also is prohibiting Americans from doing business with the two entities. Treasury's sanctions come one day after the United States warned Iran against pursuing new nuclear research. Iran on Tuesday said it planned to resume nuclear fuel research after a 2 1/2 year hiatus. It wasn't specific about what research or development activities it would undertake, but said the work would be unrelated to nuclear fuel production. That fanned fresh concerns in the West that Tehran was trying to build an atomic weapon. Novin and Mesbah are believed to be owned or controlled or acting on behalf of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, which the U.S. government designated in late June of 2005 as being a proliferator of weapons of mass destruction, the Treasury Department said. A presidential executive order issued at that time provided the United States with the power to take Wednesday's action against the two Iranian companies. Novin allegedly transferred "millions of dollars" on behalf of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran "to entities associated with Iran's nuclear program," the Treasury Department said. Novin operates within the agency and shares the same address , the department said. Mesbah "has been used to procure products for Iran's heavy water project," Treasury said. "Heavy water is essential for Iran's heavy-water-moderated reactor project, which will provide Iran a potential source of plutonium well-suited for nuclear weapons," the department alleged. "Heavy water is believed to have no credible use in Iran's civilian nuclear power program," it added. "Identifying and designating supporters of WMD proliferation disrupts the networks that are vital to illicit weapons programs," said Stuart Levey, Treasury's under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence. --- On the Net: OFAC: http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/ All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 13 IHT: EU acknowledges holes in its energy policies - Europe - International Herald Tribune By Dan Bilefsky International Herald Tribune JANUARY 5, 2006 BRUSSELS Just hours after Russia ended a standoff with Ukraine that disrupted gas supplies across Europe, EU officials acknowledged that the dispute had exposed holes in the Continent's energy policy. "Europe needs a clear and more collective policy on the security of our energy supply," said Andris Piebalgs, the EU's energy commissioner. "Now, powers reside at the national level and we need a Europe-wide approach." The 25-member EU - which imports 25 percent of its gas from Russia - welcomed the agreement between Russia and Ukraine to end their gas war and said it hoped it would assure the Union's gas supplies in the long-term. But Piebalgs and other energy officials acknowledged that the crisis had underscored Europe's over-dependency on energy imports, its patchwork of contradictory national approaches and the limitations on Brussels's ability to intervene during energy emergencies. EU officials said the chief lesson of the standoff was that the Union was too dependent on foreign energy sources; the European Commission estimated that foreign sources will account for 70 percent of EU usage by 2020. "Dependency on Russia should be reduced," said Martin Bartenstein, economics minister of Austria, which now holds the EU's rotating presidency. He said energy supply and security would top the agenda at an EU summit meeting in March. Developing a common energy policy faces many difficulties, analysts said. Each country has its own policy on managing and stocking energy sources, making coordination cumbersome. During crises, countries can opt to pool energy resources, but the European Commission has no power to force them to do so. Two years ago, member states rejected proposals to create stores of gas across the bloc. William Ramsay, deputy executive director of the International Energy Agency in Paris, warned that the lack of cohesiveness could be debilitating if an energy shock became protracted. "You have some countries with very liberalized markets like Britain," he said, "and others like Italy, France and Germany where you have companies with dominant positions and this asymmetry can prove dangerous in a crisis." Ramsay said that several European countries had large reserves in place, but that unlike the United States, where gas stores could be transferred easily among states, too much regulation in Europe made national transfers difficult. The commission said it would examine how Europe could offset dependence on Russia by turning to suppliers like Algeria, Libya and Nigeria and by developing alternative supply routes - using pipelines from the Middle East and Central Asia through Turkey to Austria. Ramsay said that offsetting the EU's dependence on one energy supplier was imperative, regardless of whether the Middle East or North Africa could prove more politically volatile than Russia. "Five unstable supply sources are better than depending on one unstable source of supply," he said. The standoff between Russia and Ukraine has prompted Britain and Germany to to consider building more nuclear power plants. EU officials said the weakness of the Union in the face of an energy crisis was illustrated by the meeting Wednesday of the bloc's Gas Coordination Group - which consists of industry experts and convenes during events like energy disruptions to discuss contingency plans. People present at the meeting said the national experts were so relieved about the 11th-hour agreement that they decided to break up the meeting hours ahead of schedule. Jonathan Stern, director of gas research at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, said he doubted the crisis would act as a catalyst for a radical EU energy shake-up. "It will take years," he said, "to get agreement to build the infrastructure required for things like renewable energy or nuclear power plants and by then everyone will have forgotten this three day event." Herald Tribune All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 14 Indian Express: Clash of two nuclear pacts Op-Ed Thursday, January 05, 2006 Beijing and Islamabad could be muddying the unfolding debate on Indo-US nuclear cooperation, argues C. Raja Mohan 'C. Raja Mohan' Despite Pakistan’s denial of reports that it is in talks with China for acquiring atomic reactors, New Delhi’s suspicion that Beijing and Islamabad might be out to wreck the Indo-US nuclear deal is bound to grow. When Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran heads to Beijing over the weekend for another round of strategic dialogue, he would have an opportunity to find out where exactly China stands on the Indo-US nuclear pact. That China and Pakistan are uncomfortable with the nuclear pact signed last July by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W. Bush is well-known. Both Beijing and Islamabad understand that the deal could transform Indo-US relations as well as regional geopolitics. Washington has repeatedly rebuffed Pakistan’s demand to have nuclear energy cooperation on the same lines as being proposed for India. The Indo-US nuclear pact is based on the premise that India is a responsible nuclear power. Even the best friends of Pakistan in Washington are not prepared to say the same about Islamabad. Given the extraordinary story of A.Q. Khan’s nuclear Wal-Mart, there is little prospect of Pakistan being treated on par with India on nuclear energy cooperation. While Beijing has been formally silent on the subject, commentary in the official Chinese media was sharply critical of Washington for the nuclear deal with India. Accusing the US of “double standards” on nuclear proliferation, the People’s Daily last November said that if the US makes a “nuclear exception” for India, other powers could do the same with their own friends and weaken the global non-proliferation regime. Earlier this week, the London-based Financial Times reported that Pakistan is negotiating the purchase of six to eight nuclear reactors from China at a cost of $7-10 billion. The spokeswoman of the Pakistan foreign office, Tasneem Aslam, quickly denied the report, calling it “baseless”. The denial appears less than convincing. Much of the current reporting potential Sino-Pak nuclear cooperation has come amidst Chinese Atomic Energy Chief Sun Qin’s to Mianwali in West Punjab to launch the construction of Chinese power reactor called Chashma II. Pakistan prime minister, Shaukat Aziz, who was present at the occasion talked of expanding his country’s atomic energy generation from the present 425 MW to about 8,800 MW by 2030. No one in Pakistan is denying these remarks; and no one can deny that currently China is Pakistan’s only nuclear partner. But having recently joined the Nuclear Suppliers Group — the 45-nation club of advanced countries trading in atomic energy technologies and materials — China is bound by certain rules. Under those rules neither India nor Pakistan is eligible for civilian nuclear energy cooperation. And that precisely is the reason why the Bush administration is seeking a modification of these rules in favour India, and only India. China, however, could sell reactors to Pakistan by claiming that it has past agreements with Islamabad that should be “grand-fathered” from the NSG rules. (The agreement on Chashma II was signed before China joined the NSG.) Acceptance of Beijing’s line would make a mockery of the entire non-proliferation regime. After all, the record says that China sold nuclear weapon and missile technologies to Pakistan and Islamabad passed them further on. The real purpose of the talk on Sino-Pak nuclear cooperation might be to muddy the unfolding debate on the Indo-US nuclear pact in the American Congress and the NSG. Beijing and Islamabad are posing a simple question: if the US can make an exemption for India, why can’t China do the same for Pakistan? As India and the US seek to accelerate the implementation of the nuclear pact, this argument is likely to acquire some currency among the opponents of the Indo-US nuclear deal in Washington and the NSG. By pointing to the dangerous consequence of Sino-Pak nuclear collaboration, the opponents would argue it would make sense not to change the rules for anyone. It is even more likely that both Beijing and Islamabad might have concluded that if the Indo-US nuclear pact falls apart, there would be little reason to worry about a future strategic partnership between New Delhi and Washington. Unless there is a frank conversation between India and China on the subject, mutual suspicions could only grow at a time when they are launching 2006 as a Sino-Indian friendship year. © 2005: Indian Express Newspapers (Mumbai) Ltd. ***************************************************************** 15 Japan Times: INDIA-U.S. NUCLEAR TALKS: Deal harms Indian interests Thursday, January 5, 2006 By BRAHMA CHELLANEY NEW DELHI -- A real problem of an ever-shifting goal post has cast a cloud over America's current negotiations with India to implement a much-heralded nuclear deal that is supposed to showcase the emerging global partnership between the world's most powerful and most populous democracies. Seeking to formally close their past disputes over nuclear issues, the two concluded an accord whose intent is bold but that operationally will constrain India's ability to deter the larger of its two nuclear-armed neighbors, China. In the period since the accord was reached in Washington last July, the challenges for both countries to translate their commitments into policy have been underscored by the storm of protests in India over the onerous obligations that country has agreed to undertake, and the growing concerns voiced by U.S. nonproliferation zealots that the deal legitimizes the Indian nuclear arsenal and weakens the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) regime. The July agreement represented only a statement of joint intent. Now negotiations are under way to give effect to the July commitments. By the time U.S. President George W. Bush visits India in two or so months, the two sides will know whether they have settled the issues. Even then, the deal's future will remain uncertain until the U.S. Congress makes necessary changes to U.S. domestic law and the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers' Group removes India as a target of its export controls. Armed with leverage from the July accord, America is using the ongoing negotiations to try to limit the size of India's nuclear deterrent, control its fast-breeder program and bring a maximum number of Indian nuclear facilities under international inspections. The negotiations also demonstrate America's shifting goal post in relation to what all India needs to do and what Washington is willing to grant. In return for a promise to be allowed to import commercial nuclear power reactors and fuel, New Delhi "reciprocally" agreed in July to a series of legally binding obligations that entail its observance of nonproliferation norms and extension of full support from the outside to the crisis-torn NPT regime. Most importantly, New Delhi agreed to put into practice what China refuses to do -- civil-military segregation of its nuclear program -- even before India has succeeded in building a credible minimal deterrent capability against Beijing. The accord is likely to escalate the costs and technological challenges of India's deterrent drive. Washington began moving the goal post no sooner than the accord had been signed. Although the accord spelled out India's obligations as being reciprocal, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns declared the agreement "will have to be implemented by the Indian government and then we will have to seek these changes from the Congress." While the accord merely states that India will begin "identifying and separating civilian and military nuclear facilities and programs in a phased manner," Washington has added specific conditionality -- that such a separation plan be "credible," "transparent" and "defensible." Put simply, the U.S. has set itself as the judge to whom India is answerable in terms of its obligations. The accord was signed by bureaucrat-turned-politician Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who is not versed in international relations. Singh dispatched his foreign secretary to Washington last week with a civil-military segregation plan, including the names of facilities India was willing to put under international inspections. After the plan was presented to the Americans for their approval, Singh's national security adviser told an Indian TV network that India was open to further negotiations on that plan. Yet another way Washington has moved the goal post is by seeking to renege on the accord's central plank -- that India would "assume the same responsibilities and practices and acquire the same benefits and advantages as other leading countries with advanced nuclear technology, such as the United States." In recent testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert G. Joseph said "voluntary offer" safeguards of the kind the U.S. has with the International Atomic Energy Agency would not be acceptable for India. The five NPT-recognized nuclear powers, under voluntary accords, offer nuclear materials and facilities for IAEA inspections in name only. The IAEA, in return, carries out token inspections or, often, no inspections "to conserve resources" for inspections in the nonnuclear states. Currently, out of 915 nuclear facilities the IAEA inspects worldwide, only 11 are in these nuclear-weapons states. Joseph has also stipulated another condition not applicable to the other nuclear powers: safeguards on Indian facilities, he said, "must be applied in perpetuity." In contrast, a note released by the Indian prime minister's office right after the accord stated that India "has committed [itself] to taking reciprocally exactly the same steps that the other nuclear weapon states have taken. . . . An argument has been made that separation into civilian and military programs will rob India of flexibility if that is required by unanticipated circumstances. Nuclear-weapons states, including the U.S., have the right to shift facilities from civilian category to military and there is no reason why this should not apply to India." America's shifting goal-post approach brings out two things: that it is using the accord and the current negotiations to gain control over India's nuclear plans; and that it will accept India at the most as a second-class nuclear power. Having failed over decades, the U.S. believes that at last it has a reasonable opportunity to get a handle on India's nuclear program. That approach casts doubt that the current negotiations would conclude in a manner that allows both sides to proceed with the accord's implementation. It also underscores the accord's inherently unequal bargain and its implications for India's still-nascent nuclear military program. While Bush has made only a promise, which he may or may not be able to fulfill, the deal sets out a clear "road map" for India to traverse. The deal, in fact, imposes obligations largely on India. Not only has India committed to carry out a burdensome civil-military segregation of its nuclear program and put all its civil facilities under IAEA inspections; it has also given its word to import commercial nuclear power reactors from the U.S. and thereby help revive the decrepit nuclear power industry there. The only U.S. obligation is to permit its industry to rake up billions of dollars worth of reactor and fuel exports to India. Those supporting the accord have naively touted it as an answer to India's growing energy needs. The fact, however, is that electricity generated by high-priced imported reactors dependent on imported fuel will not be commercially viable in India. The U.S.-inspired ban on civilian nuclear technology sales to India dates back to the first Indian nuclear explosion in 1974. That test was triggered by the 1971 U.S. action in dispatching the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise to the Bay of Bengal, in a move aimed at intimidating New Delhi during the India-Pakistan war, which led to the independence of Bangladesh. Spawning expansive controls on export of an array of dual-use technologies to India, the ban has been a major stumbling block to the forging of a true U.S.-Indian strategic partnership -- an important foreign-policy goal of Bush. The deal strikes the weak spot of India's nuclear military capability -- its umbilical ties with the civilian program. India's weapons capability is unique in that it flows out of the civilian nuclear program and continues to draw sustenance from it. For Washington, the accord is an astute move. It profitably panders to India's craving for status and helps buy Indian silence on widening U.S. support to military-ruled Pakistan. But is it in U.S. interests to limit India's nuclear-deterrent capability against China, an opaque, rising empire of common concern? Brahma Chellaney is a professor of strategic studies at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi. The Japan Times: Jan. 5, 2006 (C) All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 16 Platts: Talks may occur in next year on first new US power reactors + Spent fuel contract talks may have to take place in the next year or so for companies planning to license and build some of the first new power reactors in the US, according to Nuclear Energy Institute legal counsel Mike Bauser. Although a negotiated contract for the disposal of a reactor's spent fuel would not have to be in place when an application is filed with NRC for a combined construction permit-operating license, one would be needed for the issuance of the license, Bauser said in an interview yesterday. A contract would be required whether a new reactor is built on a greenfield or at an existing nuclear power plant site, he said. For more information, take a trial to Nuclear News Flashes at http://www.nuclearnews.platts.com. Washington (Platts)--3Jan2006 Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 17 Xinhua: India, Japan agree to further co-op in energy sector www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2006-01-04 21:03:55 NEW DELHI, Jan. 4 (Xinhuanet) -- India and Japan agreed on Wednesday to step up cooperation in the energy sector, according to a joint statement released by Indian Ministry of External Affairs here Wednesday. The Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs Taro Aso on Wednesday held talks with Indian Minister of State for External Affairs E. Ahamed, Minister of Commerce and Industry Kamal Nath and National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan here. The cooperation in energy sector will be achieved through implementation of action plan agreed upon between India and Japan in September 2005. The two ministers agreed to strengthen exchanges between the two countries in the security and defense fields. The Indian defense minister is expected to pay an official visit to Japan later this year. The ministers agreed to launch a dialogue on disarmament and non-proliferation and address issues relating to high-technology trade. The two ministers reiterated the principles and understandings contained in the Joint Statement signed by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi in New Delhi in April last year. Singh is expected to visit Japan in response to an invitation from Koizumi. The two sides agreed to consider the possibility of a comprehensive economic partnership agreement in context of the ongoing work of the India-Japan Joint Study Group, which is expected to submit its report by June 2006. Aso said India would remain the largest recipient of the Japanese Official Development Assistance (ODA) loan in the current fiscal year for the third consecutive year. The ministers reaffirmed the need for urgent and comprehensive reform of the United Nations, including the reform and expansion of the UN Security Council, in both permanent and non-permanent categories. Meanwhile, the Indo-Asian News Service reported here Wednesday that M.K. Narayanan underlined India's credentials as a responsible nuclear power and asked Aso to use Japan's influence to alter international opinion in favour of civilian nuclear energy cooperation with India. The two sides also discussed the possibility of a free trade agreement. Trade between India and Japan during 2004-05 was estimated at 5 billion U.S. dollars. Japan ranks as the fourth largest foreign direct investor in India. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 18 Register-Guard: Trojan's implosion Eugene, Oregon, USA [The Register-Guard opinion section header] A Register-Guard Editorial Published: Wednesday, January 4, 2006 There's an elegance to the Trojan nuclear plant's cooling tower. The cylinder rises 499 feet on the banks of the Columbia River - tapered in the middle, flared at the top - and is instantly recognizable as an icon of 20th century technology. But the tower hasn't cooled anything since Trojan shut down in 1993, and later this year a company specializing in large-scale demolition will turn it to rubble. Eugene residents can watch Trojan's demolition from a safe distance - not just physically, because the plant is located 40 miles north of Portland in Rainier, but financially. The Eugene Water &Electric Board was a 30 percent owner of Trojan, but assigned its share to the Bonneville Power Administration. Trojan costs still show up as a pass-through on EWEB's financial statements, but local ratepayers aren't stuck with decommissioning expenses. Economics killed Oregon's only nuclear power plant. EWEB's leaders were prescient in recognizing that the plant was a lemon. It started producing power in 1976, but its steam generator developed cracks just 16 years later - far sooner than projected. Trojan's majority owner, Portland General Electric, judged that replacing the generator would not be worth the cost. In May, a Maryland-based company will set explosive charges around the base of the cooling tower and cause it to implode. If the cooling tower counts as a building, Oregon will lose its third-tallest. One hundred and three commercial nuclear plants remain in operation in the United States, generating about 20 percent of the nation's electricity. No new plants have been added to that number since 1996. But nuclear power may be about to make a comeback. Thirty-one other countries have 443 nuclear plants, with another 23 under construction. Some nations obtain a majority of their electricity from nuclear fission. Nuclear power is gaining a worldwide cost advantage as the prices of oil and natural gas increase. And as concerns about global warming intensify, emissions-free power sources become more appealing. Yet Trojan remains a cautionary example. While Trojan's most visible structure will vanish, its legacy will stretch far into the future. Radioactive waste produced during the plant's years of operation remains stored in concrete casks, awaiting permanent disposal. The creation of a permanent waste repository seems no closer today than it did when Trojan opened, or when it closed. The waste will remain dangerous for longer than anything built by humans has endured. The benefits of power generation lasted less than two decades; the responsibility for secure waste disposal will persist for millennia. Copyright © 2006 The Register-Guard, Eugene, Oregon, USA ***************************************************************** 19 NRC: Sunshine Federal Register Notice FR Doc 05-24704 [Federal Register: January 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 2)] [Notices] [Page 372] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr04ja06-93] Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dates: Weeks January 2, 9, 16, 23, 30, February 6, 2006. Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Status: Public and Closed Matters to be considered: Week of January 2, 2006 There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of January 2, 2006. Week of January 9, 2006 Tuesday, January 10, 2006 9:30 a.m. Briefing on International Research and Bilateral Agreements (Public Meeting). (Contact: Roman Shaffer, 301-415-7605). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov . Wednesday, January 11, 2006 1:55 p.m Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. Hydro Resources, Inc. (Crownpoint, New Mexico) Petition for Review of LBP-05- 17 (Groundwater Issues) (Tentative). 2 p.m. Meeting with Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) (Public Meeting) (Contact: John Larkins, 301-415-7360). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov . Thursday, January 12 2006 9:30 a.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 2 & 3). Week of January 16, 2006--Tentative Tuesday, January 17, 2006 1:30 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1 & 3). Week of January 23, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of January 23, 2006. Week of January 30, 2006--Tentative Tuesday, January 31, 2006 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Strategic Workforce Planning and Human Capital Initiatives (Closed--Ex. 2). Wednesday, February 1, 2006 9:30 a.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1 & 3). Week of February 6, 2006--Tentative Monday, February 6, 2006 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Materials Degradation Issues and Fuel Reliability (Public Meeting). (Contact: Jennifer Uhle, 301-415-6200). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov . Wednesday, February 8, 2006 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards (NMSS). Programs, Performance, and Plans--Materials Safety (Public Meeting). (Contact: Teresa Mixon, 301-415-7474). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov . 1:30 p.m. Briefing on Office of Research (RES) Programs, Performance and Plans (Public Meeting) (Contact: Gene Carpenter, 301-415-7333). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov . *The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings call (recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more information: Michelle Schroll, (301) 415- 1662. * * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html. * * * * * The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g. Braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, August Spector, at 301-415-7080, TDD: 301-415- 2100, or by e-mail at aks@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. * * * * * This notice is distribute by mail to several hundred subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: December 29, 2005. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 05-24704 Filed 12-30-05; 12:42 pm] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M ***************************************************************** 20 Beaver County Times Allegheny Times: Public meeting on Shippingport Business News - 01/04/2006 SHIPPINGPORT - Managers from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co. will meet Tuesday in Shippingport to discuss the operation of FirstEnergy's three nuclear power plants. The plants are Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station in Shippingport and Davis-Besse and Perry 1 in Ohio. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. in Room 103 of the training building on Shippingport Road, across from the plant parking entrance. Members of the public are invited to attend and may ask questions after the business portion of the meeting is complete. Information on the NRC's assessment of Beaver Valley's performance can be found online at www.nrc.gov ©Beaver County Times Allegheny Times 2006 Copyright © 2006 Beaver Newspapers, Inc. All Rights ***************************************************************** 21 NRC: blishes Clarification of Fire Protection Requirements for Electrical Circuits in Nuclear Power Plants News Release - 2005-NR U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 06-002 January 4, 2006 requirements for assuring reactors can be safely shut down following a fire. NRC regulations require nuclear power plants to analyze how their systems could be affected by a fire. Plants must protect any electrical circuit whose fire-induced failure would prevent a safety system from operating, or cause a safety system to function inappropriately. Over the past five years, the NRC and industry representatives have worked together in meetings and public workshops to better understand cable fire tests that help clarify how the NRCs regulations should be applied. The NRCs RIS on this topic addresses the variety of interpretations for existing regulations on fire-induced electric circuit failures, and sets out clear regulatory expectations for ensuring plants maintain safe shutdown-related circuits. These include: Performing analyses to address any and all possible failures and combinations of multiple failures resulting from fire-induced circuit failures in redundant systems in fire areas where the failures could impact safe shutdown. Performing analyses of circuits whose failure could affect systems necessary for safe shutdown, including prior NRC approval before crediting the actions of plant personnel to protect against inappropriate operation of safety systems. Performing analyses of redundant safe-shutdown circuits that reside in the same fire area without taking credit for plant personnel use of an emergency control station on those circuits, unless alternative or dedicated shutdown capability is provided elsewhere. The RIS discusses these matters in more detail, and is available on the agencys web site, by entering accession number ML053360069 at this address: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html. The RIS requires no action or written response. Questions should be directed to Bob Radlinski, (phone 301-415-3174 or rfr1@nrc.gov) or Chandu Patel (phone 301-415-3025 or cpr@nrc.gov). The NRC has issued several guidance documents on complying with fire protection requirements. In addition, several public meetings were held between October 2004 and August 2005 to discuss clarification of the issues included in the RIS. Last revised Wednesday, January 04, 2006 ***************************************************************** 22 Guardian Unlimited: Clandestine nuclear deals traced to Sudan Ian Traynor and Ian Cobain Thursday January 5, 2006 The Guardian International investigators and western intelligence have for the first time named Sudan as a major conduit for sophisticated engineering equipment that could be used in nuclear weapons programmes. Hundreds of millions of pounds of equipment was imported into the African country over a three-year period before the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington in 2001 and has since disappeared, according to Guardian sources. Western governments, UN detectives and international analysts trying to stem the illicit trade in weapons of mass destruction technology are alarmed by the black market trade. A European intelligence assessment obtained by the Guardian says Sudan has been using front companies and third countries to import machine tools, gauges and hi-tech processing equipment from western Europe for its military industries in recent years. But it says that Sudan is also being used as a conduit, as much of the equipment is too sophisticated for use in the country itself. "The suspicion arises that at least some of the machinery was not destined for or not only destined for Sudan," the assessment says. "Among the equipment purchased by Sudan there are dual-use goods whose use in Sudan appears implausible because of their high technological standard." Western analysts and intelligence agencies suspect the equipment has been or is being traded by the nuclear proliferation racket headed by the Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who admitted nuclear trading two years ago and is under house arrest in Islamabad. Khan is known to have visited Sudan at least once between 1998 and 2002, and the suspicion is he may have used the country as a warehouse for the hi-tech engineering equipment he was selling to Libya, Iran and North Korea for the assembly of centrifuges for enriching uranium, the most common way of building a nuclear bomb. Sudan has been ravaged by internal conflicts for decades, and has until recently been governed by an Islamist regime. Analysts point out that a "failing state" such as Sudan is an ideal candidate for the illicit trading. David Albright, who is investigating the various players in the Khan network and tracks nuclear proliferation for the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security, said about £20m worth of dual-use engineering equipment was imported by Sudan between 1999 and 2001. The purchases were denominated in German marks (before the introduction of the euro), suggesting that at least some of the equipment came from Germany. Investigators say the machinery has not been found in Sudan. Nor has it been found in Libya, since Tripoli gave up its secret nuclear bomb project in December 2003. Given Osama bin Laden's long relationship with Sudan, where he lived before moving to Afghanistan, there had been suspicions of al-Qaida involvement. But the goods have not been found in Afghanistan either. "A huge amount of dual-use equipment was bought by Sudan and people don't know where it went to," Mr Albright said. "It's a big mystery. The equipment has not been found anywhere." A senior international investigator confirmed that Sudan had been importing the material and that the transports had ceased in 2001. "No one now seems to be buying to that extent," he said. "Perhaps the activity stopped because they got all that they needed." While the Khan operation is a main suspect, Iran is also suspected of being behind the Sudanese dealings. "There is the Khan network and then there is a much bigger network in this, and that is the Iranian network," the investigator said. Yesterday, the Guardian reported that the same European intelligence assessment - which draws on material gathered by British, French, German and Belgian agencies - concluded that the Iranian government had been successfully scouring Europe for the sophisticated equipment needed to build a nuclear bomb. Western intelligence and Mr Albright identified a state-owned firm in Khartoum as a "pivotal organisation" in Sudan's procurement of weapons and dual-use technology in eastern and western Europe and Russia. The named company has offices in Tehran, Moscow, Sofia, Istanbul and Beijing. According to the European intelligence assessment, the company "is cooperating intensively with Iran". "It is striking," says the document, "that [the company's] partners are enterprises subordinate to Iran's Defence Industries Organisation. Technology transfer between these two states and links between their programmes cannot be ruled out." While the machinery was dual-use, meaning that it could be used in civil or military applications, Mr Albright said he understood the equipment was "nuclear-related". "For the people following this, the interest is whether it's nuclear. The assumption is it is." The likelihood that the machinery was for Sudan is slim, say experts and investigators. "The idea that Sudan could buy and make use of extremely sophisticated nuclear technology is obviously a question mark," said Jon Wolfsthal, a nuclear proliferation expert at Washington's Centre for Strategic and International Studies. Sudan is known to have a small civilian nuclear programme, researching nuclear medicine, radiological safety and food irradiation techniques. Never before has it been suspected of involvement in nuclear weapons research, however. It signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in 2004. Useful links Rift Valley Institute: Sudan Internet Resources sudan.net Sudan News Agency Sudan Tribune Norwegian Council for Africa: Sudan Protect Darfur [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 23 Reuters: Venezuelan thieves steal another radioactive unit 04 Jan 2006 18:36:53 GMT Source: Reuters CARACAS, Venezuela, Jan 4 (Reuters) - Thieves in Venezuela have stolen equipment containing radioactive material used in the oil industry, in the latest in a string of similar incidents, officials said on Wednesday. Angel Diaz, head of the energy ministry's nuclear affairs department, warned the Cesium-137 material could cause contamination if exposed. The equipment, used in oil prospecting, was stolen last week in eastern Anzoategui State. "If you take this material out, it could cause contamination," Diaz told reporters. Authorities arrested three police officers in December after they were linked to the robbery of a truck carrying a device containing Iridium-192, used to check oil pipelines. Two other capsules with Iridium-192 went missing in March through negligence in two separate incidents. Both of those capsules have since been found, one dumped in Lake Maracaibo in the west of the country. In neighboring Brazil in 1987, scrap-metal scavengers took a container with Cesium-137 from an abandoned radiation-therapy clinic. Children smeared the material on their faces and bodies because it glowed after the container was opened. Four people died and about 250 suffered from radiation contamination. ***************************************************************** 24 AFP: CIA gave Iran nuclear design in botched plot - new book - Wed Jan 4, 4:26 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - The CIA" /> CIA, using a double-agent Russian scientist, may have handed a blueprint for a nuclear bomb to Iran" /> Iran, according to a new book which has ruffled the US national security establishment. "State of War" by James Risen, the New York Times reporter who exposed the Bush administration's controversial domestic spying operation, claims the plans contained fatal flaws designed to derail Tehran's nuclear drive. But the deliberate errors were so rudimentary they would have been easily fixed by sophisticated Russian nuclear scientists, the book said. The operation, which took place during the Clinton administration in early 2000, was code-named Operation Merlin and "may have been one of the most reckless operations in the modern history of the CIA," according to Risen. It called for the unnamed scientist, a defector from the Soviet nuclear program, to offer Iran the blueprint for a "firing set" -- the intricate mechanism which triggers the chain reaction needed for a nuclear explosion. According to Risen's book, the agent, posing as a greedy Russian scientist keen to steel secrets, delivered to plans as instructed by the CIA to Iran's mission to the International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) in Vienna. He had been told by CIA officers that the Iranians already had the technology detailed in the plans -- and that the ruse was simply an attempt by the agency to find out the full scope of Tehran's nuclear knowledge. But, contrary to orders not to open the packet, he added a note which made it clear he could help fix the flaws -- for money. The CIA declined to comment in detail on the book's claims on Iran -- but issued a vigorous condemnation of Risen's work and methods. "Readers deserve to know that every chapter of State of War contains serious inaccuracies," said Jennifer Millerwise, CIA Director of Public Affairs. "The author's reliance on anonymous sources begs the reader to trust that these are knowledgeable people. As this book demonstrates, anonymous sources are often unreliable. "It is most alarming that the author discloses information that he believes to be ongoing intelligence operations, including actions as critical as stopping dangerous nations from acquiring nuclear weapons. "Setting aside whether what he wrote is accurate or inaccurate, it demonstrates an unfathomable and sad disregard for US national security and those who take life-threatening risks to ensure it." In the same chapter, Risen also claimed that a CIA officer once mistakenly sent a message to an agent, who turned out to be a turncoat, in Iran exposing the US spy network in the country. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 25 Guardian Unlimited: Intelligence report claims nuclear market thriving European firms warned they are main target of illicit trade in weapons parts Ian Traynor and Ian Cobain Wednesday January 4, 2006 The Guardian It is intended as an alarm bell sounding in the boardrooms of western Europe's leading engineering companies as well as the common rooms of campuses and cutting-edge science labs. It is also a wake-up call to EU governments, spy agencies and customs officials struggling to keep the ingredients for weapons of mass destruction (WMD) out of the hands of some of the most unsavoury regimes in the Middle East and the far east. But if the 55-page confidential "early warning" intelligence assessment is impressive in the sheer mass of detail on the names and locations of suspect players in the global WMD game, the information may be seen as deeply troubling. It emphasises that west European engineering firms, germ laboratories, scientific thinktanks and university campuses are successfully preyed on by multitudes of middlemen, front companies, scholars with hidden agendas and bureaucrats working for the Iranian, Syrian or Pakistani regimes. The report from a leading EU intelligence service obtained by the Guardian represent, it seems, the pooled knowledge of at least four major EU member-states on how countries such as Iran, Syria, and North Korea orchestrate a vast network of traders, phoney companies, state institutions and diplomatic missions internationally to procure the means to develop chemical, biological, nuclear and conventional weapons. Given the hi-tech nature of the coveted parts and materials, the west European marketplace is the principal shopping mall, while Russia and the former Soviet Union are targeted for talented if impoverished brainpower. The Iranians, for example, are using middlemen in the neighbouring and post-Soviet countries of Azerbaijan and Armenia to tap the post-Soviet market, the document states. Or the Pakistanis. The world's biggest clandestine nuclear proliferation racket, centred around the Pakistani metallurgist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, was exposed more than two years ago. Khan is under house arrest and several of his collaborators in Europe have been arrested in Germany, Switzerland and South Africa. Yet the business rolls on, according to the document almost from the moment Khan went on Pakistani television to "confess" in February 2004. "Since the beginning of 2004 extensive procurement efforts for the Pakistani nuclear sector have been registered." Furthermore, the range of materials and components being bought "clearly exceeds" that required for spare parts and replacements in Islamabad's nuclear programme. That suggests the nuclear black market is trading on the surplus goods. The report notes, for example, that Khan's shopping sprees included high-grade aluminium tubing for the centrifuges that spin uranium into bomb fuel. He sold the pipes to Libya's Colonel Muammar Gadafy, who has since given them up. "The procurement efforts for such tubing were not halted after the uncovering of the procurement network." Khan's power base outside Islamabad, the Khan Research Laboratories (named after him), remain a central institution in the Pakistani nuclear programme, according to the document, served by an array of front companies who are past masters at disguising the real "end users" for the components and equipment they purchase in western Europe. While the Pakistani bomb project has long been realised, Iran's nuclear ambitions are not as advanced and have the makings of an international crisis. So it is not surprising that much of the document focuses on Iranian activities - not only in the nuclear field, but in bio-chemical and conventional weapons, notably its "very ambitious" missile programmes. The document lists more than 200 Iranian companies, institutes, government offices and academic outfits said to be engaged in weapons research, development and procurement, and mostly subordinate to the defence ministry in Tehran's armed forces logistics department. Russia, which has just clinched a billion-dollar missile deal with Iran, is identified as crucial to Iran's military programmes, especially the missile development; 16 Russian companies and academic institutes are named as helping and profiting from the Iranian military effort. They range from the Glavkosmos space agency to St Petersburg's Technical University. The Iranians, as well as the Pakistanis and the Syrians, are also benefiting from North Korean military prowess and exports, the document says, noting that "the export of arms equipment is currently reckoned to be North Korea's most important source of income." To maintain this performance, the document says, the North Koreans increasingly depend on being able to import western goods and equipment. To this end they use a dense web of firms and offices, their roots going back to the 1970s. More than 30 of the named companies and institutions said to be involved in the North Korean arms procurement endeavour are in China and most of those are Chinese state firms or bodies. Last week the US State Department slapped sanctions on six Chinese companies for their alleged supplies to Iran's military industries. The main market for the North Korean exports is the Middle East. "The most important buyers are Egypt, Iran, Pakistan and Syria." Damascus, the document says, has been striving for self-sufficiency in its WMD efforts for years through substantial supplies of material and knowhow from Russia and through purchases in western Europe. Most surprisingly perhaps, the report says that Syria "has recently strengthened cooperation in the [arms] sector, particularly with Iran". The 55 pages list hundreds of companies and institutions from Pyongyang to Beijing to Sofia said to be in the WMD business, often using front companies in Dubai to disguise their true dealings. The aim is to "name and shame", to warn off EU companies from doing business with the listed organisations. What the intelligence assessment does not include are the names of the west European firms and scholars believed to be profiting handsomely from the trade in military knowhow and components. Useful links Control Arms campaign site Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Federation of American Scientists Carnegie Endowment for International Peace saferworld.org.uk Wisconsin Project Foreign Policy magazine [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 26 [du-list] Deployed Gulf War vets more likely to have illness Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 17:40:42 -0800 http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/emaf.nsf/Popup?ReadForm&db=stltoday%5Cnews%5Cstories.nsf&docid=2273701C6CE0CE3B862570EA001CB326 Deployed Gulf War vets more likely to have illness By Tina Hesman ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH Sunday, Jan. 01 2006 Gulf War veterans who deployed during the war are more likely to suffer from a constellation of health problems than nondeployed vets even a decade later. Researchers led by Dr. Melvin S. Blanchard of the St. Louis Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Washington University found that more than 28 percent of deployed Gulf War veterans suffered from a complex of unexplained symptoms called Chronic Multisymptom Illness, or CMI, as compared to about 16 percent of nondeployed veterans with similar symptoms. The results of the study appear in the American Journal of Epidemiology. Investigators from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention identified the multisymptom illness in 1994 among Air National Guard troops in Lebanon, Pa. Troops reported fatigue, sleep problems, muscle pain, moodiness and problems with thinking and memory. Although more prevalent in veterans from the war, the complex illness is not specific to the Gulf War and may not be the same as Gulf War syndrome. The initial study found that 45 percent of deployed veterans met the criteria, while only 15 percent of nondeployed people had the multisymptom complex. The new study found that deployed personnel, particularly those who experienced combat stress, were still more likely to have the cluster of symptoms even 10 years after returning home. The incidence of illness among the deployed troops dropped, while the number of nondeployed veterans reporting the cluster of symptoms stayed the same. "It's a good news, bad news story," said Dr. Donald W. Black, professor of psychiatry at the University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine. "The good news is that fewer veterans report symptoms at 10 years (after the war). The bad news is that for many veterans the symptoms persist." Fewer reports of veterans with symptoms could mean that the condition isn't permanent. "There is a saying that time heals wounds," Blanchard said when asked what accounts for the drop. He stressed that veterans in this study are not the same people as participated in earlier studies, but believes the sample is representative of the nearly 700,000 deployed Gulf War veterans. "This is yet another reminder that wartime experiences can lead to chronic physical and psychological problems," Black said. "If we're going to send people off to war, we need to be aware that even if they come back whole physically, they're still at higher risk of developing symptoms later." Veterans of the Iraq war also may develop symptoms similar to those reported by people who served in the Gulf War and other conflicts, Black said. The Iraq war has been longer than the first Gulf War with more casualties, more combat exposure for deployed troops, more injuries and more women exposed to combat stress. Those factors could make symptoms even more severe for veterans of the current war, but the final effect remains to be seen, he said. thesman@post-dispatch.com 314-340-8325 _____________________________________________________________________ If you enjoy reading about interesting news, you might like the 3 O'Clock Stir from STLtoday.com. Sign up and you'll receive an email with unique stories of the day, every Monday-Friday, at no charge. Sign up at http://newsletters.stltoday.com _____________________________________________________________________ [input] [input] [input] [input] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com. In the body of the message type unsubscribe and send. ***************************************************************** 27 Former Pentagon Expert On DU Radiological/Biological War Crimes Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 22:58:39 -0500 X-Fingerprint: smirnowb@ix.netcom.com-127.127 From Dr. Doug Rokke, former head of Pentagon cleanup of DU [depleted uranium]- illegal use of depleted uranium: AR 700-48, DA PAm 700-48, and radiological exposures limits specified in TB 9-1300-278. DHS guidelines: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/fr-cont.html or http://cryptome.org/dhs010306.txt doug rokke 217-643-6205 Depleted Uranium Situation Requires Action By President Bush and Prime Minister Blair Dr. Doug Rokke, Ph.D. former Director, U.S. Army Depleted Uranium project January 4, 2006 While U.S. and British military personnel continue using illegal uranium munitions- America's and England's own "dirty bombs" U.S. Army, U.S. Department of Energy, and U.S. Department of Defense officials continue to deny that there are any adverse health and environmental effects as a consequence of the manufacture, testing, and/or use of uranium munitions to avoid liability for the willful and illegal dispersal of a radioactive toxic material - depleted uranium. They arrogantly refuse to comply with their own regulations, orders, and directives that require United States Department of Defense officials to provide prompt and effective medical care "all" exposed individuals [Medical Management of Unusual Depleted Uranium Casualties, DOD, Pentagon, 10/14/93, Medical Management of Army personnel Exposed to Depleted Uranium (DU) Headquarters, U.S. Army Medical Command 29 April 2004), and section 2-5 of AR 70-48]. They also refuse to clean up dispersed radioactive Contamination as required by Army Regulation- AR 700-48: "Management of Equipment Contaminated With Depleted Uranium or Radioactive Commodities" (Headquarters, Department Of The Army, Washington, D.C., September 2002) and U.S. Army Technical Bulletin- TB 9-1300-278: "Guidelines For Safe Response To Handling, Storage, And Transportation Accidents Involving Army Tank Munitions Or Armor Which Contain Depleted Uranium" (Headquarters, Department Of The Army, Washington, D.C., JULY 1996). Specifically section 2-4 of United States Army Regulation-AR 700-48 dated September 16, 2002 requires that: (1) "Military personnel "identify, segregate, isolate, secure, and label all RCE" (radiologically contaminated equipment). (2) "Procedures to minimize the spread of radioactivity will be implemented as soon as possible." (3) "Radioactive material and waste will not be locally disposed of through burial, submersion, incineration, destruction in place, or abandonment" and (4) "All equipment, to include captured or combat RCE, will be surveyed, packaged, retrograded, decontaminated and released IAW Technical Bulletin 9-1300-278, DA PAM 700-48" (Note: Maximum exposure limits are specified in Appendix F). The previous and current use of uranium weapons, the release of radioactive components in destroyed U.S. and foreign military equipment, and releases of industrial, medical, research facility radioactive materials have resulted in unacceptable exposures. Therefore, decontamination must be completed as required by U.S. Army Regulation 700-48 and should include releases of all radioactive materials resulting from military operations. The extent of adverse health and environmental effects of uranium weapons contamination is not limited to combat zones but includes facilities and sites where uranium weapons were manufactured or tested including Vieques; Puerto Rico; Colonie, New York; Concord, MA; and Jefferson Proving Grounds, Indiana. Therefore medical care must be provided by the United States Department of Defense officials to all individuals affected by the manufacturing, testing, and/or use of uranium munitions. Thorough environmental remediation also must be completed without further delay. I am amazed that fourteen years after was asked to clean up the initial DU mess from Gulf War 1 and over ten years since I finished the depleted uranium project that United States Department of Defense officials and others still attempt to justify uranium munitions use while ignoring mandatory requirements. I am dismayed that Department of Defense and Department of Energy officials and representatives continue personal attacks aimed to silence or discredit those of us who are demanding that medical care be provided to all DU casualties and that environmental remediation is completed in compliance with U.S. Army Regulation 700-48. But beyond the ignored mandatory actions the willful dispersal of tons of solid radioactive and chemically toxic waste in the form of uranium munitions is illegal (http://www.traprockpeace.org/karen_parker_du_ille gality.pdf) and just does not even pass the common sense test and according to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, DHS, is a dirty bomb. DHS issued "dirty bomb" response guidelines, http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/fr-cont.html , on January 3, 2006 for incidents within the United States but ignore DOD use of uranium weapons and existing DOD regulations. These guidelines specifically state that: "Characteristics of RDD and IND Incidents: A radiological incident is defined as an event or series of events, deliberate or accidental, leading to the release, or potential release, into the environment of radioactive material in sufficient quantity to warrant consideration of protective actions. Use of an RDD or IND is an act of terror that produces a radiological incident." Thus the use of uranium munitions is "an act or terror" as defined by DHS. Finally continued compliance with the infamous March 1991 Los Alamos Memorandum that was issued to ensure continued use of uranium munitions can not be justified. In conclusion: the President of the United States- George W. Bush and The Prime Minister of Great Britain-Tony Blair must acknowledge and accept responsibility for willful use of illegal uranium munitions- their own "dirty bombs"- resulting in adverse health and environmental effects. President Bush and Prime Minister Blair also should order: 1. medical care for all casualties, 2. thorough environmental remediation, 3. immediate cessation of retaliation against all of us who demand compliance with medical care and environmental remediation requirements, 4. and stop the already illegal the use (UN finding) of depleted uranium munitions. References- these references are copies the actual regulations and orders and other pertinent official documents: http://www.traprockpeace.org/twomemos.html http://www.traprockpeace.org/rokke_du_3_ques.html http://www.traprockpeace.org/du_dtic_wakayama_Aug2002.html http://www.traprockpeace.org/karen_parker_du_illegality.pdf http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/fr-cont.html http://cryptome.org/dhs010306.txt ***************************************************************** 28 [NukeNet] High levels of Strontium 90 found in goat's milk 5 Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:11:37 -0800 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Dear All, Please click on www.mothballmillstone.org and then click on the full story. It has alarming news about Sr. 90 in goat's milk near Millstone Nuclear Power Plant and outlines how the corageous people there are fighting to get the information known. How much Sr. 90 is in the milk you are drinking, or feeding to your children? The coverup was so complete that even the owner of the goat was not given the radiation readings. The cluster of cancer and leukemia deaths in the neighborhood are also frightening. Isn't it time for us to establish ourr own independent monitoring systems? We need to learn how to test milk and collect our own data, and then how to diseminate it widely. At the very least, we need to insist that our states do independent monitoring, and that our newspapers carry the monitoring results on a timely basis, not 3 to 6 years after the fact. Agreed? Happy New Year, Ya'll Love, Jeannine From: "Sidney Goodman" Reply-To: gizmogink@mindspring.com Subject: FW: Re: Happy New Year! Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 20:53:37 -0800 Subject: Re: Happy New Year! Nancy, The website (www.mothballmillstone.org) is fabulous! Have a look. ----- Original Message ----- From: NancyBurtonEsq@aol.com To: upthesun@cshore.com Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 4:45 PM Subject: Happy New Year! Dear Pete & Mitzi, Check out www.mothballmillstone.org - You Beautiful People are there for all the world to be inspired by! Love you very, very much! Nancy _______________________________________________________________________ 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 Salt Lake Tribune: Utah will test water for rocket fuel chemical Article Last Updated: 01/04/2006 12:45:38 AM Perchlorate: It was recently found in Utah milk samples By Joe Baird and Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune The state will begin this spring to test groundwater for perchlorate - a rocket fuel chemical - amid growing concern about its presence in drinking water supplies nationwide and its recent discovery in a half-dozen milk samples in Utah. Larry Lewis, spokesman for the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food, said Tuesday that the department will test for perchlorate in more than 400 water sources in seven counties - Utah, Summit, Wasatch, Carbon, Emery, Grand and San Juan - as part of its annual groundwater sampling, scheduled to run from May to October. Half of the samples will be taken from drinking water wells, one quarter from irrigation wells, 15 percent from springs and 10 percent from wells used for livestock. "This is a result of ongoing public concern and interest in perchlorate in the environment," Lewis said. "We want to see if it's in the groundwater, find out what's there and act accordingly." Perchlorate is the explosive component of solid rocket fuel. It is used in munitions, including gunpowder, fireworks and highway flares. Airbags, tanning and leather finishing, rubber, paint and enamel production also rely Perhchlorate Q &A What is perchlorate? A chemical known best as an energy booster for solid rocket and jet fuel and in automotive air bags. How are people exposed to it? Tests around the United States have shown perchlorate in varying amounts in groundwater, milk and such irrigated crops as lettuce. There is no question that perchlorate affects the thyroid, but there is heated debate about how much is unsafe. Industries and the Pentagon has attacked animal studies that showed tiny amounts of perchlorate can harm the brains of developing fetuses and infants. Where can I find out more? + The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has a Web site with information. + The Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization, has done five reports on perchlorate contamination, that can be found by clicking here. + Perchlorate skeptics also have a page here. on perchlorate. Although the chemical has been in use for decades, there continues to be widespread disagreement about its impact on human health. Some studies suggest that perchlorate even above 100 parts per billion (ppb) poses no danger; others indicate that even tiny concentrations disrupt the thyroids of fetuses and young children, which manage development and the brain. The Environmental Protection Agency has not established a standard for perchlorate, but has set a "reference dose" for the substance at 24.5 ppb for drinking water. Meanwhile, some states have opted for tougher controls. Massachusetts, for example, has a standard of 1 ppb. California is considering a 6 ppb standard. The decision to begin perchlorate groundwater testing in Utah was prompted, at least in part, by the results of the state's tests in December 2004 on milk. Contracted to a private lab, DataChem Inc. of Salt Lake City, the tests yielded results ranging from 2.95 to 6.22 ppb, with five of the six samples closer to the higher end. "It is a very wise move by the state to start looking for perchlorate," said Bill Walker, West Coast vice president of the Environmental Working Group. "Given what we know about perchlorate in Utah, they may be surprised." California first found perchlorate in water sources near military contractors and air fields, then launched a statewide program that revealed many water supplies were tainted. Discoveries of perchlorate in Utah have followed a similar path. The Environmental Protection Agency has identified perchlorate in water supplies at Hill Air Force Base, the site of a Superfund cleanup because of perchlorate; Thiokol, the rocket manufacturer west of Brigham City, and Alliant Techsystems, whose rocket facilities stretch across both West Valley City and Magna. The discovery of perchlorate in one of its wells has prompted the Magna Water Company to stop production in the well and get rid of the chemical. "Fortunately, it's been in the 8 to 10 ppb range," said Magna Water Manager Ed Hansen. "But until there is a definite [standard established by EPA], our board felt we needed to isolate it and not allow any of it to go into our system." Other local water districts are also testing for perchlorate, with encouraging results. Tests by the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District in 2002 showed no detectable levels in groundwater and surface supplies. The Weber Basin Conservancy District has found perchlorate in a few shallow groundwater sources - in one instance as high as 70 ppb. But it has yet to find any trace in the aquifer it taps for drinking water, even near the Air Force base. Western water officials have grown increasingly concerned about perchlorate since the May 4, 1988, explosion of a perchlorate manufacturing plant in Henderson, Nev., which left two employees dead and allowed the chemical to begin leaching into Lake Mead. That plant was relocated the following year to a site 15 miles west of Cedar City. Now called Wecco, short for Western Electro-Chemical Corp., the plant was the site of a 1997 explosion that killed one employee and injured four others. The state's testing list does not include water supplies near the plant in Iron County. Walker, of the Environmental Working Group, said omitting the nation's only perchlorate manufacturing plant is surprising. "That would certainly seem to be a major oversight," he said. Meanwhile, the state agriculture department wants the milk-drinking public to remain confident. Lewis says his agency is trying to abide by Food and Drug Administration guidelines. "Their basic recommendation is that those low, low trace amounts appear not to be a problem for consumers, and that people should not alter their diets, avoid foods that contain those extremely low levels of perchlorate." jbaird@sltrib.com jfahys@sltrib.com Perchlorate What is perchlorate? A chemical known best as an energy booster for solid rocket and jet fuel and in automotive air bags. How are people exposed to it? Tests around the United States have shown perchlorate in varying amounts in groundwater, milk and such irrigated crops as lettuce. There is no question that perchlorate affects the thyroid, but there is heated debate about how much is unsafe. Industries and the Pentagon have attacked animal studies that showed tiny amounts of perchlorate can harm the brains of developing fetuses and infants. Where can I find out more? The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has a Web site with information: http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/ccl/perchlorate/ perchlorate.html. The Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization, has done five reports on perchlorate contamination that can be found at http://www.ewg.org. Perchlorate skeptics also have a page: http://www.tera.org/perchlorate/welcome.htm © Copyright 2005, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 30 Journal Star News: Uranium expert will speak at forum PJStar.com - 010406 TRI_COUNTY Wednesday, January 4, 2006 PEORIA - Doug Rokke, an expert on depleted uranium, will speak at a public forum Saturday on the Iraq war. The forum, from 2 to 4 p.m. at the Peoria Public Library, 107 NE Monroe, is free and open to the public. Rokke, a retired Army major who was director of the Army's Depleted Uranium Project from 1994 to 1995, will discuss the growing danger of depleted uranium caused by weapons used during the war in Iraq and elsewhere. The event is part of a national campaign organized by a coalition of peace groups. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 1 News Plaza, Peoria, IL 61643 :: 1-309-686-3000 ***************************************************************** 31 Bradenton Herald: Tallevast group - Holes a hazard | 01/04/2006 | Posted on Wed, Jan. 04, 2006 DUANE MARSTELLER Herald Staff Writer TALLEVAST - Several holes dug near a house under construction had the pollution-tainted Tallevast community up in arms and Manatee County officials scrambling Tuesday. A neighborhood advocacy group called the holes, some of which measured up to 8 feet across and contained standing water, a safety and health hazard. The holes also renewed long-standing fears that digging could release toxic vapors and dust from underground pollution that has leaked from a former beryllium plant. "This is a very big concern because this is right in the middle of the (contamination) plume," said Wanda Washington, vice president of the Family Oriented Community United and Strong (FOCUS) advocacy group. County officials said a plumbing contractor apparently dug the holes at 7138 17th St. Court E., where a single-family residence is being built. Officials made plans to have the area cordoned off Tuesday night - and air, water and soil samples taken and tested today before filling the holes. "We don't want anything going on down there without us knowing about it," County Administrator Ernie Padgett said before leaving his office to inspect the site. He did not immediately return follow-up calls to his cellular and home phones. An official of Urban Plumbing Service Inc. confirmed the Bradenton company recently did work to connect the house to water and sewer lines. Jennifer Urban, the company's administrative project manager, said she didn't know when the work was performed but that it was not in the company's schedule for Tuesday. The general contractor building the house, Robert Bolt of Going Up Inc., said he was unaware of any digging on the site Tuesday. He said he was unable to reach his field supervisor, the only one of his employees at the job site Tuesday. Washington said the holes, several of which were caving in, were a safety hazard because they weren't blocked off. One hole was dug near a well used to monitor contamination, exposing the well's pipes, she said. But a bigger concern was that the digging could further expose Tallevast residents to underground pollution that covers some 131 acres surrounding the former Loral American Beryllium Co. plant at 1600 Tallevast Road. The plant's former owner, Lockheed Martin Corp., didn't cause the contamination but has accepted responsibility for cleaning it up. Digging has been a contentious issue in Tallevast since late 2003, when residents learned of the pollution. The county cleaned out a drainage ditch alongside Tallevast Road in February, angering residents who weren't told in advance, according to Herald archives. Three months later, community outrage over a water main project at the intersection of Tallevast Road and 15th Street East prompted the county to halt the work. But the county installed a water line to the house under construction in late December despite a formal protest by FOCUS. County officials said they took precautions, including vapor monitoring, suggested by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to safeguard residents. Duane Marsteller, transportation and growth/development reporter, can be reached at 745-7080, ext. 2630, ***************************************************************** 32 Platts: 2006 seen as important year for fuel market + For the nuclear fuel market, 2006 is shaping up as a particularly important year. Developments market analysts are watching include: LES is still on track to receive an NRC license to build and operate a centrifuge enrichment plant in New Mexico. USEC Inc.'s American Centrifuge development strategy will either be validated or not. Companies currently investigating Silex Systems Ltd.'s laser enrichment process will probably decide one way or the other on whether to invest in a pilot 250,000 SWU/year plant. The winning bidder to take over Westinghouse likely will be known, as will the company that will buy RWE Solutions and its key RWE Nukem uranium trading unit. There should be much more clarity as to the impact of the court decision declaring SWU to be a service on the commercial SWU market, as well as on the Russian antidumping suspension agreement, which is currently undergoing a sunset review. The spot price of uranium is likely to climb over $40 a pound U3O8, but the rapid rise of the spot price?an increase of 75% in the past year and 150% over the past two years?won't continue, most analysts say. Consolidation of the more than 200 junior uranium companies will probably accelerate. Regarding the spot price, most analysts now see it climbing above $40/lb sometime during the first half of the year. But there is no consensus as to how much higher it will climb. A big unknown is whether buying by hedge fund/investment companies will continue in 2006 at its 2005 pace. As the year ended, analysts said that almost 10-million lb were in the control of these entities, which have so far been content to hold their inventories. Also it is unclear how much supply will be available to meet continuing demand of utilities, many of which are taking steps to build inventory. For example, in a Dec. 21 filing with the U.S. Securities &Exchange Commission, the owners of the South Texas Project said the owners committee had approved the acquisition of "a strategic refueling reload of uranium." Although analysts believe that the spot price will not continue to rise indefinitely, they also suggest that until supply catches up with demand there is not going be much sustained downward pressure on the price. Consultant International Nuclear Inc. (INI) estimates 2006 worldwide uranium production at 110-million lb, with consumption around 170-milllion lb. But how soon that gap will be closed is unclear. Bullish estimates of production out of Kazakhstan by 2010?as much as 39,000,000 lb U3O8?may be off by as much as a third, say some analysts. INI estimates 2006 production in Kazakhstan at close to12-million lb U3O8 and projects that production in 2010 could be as much as 22.5-million lb. But there are hurdles that could hinder a smooth production increase. Wallace Mays, one of the key figures in UrAsia Energy Ltd.'s foray into production in Kazakhstan, said in a paper delivered at the World Nuclear Association's annual meeting in September, that a key bottleneck to production by in situ leach mining is the availability of drill rigs in Kazakhstan. "Many of the manufacturers of drill rigs have gone out of business," Mays said. And in Kazakhstan, "the lack of competition from government-licensed drilling companies (only two are licensed) has limited the development of competitively effective drilling equipment and methods," he added. There are also indications that the expansion of BHP Billiton's Olympic Dam copper-uranium operation may proceed more slowly, driven in large part by BHP Billiton's strategy in the copper marketplace. Among the junior uranium companies, Paladin Resources is expected to begin production at its Langer Heinrich mining operation in Namibia late this year. In a recent coup, Paladin announced that it had hired Wyatt Buck, Cameco's general manager of the McArthur River mine and Key Lake mill, as the general manager of the Langer Heinrich mining operations. Buck will start work for Paladin Feb. 1. And Mestena Uranium has started up its Alta Mesa ISL project in Texas. And Uranium Resources Inc. is hoping for increased production in 2006. This story was published in full in Platts Nuclear Fuel. Request a free trial at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/ Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 33 Irish Examiner: Nuclear waste a hazard forever 05/01/06 I READ with interest Michael Job’s letter headlined ‘ Nuclear energy is our only option’ (Irish Examiner, January 2). While I do not doubt the information he provided regarding current global energy consumption and demand, I feel that several important points were not mentioned. While the generation of energy by nuclear means does not directly produce any of the greenhouse gases that we hear so much of today, the process does leave us with another problem in the form of hazardous nuclear waste. As yet there are no technological means safely to dispose of this waste. The current ‘solution’ to this problem is simply to bury it. In the US, for example, two enormous repositories have been built deep under the deserts of Nevada and New Mexico to store the hundreds of thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste resulting from the production of nuclear power and nuclear weapons. It has been estimated that this waste will take up to 250,000 years to decompose, which is significantly longer than any of the other forms of refuse that we are being encouraged to recycle in recent years. To help put this nuclear waste timeframe in perspective, if it was being produced in the days of Christ and was being disposed of the way it is today, its highly toxic, cancer-causing nature would have diminished hardly at all at the dawn of 2006. These repositories are inaccessible once sealed, but given that irradiated containers will corrode relatively rapidly, that soil and geological formations move and subside, and that groundwater seeps through rock, it is very likely only a question of time before nuclear particles begin to show up in the environment and the human food chain. One need only think of the sick and dying children of Chernobyl to imagine the potential suffering of future generations, victims of our selfishness. Nuclear energy is not our only option. There are alternatives, but these alone are not sufficient without a new moral approach and the abandonment of our excessively materialistic lifestyles. Eoin O’Callaghan 4 Ashbourne Court Carrigaline Co Cork © Irish Examiner, 2005, Thomas Crosbie Media, TCH ***************************************************************** 34 Pahrump Valley Times: Hard work or smart work for politicians? January 4, 2006 Last month James Thompson, a member of the September 11 commission, said in a speech, "Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is working hard to distribute some of the funds based on risk despite congressionally imposed restrictions favoring a pork-barrel system." I saved that clipping and stuck it in my file of political leaders talking about how hard they work. I've never understood the appeal of this kind of rhetoric to officeholders. Is it possible they don't know how it makes them sound? Here's an example. U.S. Sen. John Ensign in a speech to the Nevada Legislature: "But there are many other issues we are working hard on that have a direct impact on Nevada and I would like to share those with you." The hard work of Republican Ensign is vouched for by his Democratic colleague, Harry Reid, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal: "He [Reid] also praised Ensign for working hard to win over Republicans, even though only two outside Nevada voted to oppose Yucca Mountain." As for Reid himself, his web page says he is "working hard to protect Nevada's environment." Even working hard running for office is a credential, apparently. This is from Democrat John Lee's web page: "It's a big Senate District, but John is working hard covering as many community events as he can." George Bush, of course, is comically well known for talking about how hard he works. In his debate with John Kerry he used the term "hard work" 11 times, which suggests that he's kind of defensive about it. He even said, "You know, it's hard work" about his decision to send U.S. soldiers into danger. Recently U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana said of her efforts to get Hurricane Katrina impact funding for her state, "We're going to fight hard for every dollar." One might think Landrieu would have learned something from her famous live dialogue with CNN reporter Anderson Cooper on Sept. 1. After she thanked a bunch of other big shots who she said were helping her state, he broke in and said, "And to listen to politicians thanking each other and complimenting each other, you know, I got to tell you, there are a lot of people here who are very upset, and very angry, and very frustrated. "And when they hear politicians slap - you know, thanking one another, it just, you know, it kind of cuts them the wrong way right now, because literally there was a body on the streets of this town yesterday being eaten by rats because this woman had been laying in the street for 48 hours. And there's not enough facilities to take her up. Do you get the anger that is out here?" I hoped this on-air exchange would cool politicians off on swaggering about their work ethics, but no such luck. There's no reason to disdain hard work, of course. More than once, in defending state legislators from claims that they are all a bunch of lazy people at the public trough, I have written about how most of them come early, stay late, and sometimes literally work themselves into sickbeds. But that's different from their citing hard work as a credential. What exactly is hard work supposed to tell us about politicians? Hard work is something we automatically expect from officeholders. It should come with the job. And so they work hard - so what? Plenty of tyrants, sellouts, blockheads, and officials on the take have worked hard. Unless it's matched with wisdom, it can be as much threat as credential. In 1930, Congress enacted the Smoot Hawley Tariff as a Depression measure. I'll bet congress members worked hard on it. And it made the Depression worse. Daniel Rapoport, who reported on the U.S. House of Representatives, wrote a fine book in which he identified something he calls the "hard work syndrome" that, he said, "afflicts individuals as well as committees" like the House Armed Services Committee. "What the committees do is equate hard work with good judgment. Almost everybody on Armed Services works hard." Worse, Rapoport said, the work gives officeholders an emotional investment in the value of that work - "After legislators have spent months poring over reports, listening to witnesses and wrangling over the drafting of a bill, they don't take kindly to criticism of their accomplishments." Just what we want in officeholders. Besides, it's tasteless, coming from politicians, whose jobs are normally done in cushy offices with expensive equipment. There are people out there in the real world who really work hard and politicians enact inequitable tax laws that make the burdens of those workers heavier. "Working Hard, Living Poor" is the title of a study of what it's like in Nevada for working people. They don't need strutting by politicians. Myers is a veteran capital reporter. His column, "Against the Grain," appears here on Wednesdays. For comment or questions, please e-mail webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006 ***************************************************************** 35 Oxfam America: US Fails to Respond to UN Request; Western Shoshone Petition for Public Support 4 January, 2006 The United States government has missed a year-end deadline to answer questions posed by a United Nations committee looking into charges of federal harassment of the Western Shoshone people. But along with the Western Shoshone traditional government, the Western Shoshone Defense Project is determined not to let the matter die. The defense project is one of the local organizations with which Oxfam America partners. The Western Shoshone maintain that the US government, through a host of measures including the seizures of livestock and the imposition of heavy trespass fines as well as attempts to privatize large tracts of land to multinational gold companies, is violating the rights of indigenous people to their ancestral landssome 60 million acres that stretch across Nevada, Idaho, Utah, and California. The Western Shoshone have now launched a nationwide petition calling on the UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, or CERD, to act immediately to address the human rights violations the Western Shoshone have long endured. CERD was the committee that issued the list of 10 questions the government failed to answer by Dec. 31. The questions are part of a request for urgent action, which, if accepted, would allow the committee to open an investigation into US conduct regarding the land issues and the treatment of indigenous people. CERD is going to get a lot of pressure from the United States to drop this thing and not take it on as a formal urgent action before the full committee, said Julie Ann Fishel, the land recognition program director for the defense project. The appeal to CERD is the latest step in a long-simmering dispute between the Western Shoshone and the federal government. At issue is the Western Shoshones contention that the land is theirsrecognized as such by the Treaty of Ruby Valley in 1863and that federal agencies along with energy and mining industries are trampling on the rights of indigenous people in a scramble to access the valuable resources lying beneath the land. Protection of the land is critical to the Western Shoshones preservation of their cultural and spiritual integrity. But among the threats it now faces is a plan to store nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain and to conduct open-pit gold mining at Mt. Tenabo, both areas that are spiritually significant to the Western Shoshone. This is a critical land rights issue. The federal government needs to be held accountable for violating treaties with Indian nations, as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has clearly established, said Oxfam Americas Laura Inouye, referring to an earlier decision by that body which found the US Bureau of Land Management had violated Western Shoshone rights to due process, property rights, and equality. A similar finding by UNCERD will help the Western Shoshone press their case for justice. This isnt just about Indians. Its about everybody, added Fishel. Its about land, clean water, clean air, and protection of significant areas. This is about not allowing the US government to place corporate interests before human rights and environmental concerns. In August, a Western Shoshone delegation traveled to Geneva, Switzerland, to speak with CERD members and present their case. Another delegation plans to make a second trip to Geneva in March to present the petition in person. The deadline for signing the petition is Feb. 28 of this year. If we can get to the heart of US treatment of indigenous people, and tell the truth about that treatment, were going to get to the core of cleaning up social justice issues here and wherever US and corporate policies are affecting peoples lives, said Fishel. 2005 Oxfam America. Oxfam America is a member of Oxfam International ***************************************************************** 36 edmontonsun.com: Alberta's nuclear daze [edmontonsun.com] www.edmontonsun.com mailbag@edmsun.com Wed, January 4, 2006 Alberta's nuclear daze Idaho tour first step, claims opposition By DARCY HENTON, LEGISLATURE BUREAU Energy Minister Greg Melchin's trip to an Idaho research centre today has opposition Liberals wondering if the province is preparing to build a nuclear power plant in northern Alberta. Melchin is leading a 13-member delegation of politicians, academics and executives to the Idaho National Laboratories Power Research Centre. Liberal energy critic Hugh MacDonald says Albertans should be concerned about the visit because the centre is a leader in nuclear research. "If this government is quietly looking at encouraging the development of nuclear power in northern Alberta, what will that do to the environment?" he asked. "Where will we store this waste?" He said companies in the oilsands are looking at nuclear power as a low-cost alternative to using natural gas to refine tar-like oilsands bitumen. MacDonald also expressed concern that Melchin could be looking at linking Alberta's power system up to the Pacific Northwest - a move he said would raise the cost of electricity the way connecting to the U.S. market boosted domestic natural gas prices. But Alberta energy spokesman Cathy Housdorff says the $2,700 trip is an information-gathering tour. "As far as I know, they are going down there to look at the research being done in light of the 2003 blackouts in the U.S.," she said. Melchin said yesterday that he is gathering information to improve Alberta's power system. "We will be able to learn from the research the Idaho national centre is conducting on the U.S. power grid to help ensure Albertans continue to receive reliable electricity service," he said in a release. *****************************************************************