*****************************************************************
03/02/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.52
*****************************************************************
   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 [southnews] Spinning us to war with Iran-  an Aussie
2 [southnews] Iran could play Iraq card in row over nuclear plans
3 U.S.-India Nuclear Deal and Iran: Interview with Arjun
4 [NYTr] US, British envoys differ on next UN moves on Iran
5 UN Nuclear Agency Head Welcomes European-iranian Meeting On Weapons 
6 IRNA: N-plan peaceful, devoid of ambiguity, says Iranian ambassador 
7 Guardian Unlimited: State Dept.: Iran Has Itself to Blame
8 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Blames U.S. for Stalled Nuke Talks
9 Guardian Unlimited: Iran-Russia Talks Reported Resuming
10 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Refuses to Back Down in Nuke Talks
11 Guardian Unlimited: Tehran to Talk With EU Before IAEA Meeting
12 AFP: US seeks to 'destroy' Russian compromise offer - Iran - 
13 AFP: US gives unenthusiastic support to EU talks with Iran 
14 IRNA: Iran-Russia-Nuclear /WRD/
15 IRNA: Energy minister visits Isfahan nuclear research center
16 IRNA: ElBaradei welcomes Iran-EU3 talks 
17 Bush and Nukes in India
18 [NYTr] Nuclear Cave In: A Deeply Flawed India Deal
19 [NYTr] Hurdles ahead for landmark nuclear deal
20 [NYTr] Broccoli & Nukes: Inside Bush's Speedy Asian Diplomacy
21 UN Atomic Watchdog Hails Indian-us Nuclear Cooperation Agreement
22 Guardian Unlimited: U.S.-Indian Nuclear Deal Faces Obstacles
23 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Defends Nuclear Agreement With India
24 Guardian Unlimited: U.S., India Reach Agreement on Nuke Deal
25 [DU List] man loses depleted uranium action
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
26 US: [NukeNet] Where is your coverage on Millstone?
27 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Anger marks NRC meeting
28 US: Guardian Unlimited: Pa. Nuclear Plant Building Evacuated
29 US: NRC: NRC to Hold March 8th Public Meeting in Plymouth, Mass., on
30 Australian Financial Review: Nuclear economics fail
31 US: NRC: NRC Tracking ‘Alert’ at Susquehanna Nuclear Power Plant
32 US: POAC: NRC board OKs group's request for safety hearing 
33 US: Platts: US nuclear refueling outages show effects of aging maint
34 US: NRC: NRC Staff Approves Power Uprate for Vermont Yankee
35 US: Burlington Free Press.com: Vermont Yankee power increase approve
36 US: NRC: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impa
37 AFP: US, India clinch nuclear deal, call pact 'historic'
38 US: Vermont Guardian: NRC urges angry citizenry to participate in VY
39 IRNA: India agrees to open 14 out of 22 N-reactors to IAEA 
40 US: Vermont Guardian: Citizen group makes last-ditch bid to stall VY
41 US: Vermont Guardian: NRC approves uprate; VY plans Saturday power b
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
42 [du-list] Nibby lost his High Court action (BBC News)
43 BBC: Man loses depleted uranium action
44 UPI: Nuclear union demands workers' comp
45 US: Disinformation: Why Has Our Military Refused To Show This Traini
46 US: The Raw Story: U.S. signs $38 million deal for depleted uranium
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
47 Las Vegas SUN: EPA: Yucca radiation standards to be completed by yea
48 Deseret News: Yucca fight could bring work to PFS 
49 Guardian Unlimited: Serco recruits US partner to bid for nuclear cle
50 US: RGJ: EPA could be nearing mine site security solution
51 US: Bradenton Herald: Tallevast residents cite discrepancies in offe
52 US: Deseret News: Vetoed environmental measure dead 
53 ForUm: President wants to store used nuclear fuel in Ukraine
54 US: RIA Novosti: Ukraine to up nuclear waste storage payments - Yush
55 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca plays D.C. 
56 reviewjournal.com: Yucca Mountain backers get assurance
57 RGJ.com: Yucca Mountain proponents call for facility to move ahead
58 Kyiv Post: U.S. businessman to discuss construction of nuclear waste
59 US: MSNBC.com: Nuclear waste storage radiates controversy - Environm
60 US: cbs2chicago.com: Bill Would Require Disclosure Of Radioactive Le
61 US: Morris Daily Herald: The Politics of Tritium
62 Nevada Appeal: Yucca Project Under Stop-Work Order Following Disclos
63 Ensign: ENSIGN TESTIFIES ABOUT â€œJUNK SCIENCEâ€ AT YUCCA MOUNTAIN
64 KLASTV.com: Committee Reviews Yucca Mountain
65 Comments Needed: PressZoom.com: Management of low level radioactive 
66 US: TownOnline.com: Letter: Perchlorate response
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
67 KIFI: Most Are Happy with Idaho National Lab
68 DOE: U.S. and India Reach Historic Agreement on FutureGen Project
69 DOE: North American Energy Work Group Releases Updated Trilateral 
70 Idaho Statesman: State presses for nuclear cleanup
71 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savannah
72 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho 
73 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah
74 KTVB.COM: Survey of local perceptions of INL to be released
75 UPI: D.C. school teaches A-bomb construction
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 [southnews] Spinning us to war with Iran-  an Aussie
 
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 00:15:21 -0600 (CST)

An Aussie Perspective Spinning Us to War with Iran

By ANTONY LOEWENSTEIN
Counterpunch March 1, 2006

During former US President Bill Clinton's recent trip to Australia, he 
said the two greatest threats facing the 21st century were terrorism and 
global warming. The Age welcomed Clinton's presence in Melbourne as the 
coming of an almost god-like figure. "While much of the world's 
population struggles simply to survive", it breathlessly offered, "large 
numbers of the rest of us are searching for heroes." The fact that 
Clinton oversaw the bulk of sanctions against Iraq, and the death of 
over 500,000 men, women and children, was airbrushed out of existence. 
For the Age, Clinton wasn't Bush or a Republican, and therefore a person 
worth respecting.

Clinton was right on one issue, however. Global warming is a major 
problem and still largely side-lined by governments and mainstream media 
alike. Readers of the UK Guardian on February 8 were treated to this 
striking piece of news:

"Sweden is to take the biggest energy step of any advanced western 
economy by trying to wean itself off oil completely within 15 years - 
without building a new generation of nuclear power stations. The attempt 
by the country of 9 million people to become the world's first 
practically oil-free economy is being planned by a committee of 
industrialists, academics, farmers, car makers, civil servants and 
others, who will report to parliament in several months."

Sweden is the first Western country to attempt such an endeavour and yet 
the news was ignored in Australia. Instead, our self-appointed 
terrologists, "war on terror" devotees and fear-mongering government 
prefer to focus the public's attentions on the next target of 
liberation: Iran.

As the quagmire in Iraq deepens, and Islamophobia becomes both 
politically correct and encouraged, the same blood-stained figures that 
led us into Saddam's lair are now trying to achieve a similar result 
next-door. Perhaps somebody should inform John Howard. He told Southern 
Cross Radio on February 27 that Iraq is "inching towards a more stable 
future" and foreign troops were needed for the "stabilisation process." 
In reality, the occupation is the main source of the ongoing insurgency. 
The fact that Howard is lying is dismissed as part of the political 
game. In the UK, there are currently moves to ensure politicians promise 
to never lie while in office. The chairman of the Committee on Standards 
in Public Life, Sir Alaistair Graham, says that the public demands 
politicians "tell it as it is and own up to mistakes." Taking a country 
to war on a lie would hopefully classify as a "mistake."

We live in an environment where Muslims are portrayed as backward, 
looking for Western assistance and irrationally violent. Take this 
example from UK columnist Julie Burchill, writing in Haaretz on February 17:

     "Anyway, from now on I think I'll get just a few less accusations 
of racism when I point out that Muslims can be a bit, well, 
narrow-minded. Mind you, it's a long hard struggle trying to make 
bleeding-heart liberals see sense. Especially when you live in a country 
where a sizable part of the print and broadcasting media are such 
guilt-ridden cretins when it comes to Islam that if they saw Osama bin 
Laden and Saddam Hussein sexually sharing their own grandmother, they'd 
swear the poor old lady asked for it."

Perhaps Muslims need a good dose of Western invasion and occupation. And 
Iran is the next victim. A poll taken in the US in mid February 
suggested that people believe Iran will develop nuclear weapons but also 
use them against the United States. We are constantly told that Iran is 
a "threat". Barry Cohen, federal Labor MP from 1969-1990 and a minister 
in the Hawke government, informed readers in the Australian on February 
17 that Iran was led by fanatics and desired to destroy Israel with 
nuclear weapons. "The fanatics don't care if they die", he wrote, "On 
the contrary, many will welcome it. At the risk of being repetitive we 
have a problem." His solution wasn't articulated, but he clearly 
believed that military strikes against Iran were both necessary and 
urgent. The Iranian people a recent report said that untold thousands of 
civilians would die in a US attack were clearly irrelevant.

Larry Derfner, a senior journalist and columnist at the Jerusalem Post, 
offered another perspective. He believed that Iran was going to get 
nuclear weapons whether the West liked it or not. His answer, however, 
was for Israel to build "more and better nuclear weapons of its own." 
This kind of "deterrence", Derfner wrote, "works well." He also 
encouraged the Jewish state to develop better chemical and biological 
weapons than Iran. The lunatics have most certainly taken over the 
asylum. Witness Republican Senator John McCain, who told US television 
last Sunday that, "The Iranian threat to the world is the biggest since 
the Cold War." What he meant to say, of course, is that the Iranian 
threat is the biggest since the Iraqi threat, which is the biggest since 
the Taliban threat.

The world asked Saddam Hussein to "prove a negative" and insisted he 
prove that he did not have weapons of mass destruction. Now we are 
asking Iran to prove another negative: that it is not developing nukes. 
Common sense teaches us that it is impossible to prove that something 
does not exist.

The rise of a supposedly nuclear Iran is not to be tolerated, we're 
informed, but India and Pakistan can build their arsenals with Western 
blessing. Israel's open secret of between 200 and 500 nuclear warheads 
isn't even susceptible to international inspections, while Iran has 
allowed UN inspectors to comb the country looking for weapon's material. 
It should be noted that North Korea has undoubtedly learnt the best way 
to avoid US invasion. Build a bomb - maybe a few - and watch the world 
suddenly lower the rhetoric.

The inevitability of some kind of Western offensive against Iran is 
gathering steam. Even ABC Radio's PM is not immune. In mid-February, 
host Mark Colvin interviewed an English professor on international 
affairs and asked him how the West should deal with the "Iranian nuclear 
threat." John Pilger recently explained in the New Statesman how we are 
being set up again:

     "Like the invasion of Iraq, an attack on Iran has a secret agenda 
that has nothing to do with the Tehran regime's imaginary weapons of 
mass destruction. That Washington has managed to coerce enough members 
of the International Atomic Energy Agency into participating in a 
diplomatic charade is no more than reminiscent of the way it intimidated 
and bribed the "international community" into attacking Iraq in 1991.

     "Iran offers no "nuclear threat". There is not the slightest 
evidence that it has the centrifuges necessary to enrich uranium to 
weapons-grade material. The head of the IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei, has 
repeatedly said his inspectors have found nothing to support American 
and Israeli claims. Iran has done nothing illegal; it has demonstrated 
no territorial ambitions nor has it engaged in the occupation of a 
foreign country - unlike the United States, Britain and Israel. It has 
complied with its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty to 
allow inspectors to "go anywhere and see anything" - unlike the US and 
Israel."

The deputy head of Russia's foreign intelligence service told a Russian 
daily on February 22 that his country had no evidence Iran had any 
nuclear warheads or a sufficient amount of plutonium for constructing 
them. Flynt Leverett, former senior director for Middle East affairs in 
the US National Security Council (NSC) revealed in late February that 
the Bush administration deliberately sabotaged Iran's assistance on 
al-Qaeda in the period after September 11, as the mullahs had many 
contacts in Afghanistan and were willing to share them with Washington. 
Furthermore, even though Iranian officials assisted the US in unseating 
the Taliban in Afghanistan, the neo-conservatives were determined to 
isolate Iran and include it in the "axis of evil." It is therefore 
unsurprising that Iran would feel the need to at least explore its 
nuclear options in response to US aggression.

Perhaps the biggest bomb-shell - as yet unreported in the mainstream 
media - lies in the case of Valerie Plame, a former CIA agent outed by 
the Bush administration after her husband, Joe Wilson, challenged White 
House allegations about Iraq allegedly obtaining uranium from Niger. The 
Raw Story website discovered in mid-February that one of the main 
reasons Plame may have been outed was because she was working on 
discovering Iran's nuclear capabilities, if any, and represented a 
direct threat to the neo-con agenda. In other words, by removing Plame 
from the scene, the US intelligence community was virtually blind in 
determining Iran's nuclear progress - the neo-con's ideal situation. 
Step forward the same charlatans and war-freaks who led us into Iraq.

We live in an age of extreme spin. The US Government Accountability 
Office released a report in mid February that revealed the Bush 
administration spent at least US$1.6 billion on public relations and 
advertising campaigns over 30 months. It is a startling though 
unsurprising figure. The Bush regime recently asked Congress for a 
further US$75 million to broadcast US radio and television into Iran, 
assist Iranians to study in America and support pro-democracy groups 
inside the Islamic state. Since 9/11, however, many students of the Arab 
world have decided to shun the US and study elsewhere. Aside from overly 
repressive entry requirements, many Muslims feel marginalised in the 
land of the free. Free speech is also under attack, with Senator Lindsay 
Graham recently suggesting to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales that a 
new target for the administration's domestic spying operations should be 
so-called "fifth columnists", allegedly disloyal Americans who 
sympathise and collaborate with the enemy. Presumably tens of millions 
of Americans are guilty as charged, both questioning and challenging the 
spurious "war on terror."

The situation in Iran remains uncertain. I, for one, am not suggesting 
Iran's leadership hasn't made inflammatory or outrageous comments, not 
least President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's suggestion that Israel should be 
"wiped off the map" and denial of the Jewish Holocaust. Such statements 
are both unacceptable and repulsive, though the priorities of the 
European Jewish Congress to file a complaint in the International 
Criminal Court in the Hague against the Iranian leader, for incitement 
to genocide, seems misplaced. Rather than focusing on leaders who have 
actually caused death and destruction take Bush, Blair and Howard in 
Iraq and the estimated toll of over 100,000 dead the Jewish group wanted 
the world to focus on a country that poses no direct threat to anybody.

Sadly, Israel and many of its supporters are at the forefront of 
demonising Iran and advocating military action. Not unlike Iraq, Iran is 
a perceived threat to the Jewish state and must therefore be 
obliterated. Israeli generals and politicians know Iran is not a serious 
threat but they never underestimate the political need to create a 
regional bogeyman to rally an ever-fearful Israeli population.

One of the great unspoken truths about the so-called "war on terror" has 
been the ascendency of Iran. Iranian influence now stretches through 
Iraq, through the Kurdistan region into Turkey, a weak Syria and through 
into Lebanon's Hezbollah-dominated south, on Israel's border. Iran's 
reach also extends into the Arabian peninsula through Shiite communities 
scattered in the Persian Gulf countries. The US is fearful that as their 
regional influence is waning, a religious doctrine is taking its price. 
What better way to distract public opinion than a trumped-up scare 
campaign? The Financial Times reported last week that US marines are 
already launching probes into Iran's ethnic minorities in an attempt to 
determine whether Iran "would be prone to a violent fragmentation along 
the same kind of fault lines that are splitting Iraq." It should be 
noted that China is rushing to complete a deal worth as much as US$100 
billion that would allow a Chinese state-owned energy firm to take a 
leading role in developing a massive oil field in Iran. Clearly, not 
everybody is worried about Tehran.

When Murdoch's pro-war mouthpiece, the Australian, tells its readers 
that "the media must not become the tool of propagandists", we truly 
know that responsible commentary is dead. Fancy the Australian telling 
us about propaganda, an institution more than willing to support the 
neo-liberal agenda in the far corners of the globe. The paper's 
editorial on February 16 concluded:

"The distortion of accuracy and loss of trust among a wider public that 
looks at biased news coverage, smells a rat, and switches off is only 
part of the danger. The other, more sinister, side of the equation is 
that any old despot can ensure favourable coverage of his regime, so 
long as he presents a properly anti-Western front. Venezuela's Hugo 
Chavez, for one, is a master of this tactic. When news judgments are 
clouded by a warmed-over postmodernism that filters every conflict 
through a cloudy lens of class and power struggles, and where the US is 
the worst bad guy of all, totalitarians and terrorists turn the West's 
hard-won free press into their own ministry of propaganda."

The total failure of the Iraq project should not be taken as a 
comforting reason the US and its allies would not attack Iran. The storm 
clouds are nearly upon us. The US and Israel are gathering public 
opinion on board for yet another illegal and immoral intervention. It is 
the media's duty to stop it. Unfortunately, the corporate media's sole 
responsibility is to make money in the marketplace. Truth already comes 
a distant second to happy shareholders.

Antony Loewenstein is a Sydney-based freelance journalist and author. He 
is currently writing a book on the Israel/Palestine conflict for 
Melbourne University Publishing, due July 2006. Random House will 
publish his next book, on the Australian media, in 2007. He website is 
at http://www.antonyloewenstein.com/

He can be reached at antloew [at] yahoo.com.au

http://www.counterpunch.com/loewenstein03012006.html

The archives of South News can be found at
http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ 

*****************************************************************
 2 [southnews] Iran could play Iraq card in row over nuclear plans
 
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 11:42:15 -0600 (CST)

Iran may have no interest in fomenting full-scale civil war in Iraq, but 
could stir trouble for the United States and Britain there if it felt 
threatened by international action to curb its nuclear ambitions.

Iran could play Iraq card in row over nuclear plans

28 Feb 2006 19:22:59 GMT

By Alistair Lyon

LONDON, Feb 28 (Reuters) - Iran may have no interest in fomenting 
full-scale civil war in Iraq, but could stir trouble for the United 
States and Britain there if it felt threatened by international action 
to curb its nuclear ambitions.

Washington and London have long accused Tehran of playing a 
destabilising role in Iraq by backing Shi'ite militants and sending 
infiltrators and sophisticated bombs across the border.

Tehran derides the charges, but has also hinted in the past that it has 
the potential to inflict pain on its Western foes locally if they 
tighten the screws over the nuclear issue.

"If these countries use all their means...to put pressure on Iran, Iran 
will use its capacity in the region," Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's 
Supreme National Security Council, has said.

For now Iran appears to be holding back, wary of regional rivalries and 
the unrest that could arise among its own minorities if Iraq slid into 
outright civil war and fell apart.

"Iran has problems with its own Kurds, Arabs and Baluchis," said 
Dubai-based analyst Mustafa Alani. "It has no strategic interest in 
Iraq's disintegration. Other states will interfere."

Rather than stoking sectarian tension, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah 
Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad urged Shi'ites not to 
take revenge on Sunnis after last week's bombing of a major Shi'ite 
shrine in Iraq, blaming the attack on the United States and Israel, 
rather than Sunni militants.

With its Iraqi Shi'ite allies already in the driving seat in Baghdad, 
Iran has much to lose if central authority collapses.

It has links to all the main parties in the United Iraqi Alliance, the 
Shi'ite bloc that dominated Dec. 15 elections.

These are the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, created by 
Iran as an exile opposition to Saddam during the 1980-88 war, Prime 
Minister Ibrahim Jaafari's Islamist Dawa party, also based in Tehran 
before the 2003 invasion, and the movement of radical Shi'ite cleric 
Moqtada al-Sadr.

While not slavishly obedient to Iran, these groups and the militias 
attached to them are at least sympathetic to Tehran, which also has 
long-standing links with the Kurdish parties.

"Whenever the Iranians come under pressure on the nuclear issue, like 
sanctions or military action, their answer will be in Iraq," Alani said. 
"This is a major card for them."

CLIENT STATE

Toby Dodge, a London-based scholar, said Iran's long-term interest was 
to have Iraq as a "stable vassal state" that would not grow into a rival 
for influence over the world's Shi'ites.

"A territorially united Iraq would give them the lion's share of 
influence, rather than just having (sway over) a Shi'ite breakaway state 
in the south," he said.

Iran would rather see the Sunni Arab-led insurgency contained -- an aim 
it shares with Washington -- and preserve a friendly Shi'ite-dominated 
national government, said Iran expert Anoushiravan Ehteshami, at 
Britain's Durham University.

"The Iranians don't want to be sucked into the conflict in Iraq," he 
added. "However, they could withdraw support for stabilisation and 
security for the British in the south."

Iran's foreign minister bluntly told Britain on Feb. 17 to remove its 
troops from Basra, saying they were destabilising the city. London 
accused Tehran of trying to divert attention from world concern over its 
nuclear programme.

Iran is happy to see the United States and Britain embroiled in Iraq, 
but does not want total chaos next door or a wider conflict that could 
draw in neighbouring countries.

A prolonged Iraqi civil war, with Baghdad at its vortex, might prompt 
Kurds to secede in the north and Shi'ites to take over the south, 
splitting Iraq's oil resources between them and leaving little but 
desert for Sunni Arabs in the centre.

Iraq's national unity, which survived a brutal eight-year war with Iran 
in the 1980s, has been tested as never before since the U.S.-led 
invasion toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003.

"Iraq is teetering on the threshold of wholesale disaster," said a 
report by the International Crisis Group this week, citing a 
Sunni-Shi'ite schism as the most urgent threat.

Iran may be as worried about this as Iraq's Sunni neighbours in Jordan, 
Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf -- many of whom are also deeply 
concerned about rising Shi'ite influence -- but Tehran is better placed 
than most to advance its interests.

Iran's potential to make trouble in Iraq alarms Washington's Arab 
allies, but Dodge said there was scant evidence that it was deterring 
the U.S.-led drive to rein in Tehran's atomic plans.

"The Americans are still more worried about Iran's nuclear ambitions 
than about their problems in Iraq," he argued.

Alani said Iran was already the prime indirect beneficiary of U.S. 
policies in the region since the Sept. 11 attacks.

"The Americans removed their Taliban enemies in Afghanistan. Saddam is 
gone and there is a pro-Iranian government in Baghdad. Saudi Arabia's 
influence has been neutralised since 9/11.

"The Iranians are sitting under the tree and the fruit is falling into 
their laps," Alani said.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L2878629.htm
_________________________________________-

Report doesn't confirm Iran nuke weapons

VIENNA, Feb. 28 (UPI) -- A report from the U.N. nuclear watchdog says 
Iran is pressing ahead with uranium enrichment but does not confirm any 
secret nuclear weapons development.

The report by Mohamed El-Baradei, director general of the International 
Atomic Energy Agency, says the agency "has not seen any diversion of 
nuclear material to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices."

He also said the IAEA was not "in a position to conclude that there are 
no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran," reports The 
Washington Post.

In the enrichment program, the IAEA said Iran has begun testing about 20 
centrifuges used in enriching fuel and is making improvements at its 
Natanz nuclear facility, south of the capital Tehran.

The report goes to IAEA's 35 board members, who meet next week to 
discuss plans for putting greater pressure on Iran to halt any 
developments leading to production of nuclear weapons.
___________________________

The following notice of motion is to be put to The Australian Senate  today

*385 Senator Stott Despoja and the Leader of the Australian Democrats 
(Senator Allison):
To move-That the Senate-(a) notes:

(i) the current speculation about Iran's capabilities and intentions 
with regard to its possible development of nuclear weapons,

(ii) with deep concern, the threat of military action being considered
against Iran, including the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons,
and

(iii) successive resolutions in the United Nations General Assembly on
negative security assurances and guarantees from the nuclear
weapon states that nuclear weapons will never be used against
non-nuclear armed states, and the importance of that principle in
ensuring that non-nuclear weapon states have no motive to acquire
nuclear weapons;

(b) urges the Government to pursue a resolution of the Iranian crisis 
based on the following principles:

(i) no use of any military intervention whatsoever by any party, for any
reason,

(ii) a clear commitment by all nuclear-armed parties not to use nuclear
weapons in this situation, and to recommit to the doctrine of no
'first use' of nuclear weapons,

(iii) a clear commitment by all parties to the global elimination of
nuclear weapons, including reaffirmation of the Final Declaration of
the 2000 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review conference, and relevant
UN General Assembly resolutions, including the L28 resolution
sponsored by Japan and Australia,*12 No. 73-1 March 2006

(iv) the implementation of the 1995 Non-Proliferation Treaty Resolution
on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East, implementation
of the annual consensus-adopted UN General Assembly resolutions
on the 'Establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region
of the Middle East',

(v) a diplomatic path to the removal of tensions between the United
States of America, Israel and Iran, involving compromise on all
sides (except where the development or threat of nuclear weapons is
concerned), recognising the legitimate security concerns of all
parties including Israel and Iran, and refraining absolutely from
inflammatory statements, and

(vi) encouragement of all states parties to the Nuclear 
Non-Proliferation Treaty to remain within that framework and all 
non-states parties to join that regime; and

(c) conveys the text of this resolution to all UN Security Council
missions and their foreign ministers or secretaries of state, and the 
Governments of Iran and Israel.

__________________________

How the US has learned to love the bomb (again)...

Australian Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) TV program "Dateline"

March 1 2006

The United States is fighting hard to prevent weapons of mass
destruction being obtained by countries like Iran and North Korea. But
the US itself has quietly begun a research program to completely
redesign and rebuild its entire nuclear weapons stockpile.

There is also a renewed push from the Pentagon for nuclear
"bunker-buster" bombs, and a move to replace the nuclear arsenal with
smaller, more "user-friendly" weapons that could be used to fight the
"War on Terror".

According to General Eugene Habiger, the former head of US Strategic
Command, "... this is a mistake, because what we are doing is developing
a weapon that becomes more viable to use, and nuclear weapons are so
horrific that this doesn't make sense ..."

Using recently de-classified archival film and documents, Thom Cookes
illustrates the bizarre underbelly of the US nuclear weapons program.

http://news.sbs.com.au/dateline/

SBS TV WEDNESDAYS 8:30 PM - REPEATED THURSDAY & MONDAY 1PM

The archives of South News can be found at
http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ 

*****************************************************************
 3 U.S.-India Nuclear Deal and Iran: Interview with Arjun
 
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 19:13:48 -0800

<x-flowed>
With today's visit by U.S. President Bush to India, and with Iran's nuclear 
activities a daily news item, you might be interested in this interview of 
Arjun Makhijani that was published by India Abroad and rediff.com on 
December 28, 2005:

The U.S.-India Nuclear Deal and Iran
http://www.ieer.org/latest/indiairan.html

Here is an excerpt:
"For [the US-India civilian nuclear agreement ,signed in July by each of 
the two country's leaders], India seems to be giving up, or at least 
jeopardising, a much larger and more sure source of energy, one that could 
provide electricity more competitively than nuclear, which is natural gas 
from Iran. So it (the US-India nuclear deal) does not look like a very good 
deal, even just on economic terms, never mind the other political or 
strategic considerations."

Dr. Makhijani is president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental 
Research and an expert on nuclear related energy and security issues.  He 
is available for interviews:  Call IEER at 1-301-270-5500.


To unsubscribe, please reply with message intact and 'remove' in the 
subject line.  Apologies if you've received more than one of this message.
dist

Lisa Ledwidge
Outreach Director, United States, and Editor of Science for Democratic Action
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER)
PO Box 6674  |  Minneapolis, MN 55406  USA
tel. 1-612-722-9700  | fax: please call 
first  |  ieer@ieer.org  |  http://www.ieer.org

IEER's main office:   6935 Laurel Ave. Suite 201 |  Takoma Park, 
MD  20912  USA  |  tel. 1-301-270-5500  |  fax 1-301-270-3029  

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 4 [NYTr] US, British envoys differ on next UN moves on Iran
 
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:30:28 -0600 (CST)

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Reuters - Mar 1, 2006
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-03-01T234642Z_01_N01411425_RTRUKOC_0_US-NUCLEAR-IRAN-UN.xml

US, British envoys differ on next UN moves on Iran

By Irwin Arieff

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said on Wednesday the
U.N. Security Council should be ready to act to ensure Iran does not develop
nuclear weapons once the U.N. nuclear watchdog in Vienna refers the matter
to the council next week, as expected.

But British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry appeared to take a softer line,
saying he saw the council's role as supporting the demands of the
International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, which wants Iran to prove it
is not pursuing nuclear arms.

The U.N. envoys from the two longtime allies, who have been working in close
partnership on the Iran issue, spoke days before a March 6 meeting of the
IAEA board of governors, at which the board is expected to forward its
latest report on Iran's nuclear program to the Security Council.

The report by Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei said the watchdog was still
unable to confirm Tehran was not pursuing covert nuclear activities and
wanted its total cooperation and solid proof.

The two envoys' differences appeared to center on the Security Council's
power to impose punitive measures such as sanctions on U.N. members, which
the IAEA cannot do.

Iran is so far insisting on retaining the ability to enrich uranium on its
soil, and has threatened to end all cooperation with the international
community and pull out of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty if sanctions
are imposed.

While Tehran insists it wants only to generate electricity, an enrichment
capability could help it make bombs as well.

Jones Parry said he expected the board to report the Iran dossier to the
Security Council on March 6.

Asked how he thought the council would then react, he said it would want to
deliver the "simple message" that Tehran should comply with what the board
was asking.

"What we are saying is the dossier is rightly in Vienna, but it is right
that the Security Council should be apprised of the situation and should
make clear its support for what the board is asking," he said.

Bolton, however, said the question before the council was what it was going
to do to block Iran's nuclear ambitions, and he said he considered the
matter already to have been reported to the council last month.

While the council's five permanent members -- Russia, China, Britain and
France in addition to the United States -- had agreed voluntarily last month
to take no action before the March 6 IAEA meeting, the dossier "will be ripe
for action" after that, he said.

He said all five permanent council members had already agreed they did not
want Iran to have the ability to enrich uranium on its soil.

"If you say Iran with nuclear weapons is unacceptable, and that it is
appropriate to have Iran in the Security Council, which all five permanent
members have said, then you have to ask what is the council going to do
about it," he said.

) Reuters 2006.

       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 5 UN Nuclear Agency Head Welcomes European-iranian Meeting On Weapons Issue
 
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 11:00:47 -0500

UN NUCLEAR AGENCY HEAD WELCOMES EUROPEAN-IRANIAN MEETING ON WEAPONS ISSUE
 
New York, Mar  2 2006 11:00AM
The head of the United Nations agency entrusted with curbing the 
spread of nuclear arms today welcomed the scheduled meeting tomorrow 
between European foreign ministers and Iranian officials and 
called on Iran to show "full transparency" over a nuclear programme 
seen by some as an effort to produce weapons.

"I urge all parties to use this opportunity to create the necessary 
conditions to return to negotiations," International Atomic Energy 
Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/PressReleases/2006/prn200606.html">IAEA) 
Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei said of 
the meeting, which comes just three days before he is due to present 
his latest report on Iran's nuclear activities to the IAEA's 
Board of Governors.

In its latest action following the discovery in 2003 that Iran had 
concealed its nuclear activities for 18 years in breach of its 
obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the 
Board last month passed a resolution asking Mr. ElBaradei to report 
on the issue to the UN Security Council, which can impose sanctions. 


"I call on Iran to demonstrate full transparency toward the IAEA 
to resolve important outstanding issues related to its nuclear programme," 
Mr. ElBaradei said today. "I also call on Iran to take 
all the necessary confidence building measures required to assure 
the international community of the peaceful nature of its nuclear 
programme."

France, Germany and the United Kingdom ? the so-called EU-3 whose 
foreign ministers will meet with Iranian officials in Vienna tomorrow 
? called off their efforts to find a diplomatic solution after 
Iran last August rescinded its voluntary suspension of nuclear 
fuel conversion, which can produce the enriched uranium necessary 
either for nuclear power generation or for nuclear weapons.

Iran says its activities are solely for peaceful energy purposes 
but the United States and other countries insist that it is clandestinely 
seeking to produce w
inspectors have not found evidence that Iran is pursuing such an 
arsenal, the agency also cannot affirm positively that it is not 
doing so.

"As the negotiations proceed, it will be essential for all parties 
to specifically address the security, political and economic issues 
that underlie any future comprehensive settlement," he declared 
in today's statement.

"Only through these two tracks - full transparency on the part of 
Iran and negotiations with all concerned parties - can confidence 
be established regarding the nature of Iran's nuclear programme 
and a durable solution be found."
 2006-03-02 00:00:00.000 


________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news

To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/
*****************************************************************
 6 IRNA: N-plan peaceful, devoid of ambiguity, says Iranian ambassador -
                              
Islamabad, March 2, IRNA                                                                                                                 

Pakistan-Envoy 

Iranian Ambassador to Pakistan Mohammad Ibrahim Tahirain Fard
has made it clear that Tehran's nuclear program and activities
are "peaceful, devoid of any ambiguity and deviation from
international regulations."
 Speaking at a national seminar dubbed `Iran's Nuclear Program,
Threats and its Response to it' on Wednesday afternoon, the
ambassador said that the issue had a bearing on the destiny of
the whole region and Islamic world.

 He said that Iran was a signatory to the nuclear Non-
 Proliferation Treaty and paragraph 4 of the treaty granted it
the right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

 "We only seek to make use of this legitimate right of ours."
Now, with the passage of time, it has become more evident that
the nuclear program and activities of Iran are "peaceful and
devoid of any ambiguity and deviation from international
regulations," he said.

 He pointed out that Iran had been constructively cooperating
with the IAEA and there had been all-round interaction with the
nuclear watchdog.

 Meanwhile, a representative of the Iranian embassy here, Ali
Reza Khudaqulipur, explained parts of the ambassador's speech
and said that in a spirit of cooperation Iran opened up its
technical and peaceful installations to the agency.

 "The IAEA and its secretary general, too, have stated that
everything is clear and there is no evidence of any military
aspect in the (Iran) nuclear program," he said.

 Iran has since long made extensive efforts in regional and
international fora to make the Middle East as well as the world
free of weapons of mass destruction," he added.

 Regarding the latest postures adopted by Iran, he said that
contrary to what was being propagated in some media, the Islamic
Republic of Iran wanted to have access solely to peaceful
nuclear energy within the framework of regulations of the IAEA
and NPT.

 "Iran, in connection with its international obligations on
nuclear non-proliferation, has accepted responsibility and still
accepts the same.

 "Regrettably, some of the Western nations, contrary to what
they say to the media, are telling us in political negotiations
that Iran should not possess nuclear technology and knowhow, and
this is double standards in the international system which is
unacceptable to us," he said.

 He said that his country wanted to be treated much like other
countries such as Japan, Brazil and certain European states and
be recognized in its right to peaceful nuclear technology and
knowhow and to play its role among developing states at the
global level.

 Khudaqulipur maintained that the best guarantee as to the
peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program would be its
acceptance of supervision and inspections by the IAEA which is
the present case, delivery of advanced centrifuges with limited
capacity for enrichment which it has proposed to some US and
British scientists.

 He said that Iran was ready to accept participation of desirous
states in its nuclear activities within the framework of a
consortium and, therefore, various options were available to
prove Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons.

 Iran, he added, in the event of acceptance of its proposed
guarantees, would agree to send the Additional Protocol to the
Majlis (Iranian Consultative Assembly) for approval.

 He made it clear that Iran's peaceful use of nuclear energy was
aimed at economic development.

 "Instead of the US, European Union insisting on their postures,
they should have presented new ways on the basis of laws
formulated within the framework of the NPT," he said, and added
that Iran was willing to cooperate with the EU in this regard
but that in such a cooperation the language of threats should
not be used.

 He said that if the EU changes its position and is willing to
recognize Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy
within the framework of the NPT, there would be full readiness
on the part of Iran to cooperate with Europe.

 He announced that Iran was also ready to hold talks and
cooperate with other countries except the Zionist regime within
the same framework.

 Iran's basic objections to the European proposal made in August
last year was that the right to peaceful nuclear technology was
denied to Iran contrary to the NPT, he said.		 				 		 			

*****************************************************************
 7 Guardian Unlimited: State Dept.: Iran Has Itself to Blame
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday March 2, 2006 10:01 PM

By BARRY SCHWEID 

AP Diplomatic Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - Iran alone is to blame for the waves of
international criticism it is receiving for its nuclear
policies, the State Department said Thursday as it rejected a
verbal broadside from Iran's senior nuclear negotiator. 

``We're talking about a nuclear program characterized by
deception and prevarication,'' State Department spokesman Adam
Ereli said in response to an unusually heated rhetorical assault
by the top Iranian negotiator, Ali Larijani. 

Larijani spoke in Moscow, where he had gone to discuss a
U.S.-backed Russian proposal to transfer Iran's nuclear
enrichment activities to Russia to avoid having it contribute to
a weapons program in Iran. The U.S. campaign to refer Iran's
activities to the U.N. Security Council, Larijani said, ``means
the destruction of the Russian proposal.'' 

The enrichment process can create material that could be used in
the manufacture of nuclear weapons. 

``America is lying,'' Larijani said, ``trying to destroy the
Russian proposal.'' 

Asked about the comment, the State Department's Ereli shot back:
``If Iran has a problem with the state of affairs and the
situation it finds itself in, Iran has only itself to blame.'' 

And, he said, ``If they want to point fingers, they'll need more
than 10 of them to point.'' That is, Ereli said, 56 members of
the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency
had approved resolutions of concern about Iran's programs. 

The U.N. watchdog agency's board has referred the dispute to the
Security Council, and ``that is as it should be,'' Ereli said. 

In Congress, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a
hearing on Iran's programs. The chairman, Sen. Richard Lugar,
said the Iranians are trying to acquire nuclear weapons. 

``Iranian leaders deceived the international community about its
nuclear activities for more than 18 years,'' Lugar said in an
opening statement. ``They have rejected compromises and
threatened to cut off oil and natural gas exports should the
international community impose sanctions.'' 

The State Department also criticized Iran for suspending
negotiations with the European Union and resuming enrichment
activities. 

``We see that diplomacy as a way out of this conundrum,'' Ereli
said amid reports the sidelined talks might be resumed. 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 8 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Blames U.S. for Stalled Nuke Talks
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday March 2, 2006 11:46 PM

AP Photo MOSB103 

By GEORGE JAHN 

Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Iran's top nuclear negotiator headed for
new talks in Vienna Thursday with angry words for the United
States and no reported progress on a compromise to end the
international standoff over the Islamic republic's suspect
atomic program. 

Ali Larijani was to sit down Friday with key European foreign
ministers and senior nuclear negotiators, just three days before
the United Nations nuclear watchdog meets in the Austrian
capital to recommend action to the U.N. Security Council, which
has the power to issue sanctions against Iran. 

On Thursday Larijani accused the United States of scuttling
Moscow talks that ended with no movement reported toward a deal
that would move part of Iran's nuclear program to Russia, to
assuage concern that Iran would divert enriched uranium to make
a bomb. Iran, which restarted some enrichment activities last
month after a voluntarily freeze, says it wants only peaceful
nuclear energy. 

``America is lying, trying to destroy the Russian proposal,''
Larijani said at a news conference in Moscow. ``The Americans'
insistence on handing over the Iranian nuclear dossier to the
U.N. Security Council means the destruction of the Russian
proposal.'' 

In response to the unusually heated rhetorical assault, State
Department spokesman Adam Ereli said: ``If Iran has a problem
with the state of affairs and the situation it finds itself in,
Iran has only itself to blame.'' 

A diplomat familiar with the negotiations, who spoke to The
Associated Press on condition of anonymity because he was not
authorized to discuss them, said Iran had requested the Vienna
meeting. 

The diplomat said Britain, France and Germany would not
compromise Friday on their demand that Iran give up enriching
uranium inside its borders. 

For the meeting to be productive, a letter from the three
nations' foreign ministers said, Iran must give a clear
commitment to return immediately to ``full and sustained
suspension of all enrichment-related ... activity.'' The letter,
dated Feb. 27 and shared in part with The Associated Press, also
demanded that Iran recommit to allowing the U.N.'s International
Atomic Energy Agency pervasive, short-notice inspections of its
nuclear activities, after withdrawing such rights last month. 

Enrichment is a process that can produce fuel for a nuclear
reactor or fissile material for a bomb. 

A European official suggested France, Britain and Germany had
agreed to a final meeting with Iran's negotiator before the IAEA
board meeting next week to dispel any notion that Europe was not
interested in a negotiated solution. 

``We are in a listening mode - nothing more,'' the official said
by telephone from outside Vienna. He also spoke on condition of
anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the
negotiations. 

Meanwhile, a key Iranian opposition figure said that Iran has
ramped up its production of missiles capable of carrying atomic
warheads. 

Providing what he said were secret details of those missile
programs, Alireza Jafarzadeh told the AP Thursday that Iran had
``significantly increased the production line'' of its Shahab 3
missiles last year, and was now turning out 90 a year - more
than four times its previous production rate. 

Jafarzadeh has worked for the political wing of the Mujahedin
Khalq, an Iranian opposition group that Washington and the
European Union list as a terrorist organization. 

Jafarzadeh, who heads the Washington-based Strategic Policy
Consulting think tank, helped reveal what was then Iran's
clandestine nuclear program three years ago. In January he
divulged details of Iran's enrichment plans, which were
confirmed a few days ago by the IAEA. 

However, other accusations he has made against Iran remain
unproven. There was no independent confirmation of the
information Jafarzadeh offered Thursday, which he said he
received from unspecified sources inside Iran. 

The most advanced Shahab has a range of nearly 1,200 miles,
Jafarzadeh said. That is enough to target arch-foe Israel. 

Working together with North Korean experts at the Hemmat Missile
Industries complex in Tehran, Iranian engineers also were ``70
percent'' finished on prototype Ghadar 101 and Ghadar 110
missiles, which have a range of up to 1,800 miles, he said,
putting central Europe within reach. These missiles also were
``ready for launch'' within 30 minutes, compared to several
hours for the Shahab, he said. 

U.S. intelligence chief John Negroponte told lawmakers Wednesday
in Washington that the risk of Iran acquiring nuclear arms and
merging them with ballistic missile systems was ``a reason for
immediate concern.'' 

Meetings that started in 2004 between the Iranians and Europeans
failed to find common ground on enrichment, leading to a chain
of events that resulted in the IAEA board reporting Tehran to
the security council Feb. 4. 

In exchange for backing that move, Russia and China - which have
strong political and economic ties to Iran - insisted the
council wait for the results of Monday's IAEA board meeting
before taking any action. 

Larijani said his team had put forward a ``package proposal'' in
Moscow, and denied that the discussions had ended in failure.
``We need to give diplomats time to look at it.'' 

A Russian nuclear agency official, who spoke on condition of
anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to media,
confirmed the Moscow talks had snagged over Iran's refusal to
freeze enrichment. 

--- 

On the Net: www.iaea.org 

^---- 

Associated Press writer Judith Ingram in Moscow and diplomatic
writer Barry Schweid in Washington contributed to this report. 
        
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 9 Guardian Unlimited: Iran-Russia Talks Reported Resuming
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday March 2, 2006 5:31 PM

AP Photo MOSB114 

By JUDITH INGRAM 

Associated Press Writer 

MOSCOW (AP) - Iran and Russia reportedly resumed talks Thursday
in a Kremlin effort to defuse tensions over Tehran's suspect
nuclear program, while the top Iranian negotiator accused the
United States of trying to sabotage the deal. 

Ali Larijani said at a news conference that Washington's push to
have Iran reported to the U.N. Security Council would kill
Moscow's proposal to enrich uranium for Iran on Russian
territory as a way to increase international monitoring. 

``America is lying, trying to destroy the Russian proposal,''
Larijani said. ``The Americans' insistence on handing over the
Iranian nuclear dossier to the U.N. Security Council means the
destruction of the Russian proposal.'' 

The State Department said Wednesday that Iran's insistence on
conducting its own uranium enrichment was a move in the wrong
direction and a reason to hand the Iranian nuclear dossier to
the Security Council, which has the power to impose economic and
political sanctions. 

U.S. intelligence chief John Negroponte also told lawmakers in
Washington that the risk of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons and
using them to arm its existing long-range missiles was ``a
reason for immediate concern.'' 

Iran insists it is pursuing uranium enrichment only to produce
fuel for nuclear reactors used to generate electricity. But a
growing number of nations share U.S. fears the Tehran regime's
real goal is to develop nuclear weapons. 

Larijani said his team had put forward a ``package proposal'' in
Wednesday's negotiations in Moscow, denying that the discussions
had ended in failure. 

``We need to give diplomats time to look at it,'' he said. 

The talks resumed Thursday, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported,
quoting an unidentified official close to the negotiations. 

The Iranian delegation was to expected to fly out of Moscow
later Thursday ahead of talks in Vienna, Austria, on Friday with
three European nations. 

France's foreign ministry said Iran's government had requested
the meeting with the foreign ministers of Britain, Germany and
France, which represented the European Union in previous talks. 

Spokesman Denis Simoneau emphasized the Europeans would not
compromise on their demand that Iran give up all uranium
enrichment on its home soil. 

The meeting comes at a crucial time - just three days before
another meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency's
35-nation board. What the board recommends to the Security
Council likely will help determine the immediate course of
action on Iran by the council, which has the power to impose
sanctions. 

In Berlin, the office of German Chancellor Angela Merkel said
she had discussed the Iran situation with Chinese Premier Wen
Jiabao on Thursday, and both sides agreed on the need for a
united front in trying to find a solution for Iran's nuclear
program. 

Wen also stressed there is still time to negotiate a settlement
within the structure of the IAEA, China's official Xinhua News
Agency reported in Beijing. 

It remains unclear whether Russia and China, which have close
economic and political ties with Iran, would back sanctions
against Iran. Both countries are among the five council members
with the power to veto any action by the council. 

Moscow has offered to have Iran's uranium enrichment program
transferred to Russia, a move backed by the United States and
the EU as a way to provide more safeguards that Tehran's atomic
program could not be used to build weapons. 

Russia has said Iran must first halt domestic uranium
enrichment, which produces reactor fuel but also can make
fissile material for warheads. 

But Larijani reaffirmed the Iranians' refusal to do give up all
enrichment activities. The point was reinforced by Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who said during a visit to
Malaysia that ``it is very clear that we are not open to
negotiating on our inalienable rights.'' 

``We believe that it is the right of all member nations to enjoy
nuclear fuel and peaceful nuclear technology. We will not accept
a scientific apartheid,'' Ahmadinejad told reporters in Kuala
Lumpur. 

Britain, France, and Germany negotiated with Iran on behalf of
the 25-member EU last year in an attempt to persuade Tehran to
stop enrichment, but Iran rejected a proposal to shelve that
work in return for economic help. 

Britain's U.N. ambassador said he expected the IAEA to report
Iran to the council. 

``My expectation is that the board will reaffirm its view that
Iran ought to comply with the wishes of the board,'' Ambassador
Emyr Jones Parry said. ``It would surprise me if as a result of
that meeting the issue was not reported to the Security
Council.'' 

Asked about IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei's reported statement
that the world may have to get used to the idea of Iran having
limited enrichment capabilities, Larijani said it reflected a
``realistic approach.'' 

``I hope that people and ears can be found to listen to this
proposal. I think that Mr. ElBaradei's idea can be turned into a
new formula, it can be studied,'' he said. 

--- 

Associated Press reporters George Jahn in Vienna, Austria; John
Leicester in Paris; and Sean Yoong in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
contributed to this report. 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 10 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Refuses to Back Down in Nuke Talks
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday March 2, 2006 5:46 AM

AP Photo MOSB113 

By HENRY MEYER 

Associated Press Writer 

MOSCOW (AP) - Iran refused to back down Wednesday in crucial
talks on Russia's offer to enrich uranium for Tehran, but
negotiators agreed to resume discussions Thursday on a plan
meant to ease Western fears Iran wants to build an atomic bomb. 

The chief Iranian nuclear negotiator also said his country did
not intend to agree to Russian demands to impose another
moratorium on uranium enrichment activity. 

``I want to say that the process of enrichment is the sovereign
right of any country,'' Ali Larijani said after nearly five
hours of talks in a Moscow hotel. ``You should not take away
this right from nations which have a peaceful nuclear program,
which consequently, includes also enrichment.'' 

That drew an immediate response from the United States, which
fears Iran will use enrichment to make uranium for a weapons
program. Deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said
Larijani's declaration was ``a move in the wrong direction'' and
cause for concern. 

Iran's decision was ``one of the reasons why, after trying to
resolve this issue through negotiations and through a good and
reasonable proposal from Russia, we're having to go to the
(U.N.) Security Council,'' Ereli said. 

Russia, whose offer to host Iran's uranium enrichment program
has been backed by the United States and the European Union,
acknowledged the talks were deadlocked. The enrichment offer is
seen as a way to provide more assurances that Tehran could not
divert uranium for military purposes. 

``There was a constructive and serious discussion, but many
questions remain unresolved,'' Russian Deputy Foreign Minister
Sergei Kislyak was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency. 

However, with pressure mounting to move toward sanctions against
Iran when the U.N nuclear watchdog's board of governors meets
Monday, a joint statement said efforts to resolve the nuclear
dispute should remain within the framework of the International
Atomic Energy Agency. 

``Both sides underlined the importance of talks and
consultations for the resolution of the nuclear problem through
diplomatic means and within the framework of the IAEA,'' said
the statement issued by Russia's Security Council. 

In Malaysia on Thursday, Iran's president accused Western powers
of trying to control the world's oil resources and of creating a
climate of fear he said was forcing countries to stockpile
weapons. 

``The main root cause of this is because of the excessive
demands of certain ruling powers,'' President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad said in a speech to Malaysian and Iranian business
leaders. ``They want to have control over all world resources,
financial markets of the world and state of the art
technology.'' 

Iran insists its nuclear program is only to generate power, but
many in the West - particularly the United States - fear Iran is
aiming to develop atomic weapons. Enrichment is a process that
can produce fuel for a nuclear reactor or fissile material for a
weapon. 

Larijani said that talks would resume Thursday ahead of the
Iranian delegation's departure that day, according to RIA
Novosti. 

However, Kseniya Roshchina, a Russian spokeswoman, said she
could not confirm whether further discussions would take place
Thursday. 

Wednesday's meeting marked a third round of talks after two
previous negotiating sessions last week that made no visible
progress. Igor Ivanov, the secretary of the Russian Security
Council, led the Russian delegation. 

Russia's top diplomat reiterated Moscow's call for Iran to
return to a moratorium on enriching uranium as a condition for
going forward with the Kremlin plan. 

``What is necessary is for Iran to come back to the moratorium,
to accept the joint venture proposal as a package that would be
supported by the members of the governors' board of the IAEA,''
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told reporters in
Budapest, where President Vladimir Putin was on a state visit. 

The Vienna-based IAEA board of governors is to discuss the
Iranian nuclear issue on Monday, and it could start a process
leading to punishment by the U.N. Security Council, which has
the authority to impose sanctions on Iran. 

But it remains unclear if veto-wielding council members Russia
and China, which have close economic and political ties with
Iran, will back sanctions. 

A confidential IAEA report made available to The Associated
Press this week said a more than three-year-long investigation
had not revealed a secret nuclear weapons program in Iran, but
cautioned that a lack of sufficient cooperation from the Iranian
side meant the agency could not rule it out. 

The report said Iran plans to start setting up thousands of
uranium-enriching centrifuges this year - a possible pathway to
nuclear arms - even as it negotiates with Russia. 	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 11 Guardian Unlimited: Tehran to Talk With EU Before IAEA Meeting
                                
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday March 2, 2006 11:16 AM

By JUDITH INGRAM 

Associated Press Writer 

MOSCOW (AP) - Iran will hold talks with three European foreign
ministers in a new effort to defuse tension over Tehran's
insistence on running a program that can make nuclear arms, a
European diplomat said Thursday. 

Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, said Tehran would
conduct negotiations with Britain, France and Germany - which
have represented the EU in nuclear negotiations with Iran -
prior to a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency
board on Monday. 

The Vienna-based IAEA board of governors could start a process
leading to punishment by the U.N. Security Council, which has
the authority to impose sanctions on Iran. 

Britain, France, and Germany held talks with Iran on behalf of
the 25-member European Union last year, but Iran rejected a
proposal to give up its uranium enrichment program in return for
economic incentives. 

The meeting between the European powers and Iran was requested
by Tehran, said the European diplomat, who spoke to The
Associated Press on condition of anonymity because he was not
authorized to discuss the issue. 

He emphasized the Europeans would not bend on demands that Iran
give up all uranium enrichment on home soil. 

Another European official suggested the foreign ministers had
agreed to the meeting to dispel any notion Europe was no longer
interested in a negotiated solution. 

``We are in a listening mode - nothing more,'' the official, who
wasn't authorized to speak to the media, said on condition of
anonymity. 

Iran insists its nuclear program is only to generate power, but
many in the West fear Iran is aiming to develop atomic weapons.
Enrichment is a process that can produce fuel for a nuclear
reactor or fissile material for a weapon. 

Moscow has offered to have Iran's uranium enrichment program
transferred to Russia, a move backed by the United States and
the European Union as a way to provide more assurances that
Tehran's atomic program could not be used to build weapons. 

Talks between Iran and Moscow broke down Wednesday, but Larijani
said those talks should continue and warned that handing over
the issue to the U.N. Security Council would kill Moscow's
initiative. 

``America is lying, trying to destroy the Russian proposal,'' he
said at a news conference in Moscow Thursday. ``The Americans'
insistence on handing over the Iranian nuclear dossier to the
U.N. Security Council means the destruction of the Russian
proposal.'' 

Larijani said that his team had put forward a ``package
proposal'' in Wednesday's talks, denying that the talks had
ended in failure. He said the two countries would meet again but
that no date had been set. 

``We need to give diplomats time to look at it,'' he said. 

Russia has urged Iran to freeze its domestic uranium enrichment
program as a condition for its offer, but Iran has said it won't
do that. 

Larijani said that the two sides had ``achieved mutual
understanding'' on some issues connected with the demand for a
moratorium but did not elaborate. 

The U.S. State Department said Wednesday that Iran's persistence
on conducting its own enrichment was a move in the wrong
direction and a reason to hand over the Iranian nuclear dossier
to the U.N. Security Council. 

Britain's U.N. ambassador said he expects the IAEA to report
Iran to the Security Council. 

``My expectation is that the board will reaffirm its view that
Iran ought to comply with the wishes of the board,'' said
Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry. ``It would surprise
me if as a result of that meeting the issue was not reported to
the Security Council.'' 

It remains unclear whether veto-wielding Security Council
members Russia and China, which have close economic and
political ties with Iran, will back possible U.N. sanctions
against Iran. 

Larijani also said that Tehran would accept inspections by the
United Nations nuclear watchdog if the IAEA allows it to pursue
its nuclear program. 

Asked about IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei's reported statement
that the world may have to get used to the idea of Iran having
limited enrichment capabilities, Larijani said it reflected a
``realistic approach.'' 

``I hope that people and ears can be found to listen to this
proposal. I think that Mr. ElBaradei's idea can be turned into a
new formula, it can be studied,'' he said. 

--- 

Associated Press reporters George Jahn in Vienna, Austria, and
John Leicester in Paris contributed to this report. 	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 12 AFP: US seeks to 'destroy' Russian compromise offer - Iran - 

 Thu Mar 2, 5:10 AM ET 		 	 

MOSCOW (AFP) - Iran" /> Iran's top nuclear negotiator accused
the United States of trying to "destroy" Russian efforts to work
out a solution for easing global worries over Tehran's nuclear
program. 


The Americans' insistence on referring the Iran nuclear
dossier to the UN Security Council signifies the destruction of
the Russian proposal," Larijani said at a news
conference.

"We think the Americans are really an obstacle to the Russian 
plan."

"We think that, in ideal circumstances, the Russian proposition 
can be developed," he said. 

"We are trying to take positive steps in order to successfully 
implement the Russian proposal."

But even after Iran and Russia stated that they had held 
contructive negotiations, "the Americans announced that they were 
worried".

"The Americans are lying when they say that Iran is pursuing the 
goal of creating nuclear weapons. This does not correspond to 
reality," Larijani said.

He was speaking a day after Iran and Russia failed to reach a 
breakthrough in high-stakes talks in Moscow on a Russian proposal 
aimed at resolving the impasse over Tehran's nuclear program, a 
plan centering on joint enrichment of uranium at a facility on 
Russian soil.

Larijani described the negotiations, including discussion of Iran 
reinstating a voluntary moratorium on uranium enrichment work, as 
"very useful" and said Moscow and Tehran were in agreement on a 
number of issues.

The Iranian negotiator however admitted that no date had been set 
for further consultations between Russia and Iran.

He also said Iranian officials planned to meet with 
representatives of the European Union to discuss the issue before 
the UN nuclear supervisory agency meets on Monday to decide 
whether to take concerns over Iran's nuclear intentions to the UN 
Security Council 

Larijani said Russia and Iran had dicussed a number of proposals 
which he said needed to be examined in a single package with a 
view to carrying out the Russian proposal for uranium enrichment 
and preserving Iran's rights to develop civilian nuclear power. 

"I would suggest that the Americans say one thing but in reality
are putting a spanner in the works of the Russian proposal.
Obviously it is not in the Americans' interest that such a
successful regional proposal should come from Russia," he said. 

Larijani said Tehran would have no problem readmitting
international inspectors to all of its nuclear facilities,
provided the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and 
"influential states" within it, recognized Iran's right to pursue 
a civilian nuclear energy program. 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 13 AFP: US gives unenthusiastic support to EU talks with Iran 

 Thu Mar 2, 3:52 PM ET 		 	 

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States gave halfhearted support to
upcoming talks between three top European nations and Iran" />
Iranover Tehran's controversial nuclear program. 

State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said Britain, 
France and Germany talked to the United States about Friday's 
ministerial talks, which were requested at the last minute by 
Tehran.

"We're under no illusions," Ereli said.

The so-called EU-3 "talked to us about it," Ereli said.


"As we have throughout this process, we're supportive of the EU-3 
-- I think we're working well together," he said. "Let's see what 
happens on Friday."


"But the baseline is the same. Is Iran going to suspend 
enrichment activity? Is Iran going to return to the negotiations? 
Or is Iran going to continue, as we think they have, to stall and 
prevaricate and extend things in a meaningless way in order to 
avoid censure?"

The talks come ahead of a March 6 meeting of the United Nations' 
nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA). 
The IAEA is to make an assessment of Iran's nuclear program that 
will be sent to the UN Security Council, which could then take 
punitive action. 

Whatever the outcome of the talks between the European foreign
ministers and Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ereli said the
matter should go to the Security Council. 

"We expect it to come up at the Security Council after March 6,"
he said. 

Iran has pressed ahead with work on uranium enrichment and
insisted on its right to a civilian nuclear energy program, but
Western powers fear the country is secretly developing atomic
weapons. 

Iran's insistance on carrying out enrichment has torpedoed talks
with the EU-3. 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 14 IRNA: Iran-Russia-Nuclear /WRD/

Demand for referring Iran to UN is attempt to foil Russia's                                                                                                                 
efforts 

Moscow, March 2, 

Itar-Tass/IRNA -- The demand by the United States for referring 
the Iranian nuclear dossier to the UN Security Council are an 
attempt to undermine the Russian proposal on the setting up of a 
joint venture to enrich uranium, Iran's Supreme National Security 
Council Secretary Ali Larijani told a news conference here on 
Thursday. 

"The Russian proposal can develop and is quite viable," he said,
adding that "we assume that steps will be made toward a
successful implementation of the Russian project."
 "They (Americans), in fact, are creating obstacles to the
Russian proposals," he said.

 "The pressing demand by the United States that the Iranian
nuclear dossier be referred to the UN Security Council shows the
attempts to undermine and destroy the Russian proposal," Iran's
top nuclear negotiator said.

*****************************************************************
 15 IRNA: Energy minister visits Isfahan nuclear research center

Isfahan, March 1, IRNA                                                                                                           

Iran-Energy Minister-Isfahan Center 

Energy Minister Parviz Fattah visited Isfahan nuclear research 
and fuel production center on Wednesday.


 During his visit, the experts explained about the center's 
activities.

 Energy minister is to visit Natanz nuclear center on Thursday.

 The plan to build a nuclear research and fuel production center 
in Isfahan was designed before the Islamic revolution.

 After the victory of the Islamic revolution, the United States 
and the Zionist regime of Israel spared no efforts to halt the 
project but the Iranian scientist managed to complete it.

 The Islamic Republic of Iran by relying on its own scientists' 
knowledge and expertise has turned into a country with nuclear 
know-how and has declared repeatedly that it will use the 
technology for peaceful purposes only.

 In the last two years, Iran has accepted inspections beyond NPT 
articles and the inspectors have not reported any deviation from 
international laws and NPT Treaty.

 1391/1771

*****************************************************************
 16 IRNA: ElBaradei welcomes Iran-EU3 talks 

Vienna, March 2, IRNA                                                                                                            

Iran-ElBaradei-Nuclear 

Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) Mohamed ElBaradei issued a statement on Thursday and
welcomed the upcoming Iran-EU3 talks in Vienna.

 According to the statement, ElBaradei warmly hails the meeting
between the high-ranking Iranian nuclear officials and the
foreign ministers of France, Germany and Britain.

 He called upon all sides to seize such an opportunity to return
to negotiations.

 Meanwhile, the IAEA chief has called on Iran to assure the
international community of the peaceful nature of its nuclear
programs by continuing its confidence building measures.

 "As the talks proceed, the relevant parties are required to
take into view the security, political and economic consequences
of their discussions," added ElBaradei in his statement.

 At the conclusion of the statement, he underlined that
confidence in the nature of Iran's nuclear program and coming up
with a solution to the issue can merely be achieved by
transparency on the part of Iran and talks by all involved
partners.

 The Austrian news agencies reported on Thursday that the
meeting between the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC)
Secretary Ali Larijani and the foreign ministers of the three EU
members will be held in Vienna on Friday.

 Larijani is expected to leave for Vienna on Friday to hold
talks with the EU troika.

*****************************************************************
 17 Bush and Nukes in India
 
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 02:12:17 -0600 (CST)

Institute for Public Accuracy
915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045
(202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa@accuracy.org
___________________________________________________

	PM Monday, February 27, 2006

	Bush and Nukes in India

President Bush will be visiting India and Pakistan this week. A major 
agenda item is a nuclear agreement between the U.S. and India.

The following analysts are available for interviews. (India is 10.5 
hours ahead of U.S. Eastern Time.)

M. V. RAMANA, ramana@princeton.edu, http://www.cised.org,
http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_01-02/JANFEB-IndiaFeature.asp
    Faculty member at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies in 
Environment and Development in Bangalore, India, Ramana is coauthor of 
the recent article "Wrong Ends, Means, and Needs: Behind the U.S. 
Nuclear Deal With India" in Arms Control Today. He said today: "One 
carrot that the Bush administration has been offering India is the 
promise of cooperation on civil nuclear energy (i.e., sales of 
technology and raw materials). If it goes through, the deal will 
undermine the nonproliferation and disarmament regime, create the 
potential for an expansion of the Indian nuclear arsenal that is desired 
by some hawks, and further enlarge the uneconomical and environmentally 
unsustainable nuclear energy program."

ACHIN VANAIK, achin@bol.net.in, http://www.tni.org/archives/vanaik/iran.htm
    Vanaik is coauthor of the book "New Nukes: India, Pakistan and 
Global Nuclear Disarmament." His most recent article is "The Iran 
Issue." He is currently a fellow with the Transnational Institute based 
in Amsterdam and edited the book "Globalization and South Asia: 
Multidimensional Perspectives." Vanaik helped initiate the Coalition for 
Nuclear Disarmament and Peace in India (011-91-11-2651-7814, 
011-91-11-2696-8121, cndpindia@gmail.com, http://cndpindia.org) which is 
protesting Bush's visit.

SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN, svaradarajan@gmail.com, 
http://svaradarajan.blogspot.com
    Deputy editor of The Hindu newspaper, Varadarajan can address the 
nuclear agreement, the evolving strategic partnership between India and 
the U.S. and its wider implications for the region.

ROBERT ALVAREZ, kitbob@starpower.net, 
http://www.ips-dc.org/projects/nuclear/index.htm
    Between 1993 and 1999, Alvarez was at the U.S. Energy Department as 
Deputy Assistant Secretary for National Security and the Environment as 
well as policy adviser to the Secretary. In 1994 and 1995, he led teams 
in North Korea to establish control of nuclear weapons materials. 
Alvarez said today: "Beneath the surface of nuclear boosterism and 
public diplomacy of the India deal with the U.S., are some troubling 
issues such as ... the Bush administration's unabashed efforts to revive 
the moribund U.S. nuclear industry with an emphasis on establishing a 
global plutonium market. This is being done through new research and 
development on plutonium reprocessing; and more ominously, by thwarting 
the IAEA. In response to the North Korean and Iranian nuclear crises, 
the IAEA proposed in the spring of this year a five-year moratorium on 
the international sale of technologies to enrich uranium and separate 
plutonium, which was immediately vetoed by the U.S." Alvarez is 
currently a senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies.

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

_________________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     public@lists.accuracy.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     public-unsubscribe@lists.accuracy.org

For all list information and functions, including changing
your subscription mode and options, visit the Web page:
     http://lists.accuracy.org/lists/info/public




*****************************************************************
 18 [NYTr] Nuclear Cave In: A Deeply Flawed India Deal
 
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:30:38 -0600 (CST)

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace - Mar 2, 2006
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/npp/

Nuclear Cave In  	

By Joseph Cirincione

Buffeted by political turmoil at home, President Bush sought a foreign
affairs victory in India.  To clinch a nuclear weapons deal, the president
had to give in to demands from the Indian nuclear lobby to exempt large
portions of the countrys nuclear infrastructure from international
inspection.  With details of the deal still under wraps, it appears that at
least one-third of current and planned Indian reactors would be exempt from
IAEA inspections and that the president gave into Indian demands for
Indian-specific inspections that would fall far short of the normal,
full-scope inspections originally sought. Worse, Indian officials have made
clear that India alone will decide which future reactors will be kept in the
military category and exempt from any safeguards.

The deal endorses and assists Indias nuclear weapons program.  US-supplied
uranium fuel would free up Indias limited uranium reserves for fuel that
would be burned in these reactors to make nuclear weapons.  This would allow
India to increase its production from the estimated 6 to 10 additional
nuclear bombs per year to several dozen per year.  India today has enough
separated plutonium for 75 to 110 nuclear weapons, though it is not known
how many it has actually produced.

The Indian leaders and press are crowing about their victory over America. 
For good reason: President Bush has done what Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford,
Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and his own father refused to
do--break U.S. and international law to aid Indias nuclear weapons program. 
In 1974, India cheated on its agreements with the United States and other
nations to do what Iran is accused of doing now: using a peaceful nuclear
energy program to build a nuclear bomb.  India used plutonium produced in a
Canadian-supplied reactor to detonate a bomb it then called a peaceful
nuclear device. In response, President Richard Nixon and Congress stiffened
U.S. laws and Nixon organized the Nuclear Suppliers Group to prevent any
other nation from following Indias example. President Bush has now
unilaterally shattered those guidelines and his action would violate the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty proscription against aiding another
nations nuclear weapons program.  It would require the repeal or revision
of several major U.S. laws, including the U.S. Nonproliferation Act.  Nor
has he won any significant concessions from India.  India refuses to agree
to end its production of nuclear weapons material, something the U.S., the
UK, France, Russia and China have already done.

This is where the president is likely to run into trouble.  Republicans and
Democrats in Congress are deeply concerned about the deal and the way it was
crafted.  Keeping with the administrations penchant for secrecy, the deal
was cooked by a handful of senior officials (one of whom is now a lobbyist
for the Indian government) and never reviewed by the Departments of State,
Defense or Energy before it was announced with a champagne toast by
President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.  Congress was never
consulted.
 Republican committee staff say the first members heard about it was when
the fax announcing the deal came into their offices.  Worse, for the
president, this appears to be another give away to a foreign government at
the expense of U.S. national security interests.

Bad Example

In addition to breaking U.S. law and shattering long-standing barriers to
proliferation, lawmakers are concerned about the example the nuclear weapons
deal sets for other nations.

The lesson Iran is likely to draw is simple:  if you hold out long enough,
the Americans will cave.  All this talk about violating treaties, they will
reason, is just smoke.  When the Americans think you are important enough,
they will break the rules to accommodate you.

Pakistani officials have already said they expect Pakistan to receive a
similar deal, and Israel is surely waiting in the wings.  Other nations may
decide that they can break the rules, too, to grant special deals to their
friends.  China is already rumored to be seeking a deal to provide open
nuclear assistance to Pakistana practice it stopped in the early 1990s
after a successful diplomatic campaign by the United States to bring China
into conformity with the Non-Proliferation Treaty restrictions.  Will Russia
decide that it can make an exception for Iran?

Lawmakers loyal to President Bush are already signaling tough times ahead
for this deal.

Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA), Chairman of the Subcommittee on International
Terrorism and Nonproliferation offered the following statement after the
deal was announced:

There is enthusiastic support on Capitol Hill for growing U.S.-India ties.
However, the U.S.-India agreement on civil nuclear cooperation has
implications beyond U.S.-India relations. In this process, the goal of
curbing nuclear proliferation should be paramount. Congress will continue
its careful consideration of this far reaching agreement.

His subcommittee has oversight and legislative responsibilities over
nonproliferation matters.  Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN), Chairman of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has made no secret of his concerns, as
has Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL), Chairman of the House International Relations
Committee.  Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) says, America cannot credibly preach
nuclear temperance from a barstool.  We can't tell Iran, a country that has
signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, that they can't have [uranium]
enrichment technologies while simultaneously carving out a special exemption
from nuclear proliferation laws for India, a nation that has refused to sign
the treaty.

This looming Congressional battle will pit the proliferation fighters
against the nuclear lobby and the increasingly powerful India lobby. 
Companies and countries (including France, Canada and Russia) are lining up
to sell fuel and reactors to India.  They will be joined by the
neoconservatives who seek to construct an anti-China alliance.  For them, as
one architect of the India deal reportedly said, The problem is not that
India has too many nuclear weapons, it is that they do not have enough.

If President Bush was riding high in the polls and had a string of national
security victories behind him, this David and Goliath battle would be won by
the nuclear giants. But with sagging popularity, deep concern over his
leadership, and anger at the administrations disregard for laws and
consultation, lawmakers more concerned about proliferation than profits
could block or amend this deal.  The president may have made a fatal error
in putting nuclear weapons at the heart of improved U.S.-India relations.
Lawmakers want the latter, but not at the price of the former.

                            ***

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 

A Deeply Flawed India Deal 

By Caterina Dutto 
Published: February 28, 2006

In a February 14 letter to Congress, six nonproliferation experts and former
government officials detailed the serious problems with the proposed
US-India nuclear deal. Their core concern is that U.S. trade and cooperation
would directly assist Indias nuclear weapons program. This would violate
existing U.S. laws and the U.S. commitment in the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear
weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other
nuclear explosive devices.

The experts say, Building upon the already strong U.S.-Indian partnership
is an important goal, and we remain convinced that it can be achieved
without undermining U.S. leadership efforts to prevent the proliferation of
the worlds most dangerous weapons.

They caution, however, that on balance, Indias commitments under the
current terms of the proposed arrangement do not justify making far-reaching
exceptions to U.S. law and international nonproliferation norms. At a
minimum, this requires permanent, facility-specific safeguards on a mutually
agreed and broad list of current and future civil Indian nuclear facilities
and material, as well a cutoff of Indian fissile material production for
weapons.

For a pdf of the seven-page letter, click here.
http://www.armscontrol.org/pdf/20060214_India_Clarifying_Responses.pdf
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 19 [NYTr] Hurdles ahead for landmark nuclear deal
 
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:49 -0600 (CST)

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
BBC - Mar 2, 2006
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4766608.stm

Hurdles ahead for landmark nuclear deal

By Jonathan Marcus
BBC Diplomatic correspondent

The nuclear deal with India enshrines a shift in US policy with far-reaching
implications.

It underscores the special relationship between Delhi and Washington. And it
sends powerful - and in many ways contradictory - signals about the Bush
administration's attitude towards the nuclear non-proliferation regime.

As far as the Bush administration is concerned, this is a win-win deal.

A friendly, democratic and powerful regional ally, India gains access to
civil nuclear technology to help power its industrial growth.

At the same time India will effectively have to segregate its nuclear
facilities into two programmes - one civil and the other military, with the
former coming under additional international safeguards.

Hurdles

Not so long ago, of course, India was one of the nuclear bad-guys.

t has steadfastly refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
and it has developed its own nuclear bomb.

The US applied sanctions against India and a battery of US legislation put
India into a kind of nuclear isolation.

Hurdle one for the Bush administration is to get Congress to unpick this
legislation.

Attitudes on Capitol Hill are mixed. There is a good deal of unease about
the agreement on non-proliferation grounds, a fear that India is being
rewarded despite its nuclear weapons programme and a belief that Washington
could have struck a tougher bargain.

There are concerns, for example, that India will still be able to produce
more fissile material for its bomb-making programme and thus will be able to
expand its nuclear arsenal.

Nonetheless, there is also a strong tide of pro-Indian sentiment among US
legislators.

Hurdle two is to persuade the 44-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group - who
co-ordinate sales of nuclear technology - of the merits of the deal, where
again, opinion is divided.

'Useful benchmark'

Here the US has already had some preliminary talks.

Some countries back the US and India. Britain, Russia and France (Paris,
too, is eager to sell India nuclear technology) have all, in terms of
initial positions, been positive.

Ireland, Japan and the Netherlands have been far from enthusiastic.

Agreement at the group is not necessarily essential.

But its consensus view on nuclear transfers provides a useful international
benchmark.

Regional implications

Since so much of non-proliferation policy depends upon creating as broad a
diplomatic coalition as possible, it would be unwise of the US to break this
tradition of consensus.

The deal could have significant regional implications, especially if India
continues to develop the military side of its nuclear programme.

China's only comment so far has been a rather restrained call for any
US-India co-operation to be in line with the rules of the global
non-proliferation regime.

Though there are some strategic experts in Beijing who are carefully
watching the burgeoning US-India relationship for any sign that India is
being turned into a regional bulwark against China.

It is in the arms control community - especially among US experts - that the
deal has caused most concern.

Many fear that Washington is again signalling that international rules -
like the NPT - set standards that can be conveniently ignored in some cases,
while the Bush administration vigorously tries to apply them in others.

) BBC MMVI
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 20 [NYTr] Broccoli & Nukes: Inside Bush's Speedy Asian Diplomacy
 
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:30:40 -0600 (CST)

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Newsweek - Mar 1, 2007
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11626975/site/newsweek/from/RSS/

Broccoli and Nukes

President Bush is finding several unsavory dishes on his plate during a
diplomatic tour through India, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

By Richard Wolffe and Holly Bailey
Newsweek

March 1, 2006 - It was the worst-kept secret in presidential travel. After
weeks of rumors, President George W. Bush finally stopped in Afghanistan as
he made his way to India and Pakistanhis first visit to the country that
was once the central battlefield in the war on terror.

Like Bushs Thanksgiving Day trip to Iraq in 2003, the details of the
presidents trip to Kabul were closely held until the very last moment. Yet
White House officials and reporters had whispered about the possibility of
an Afghanistan visit for weeks. Bush was the only key member of his
administration who had yet to visit Kabul. First Lady Laura Bush and Vice
President Dick Cheney made high-profile visits last year, while other
administration officials, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, have made repeated visits.

Administration officials did all they could to stamp out the rumorseven
telling White House reporters writing an advance logistical report on Bushs
trip that there would be no major deviations in the schedule. In fact, Joe
Hagin, the deputy White House chief of staff, pitched the idea to the
president nearly two months ago. Yet for the all the secrecy, word of the
presidents visit still leaked. A few hours before Bush flew into Bagram Air
Base north of Kabul, a wire report announced the Bush visit, citing an
anonymous Afghan official.

Bushs trip to Afghanistan is a reminder of everything that has gone right
for Bush, and much that has gone wrong, since 9/11. The president had ample
reason to celebrate that nations embrace of democracy, its relative
stability and its multinational peacekeeping. He had less reason to sound so
assured about the hunt for Al Qaedas top leadership. Bush said he was
confident that Osama bin Laden would be brought to justice, citing
Pakistani efforts to capture the spiritual leader of the jihadi movement.
Part of my message to President [Pervez] Musharraf is that its important
that we bring these people to justice, Bush told reporters in Kabul. He
understands that. After all, theyve tried to kill him four times.

Yet five years after 9/11, President Bush is still making the case to
Pakistans president that bin Laden threatens his regime. Why does Bush
still need to deliver that message when the White House claims its alliance
with Musharraf is so strong? Because Bushs aides are fully aware that
Musharraf faces strong internal oppositionboth inside his government and on
the streetsevery time he makes a renewed assault on Al Qaeda suspects in
his countrys lawless tribal regions. The presidents war on terror has long
been compromised by Musharrafs political problems. Bushs national-security
strategy, as his travels illustrate this week, is a long way from the
unflinching pursuit of terrorists and shadowy enemies that has dominated the
last two election cycles.

Case in point: the nuclear deal with India. In the run-up to the war in
Iraq, the White House set a high bar on nuclear issues. Citing the examples
of South Africa, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, Bushs aides insisted that the only
test of intent was full cooperation and transparency. That was when the
debate was about disarmament. Nobody is talking about dismantling Indias
nuclear defenses. Yet the negotiations over Indias civilian nuclear program
have proved exceptionally difficult because of a distinct lack of full
cooperation and transparency.

Steve Hadley, Bushs national-security adviser, told reporters that the
sticking point with India was getting some clarification from the Indian
side about whats in the civil side and whats on the military side, not
only in terms of what exists now, at this time, but what are going to be the
ground rules going forward. Negotiators have been struggling with Indias
clarity and transparency for several months, as they try to square the
circle of recognizing a nuclear power operating outside the worlds nuclear
treaty.

Under any circumstances, these would be complex talks. But they are all the
more difficult because of the Bush administrations strategy. Unlike its
approach to Iran, the White House has chosen to lean on India on its own,
without the support of the international community by it side. Iran casts a
long shadow over Bushs nuclear talks with India: Iran is a strategic ally
of India, yet the United States is counting on Indias support to halt
Irans nuclear program.

Small wonder that Bushs aides are now playing down the prospects of a
nuclear deal. The White House pledged last summer to assist India with its
civilian nuclear program, in part by providing nuclear technology. But when
he was asked about the negotiations during a press availability in
Afghanistan, Bush called it a difficult issue. Hopefully we can reach an
agreement, Bush said. If not, well continue to work on it until we do.
At the same time, his top aides began talking up other agreements expected
this week including an agriculture initiative. This trip is not a civil
nuclear-power trip, Rice told reporters during a briefing on Air Force One.
This trip is a trip about the relationship between the United States and
India  This is a broad relationship that is deepening.

As the president arrived in New Dehli on Wednesday evening, Indian TV
remained intensely focused on two things other than a deepening
relationship: the nuclear talks and why the American president wasnt
planning to see more of their country. Locals cant forget the last time an
American president visited India. Back in 2000, President Clinton spent
nearly a week touring the country, famously visiting rural villages and
wowing Indian politicians during a speech before the Parliament. Reminders
are everywhere. At the Sheraton Hotel where Bush and the press will spend
the next three days, the hotels restaurant has a dish named after Clinton,
who dined there several times when he stayed in the hotel.

Bushs visit this week will be speedy and meticulously coordinated. Indeed,
the president wont even visit the Taj Mahalan omission he blamed on the
White House scheduler. If I were the scheduler, maybe Id do things
differently, he told a group of Indian journalists last week. Its
something that has puzzled the locals, at a time when Bush hopes to deepen
economic and political ties with the worlds largest democracy. It also
frustrates his own aides, who have repeatedly pushed the president to spend
time on the softer, cultural side of his foreign travel. According to those
aides, it is the presidentnot his schedulerwho cannot be convinced to
carve out time to respect the local culture.

Sometimes theres no escaping it. On Thursday evening, Indian President
Abdul Kalam will host a state dinner for the president and First Lady. On
the menu: a variety of Indian delicacies, including several fish and lamb
dishes. Not on the menu: chicken. Rediff, a New Delhi-based news site,
reports the Indian president took poultry off the menu amid fears of bird
flu. Instead, Bush will be served a special dish by the Indian president:
broccoli soup. Kalams press secretary says the Indian president wanted to
give the Bushes a taste of home flavor. Yet Bush, like his dad, is known
to detest broccoli. Back in 2001, Bush visited Mexican President Vicente
Foxs ranch, which is nestled alongside fields of broccoli. Asked by
reporters about his feelings on the stalky vegetable, Bush gave a thumbs
down, and said, Make it cauliflower.

) 2006 MSNBC.com
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 21 UN Atomic Watchdog Hails Indian-us Nuclear Cooperation Agreement
 
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 11:00:47 -0500

UN ATOMIC WATCHDOG HAILS INDIAN-US NUCLEAR COOPERATION AGREEMENT
 
New York, Mar  2 2006 11:00AM
The civil nuclear cooperation agreement reached today between India 
and the United States is a milestone that could consolidate efforts 
to prevent the spread of nuclear arms and combat nuclear terrorism, 
the United Nations agency entrusted with curbing such weapons 
proliferation said in a statement welcoming the deal. This 
agreement is an important step towards satisfying India´s growing 
need for energy, including nuclear technology and fuel, as an engine 
for development," International Atomic Energy Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/PressReleases/2006/prn200605.html">IAEA) 
Director-General 
Mohamed ElBaradei declared.It would also bring 
India closer as an important partner in the non-proliferation regime. 
It would be a milestone, timely for ongoing efforts to consolidate 
the non-proliferation regime, combat nuclear terrorism and 
strengthen nuclear safety," he added.The agreement between the 
two countries, both of them nuclear weapons states, was announced 
in New Delhi by United States President George W. Bush and Indian 
"The agreement would assure India of reliable access to nuclear technology 
and nuclear fuel," Mr. ElBaradei said. "It would also be 
a step forward towards universalization of the international safeguards 
regime. This agreement would serve the interests of both 
India and the international community."
 2006-03-02 00:00:00.000 


________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news

To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/
*****************************************************************
 22 Guardian Unlimited: U.S.-Indian Nuclear Deal Faces Obstacles
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Friday March 3, 2006 12:31 AM

AP Photo INDD124 

By FOSTER KLUG 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. lawmakers cautioned Thursday that an
agreement to share U.S. civilian nuclear technology with India
still faces obstacles in Congress, where some worry it could
undermine efforts to stop nuclear proliferation. 

President Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed
to the plan's details. Lawmakers from both political parties
said they would wait for the Bush administration to argue its
case before deciding whether to vote for nuclear shipments to
India. 

``The administration must show Congress it will make us more
secure by bringing India into closer compliance with
international nonproliferation norms,'' said Sen. Joe Biden of
Delaware, senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee. 

What lawmakers think is crucial, because they must either change
or approve an exception to the U.S. law that bans civilian
nuclear cooperation with countries that have not submitted to
full nuclear inspections. 

India has refused to sign the international Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty, and some fear the Bush plan could
allow rogue countries outside the treaty to build nuclear
weapons programs with imported civilian nuclear technology. 

Bush gave a nod Thursday to the hard work ahead, saying he
looked forward to working with lawmakers to ``change decades of
law that will enable us to move forward in this important
initiative.'' 

Though both chambers of Congress are controlled by the GOP,
lawmakers have shown a growing tendency to break from Bush's
leadership as his popularity declines and congressional
elections approach in November. 

Most recently, they have revolted over a decision by the
administration to allow a Dubai-based company to operate parts
of six major U.S. ports. 

Bush and Singh signed the civilian nuclear agreement in July,
but it hinged partly on India's separation of its military and
civilian nuclear programs. 

Details of the agreement remained murky, but a U.S. official
said India agreed to classify 14 of its reactors as civilian,
which would open them to international inspection; eight were
deemed military reactors, which exempts them from inspection. 

One issue likely to worry lawmakers is the unclear status of
several other Indian reactors and whether they would be open to
inspection. 

Rep. Jim Leach, R-Iowa, chairman of the House International
Relations subcommittee on Asia, said Congress faces a vital
question: whether the proposed agreement strengthens the treaty
``or whether it symbolizes an irreparable breach.'' 

Critics of the plan worry how the world's other nuclear powers
will view a unilateral decision by the United States to loosen
restrictions on the distribution of nuclear supplies. 

India's nuclear rival Pakistan, where scientist A.Q. Khan ran a
network to smuggle nuclear technology to Libya, Iran and North
Korea, told Bush in January that it also wants U.S. civilian
nuclear technology. 

Democratic Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., an outspoken critic of the
plan, called it a ``historic nuclear failure'' that endangers
U.S. national security. 

``With one simple move, the president has blown a hole in the
nuclear rules that the entire world has been playing by,''
Markey said. 

Rep. Gary Ackerman of New York, another Democrat, said that
while he supported the nuclear plan, Bush ``has, thus far, done
a horrendous job of convincing Congress that the agreement is a
good idea.'' 

He urged Bush to ``get to work and make the case to Congress, or
else the nuclear deal will blow up in his face.'' 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 23 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Defends Nuclear Agreement With India
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday March 2, 2006 12:31 PM

AP Photo INGH113 

By DEB RIECHMANN 

Associated Press Writer 

NEW DELHI (AP) - President Bush got a victory Thursday on his
first visit to India, securing a landmark nuclear energy
agreement that he says could help ease energy prices in the
United States. 

Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced the
deal, which will open most Indian reactors to international
inspections and provide the growing nation with U.S. nuclear
technology, during a joint news conference after meeting
privately to hammer out details. 

``We made history,'' Singh said of the deal that will aid
India's quest for more global influence. 

Under the accord, the United States will share its nuclear
know-how and fuel with India to help power its fast-growing
economy. It represents a major shift in policy for the United
States, which imposed temporary sanctions on India in 1998 after
it conducted nuclear tests. 

``We concluded an historic agreement today on nuclear power,''
Bush said. ``It's not an easy job for the prime minister to
achieve this agreement, I understand. It's not easy for the
American president to achieve this agreement, but it's a
necessary agreement. It's one that will help both our peoples.'' 

Critics said the deal undermines the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Agreement, which India won't sign. And they say it sends the
wrong signal to leaders of North Korea and Iran, who have
snubbed their noses at international calls to halt their nuclear
weapons programs. 

The agreement will require U.S. congressional approval. Bush
immediately acknowledged that will be difficult to win. 

Bush said he will tell lawmakers that the U.S.-India
relationship is changing for the better and that it is in the
United States' interest to cooperate with India on its nuclear
programs. He also said the deal could be a boon for U.S.
consumers. 

``Proliferation is certainly a concern and a part of our
discussions, and we've got a good faith gesture by the Indian
government that I'll be able to take to the Congress,'' Bush
said. ``But the other thing that our Congress has got to
understand - that it's in our economic interests that India have
a civilian nuclear power industry to help take the pressure off
of the global demand for energy. ... To the extent that we can
reduce demand for fossil fuels, it will help the American
consumer.'' 

Singh's leftist allies also criticized the pact, saying it paves
the way for U.S. meddling in Indian affairs. 

``Today is one of the most shameful days in the history of
independent India,'' said Shambhu Shrivastava, spokesman for the
socialist Samata Party. 

A top official of the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party said the
agreement sounded good, but must not compromise national
security. 

India argues that it has been a good steward of nuclear material
for five decades, and that there has not been one instance of
nuclear proliferation coming from India. 

Singh repeatedly thanked Bush for shepherding the deal. 

``But for his leadership, this day would probably have not come
so soon,'' Singh said. 

Not everyone in India was pleased about Bush's involvement in
its affairs. Demonstrators gathered across the country,
including an estimated 10,000 people who chanted ``Bush go
back!'' and ``Down with Bush!'' a few blocks from where the two
leaders met. 

Many carried the red flags of India's leftist political parties
or wore white skullcaps indicating they were Muslim. India has
the world's second-largest Muslim population, behind Indonesia. 

Bush and Singh signed an agreement in July to provide India with
nuclear fuel for its booming but energy-starved economy. But the
deal hinged upon determining how to segregate India's nuclear
weapons work from its commercial nuclear program, and place the
latter under international inspection, in a way that satisfied
both sides. 

U.S. Undersecretary of State Nick Burns said India agreed to
open a majority of its nuclear power plants to international
safeguards. 

A senior administration official said India classified 14 of its
22 reactors as civilian, which would open them to international
inspection. Eight were deemed military reactors, making them
exempt from inspection. 

Bush began more than 12 hours of events and meetings on Thursday
with a striking arrival ceremony in a sun-drenched plaza at
Rashtrapati Bhavan, the president's palace. He reviewed troops
of the Indian armed services outfitted in orange turbans and
brown dress uniforms with colorful sashes and marveled at a
cavalry unit on horseback that earlier had flanked his
limousine. 

``I have been received in many capitals around the world but I
have never seen a reception as well-organized or as grand,''
Bush said. 

Bush and his wife, Laura, then visited a memorial to India's
independence leader, M.K. Gandhi, standing in stocking feet for
a moment of silence and wreath-laying at the site of his
cremation in 1948. Following tradition, the Bushes tossed flower
petals on the cremation platform - a gesture repeated for news
photographers. 

After meeting with U.S. and Indian CEOs and answering questions
from the media, Bush and Singh had a lunch of smoked salmon,
mutton and vegetables. Singh spoke of how another
American-Indian duo - Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi -
pushed for the peaceful resolution of conflicts. 

The day was to end with an elaborate State Dinner. 

After India, Bush was headed to Pakistan where on Thursday at
least one bomb ripped through the parking lot of the Marriott
Hotel in Karachi, exploding windows in the nearby U.S.
consulate. 

Bush said he had been briefed on the bombing and had been told
the victims included at least one U.S. citizen, a foreign
service officer he did not identify by name. 

The attack occurred hundreds of miles from Islamabad, where
Bush's events were to take place, but underscored the need for
the extraordinary security planned for his visit. 

``Terrorists and killers are not going to prevent me from going
to Pakistan,'' he said. 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 24 Guardian Unlimited: U.S., India Reach Agreement on Nuke Deal
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday March 2, 2006 8:01 AM

AP Photo INDD105 

By DEB RIECHMANN 

Associated Press Writer 

NEW DELHI, India (AP) - Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and
President Bush on Thursday announced an agreement on a landmark
nuclear deal, a coup for Bush's first visit to India. 

Under the accord, elusive until the last minute, the United
States would share American nuclear know-how and fuel with India
to help power its fast-growing economy, even though India won't
sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. It would represent a
major shift in policy for the United States, which imposed
temporary sanctions on India in 1998 after it conducted nuclear
tests. 

``We concluded an historic agreement today on nuclear power,''
Bush said. ``It's not an easy job for the prime minister to
achieve this agreement. I understand. It's not easy for the
American president to achieve this agreement.'' 

Bush, turning immediately toward selling the deal to skeptics in
the U.S. Congress, called it ``a necessary agreement.'' 

``It's one that will help both our peoples,'' he said. 

Singh repeatedly thanked Bush for personally shepherding the
deal. 

``But for his leadership, this day probably would not have come
so soon,'' Singh said. 

Later in the week, Bush was heading to Pakistan where on
Thursday at least one bomb ripped through the parking lot of the
Marriott Hotel in Karachi, exploding windows in the nearby U.S.
consulate. Bush said he had been briefed on the bombing and been
told that the victims included at least one U.S. citizen, a
foreign service officer he did not identify by name. 

The attack occurred hundreds of miles from Islamabad, where
Bush's events were taking place, but underscored the need for
the extraordinary security planned for his visit there. 

Bush said the attack would not deter him in his travels. 

``Terrorists and killers are not going to prevent me from going
to Pakistan,'' he said. 

Bush and Singh signed an agreement in July to provide India with
nuclear fuel for the country's booming but energy-starved
economy. But it hinged upon determining how to segregate India's
nuclear weapons work from its commercial nuclear program, and
place the latter under international inspection, in a way that
satisfied both sides. 

Some lawmakers in Washington contend that the Bush
administration is essentially making a side deal to the
international nonproliferation treaty. Critics in India,
meanwhile, are wary that the United States is meddling in Indian
affairs, and is using India as a counterweight to China's
growing economic and political influence. 

The president acknowledged that convincing lawmakers would be
difficult. 

``Proliferation is certainly a concern and a part of our
discussions and we've got a good-faith gesture by the Indian
government that I'll be able to take to the Congress,'' Bush
said. ``But the other thing that our Congress has got to
understand that it's in our economic interests that India have a
civilian nuclear power industry to help take the pressure off
the global demand for energy. ... To the extent that we can
reduce demand for fossil fuels, it will reduce the cost to the
American consumer.'' 

Also acknowledging the deal falls outside the limits of
traditional international agreements, Bush argued it was
responsible and would not increase proliferation risks. 

``What this agreement says is - things change, times change,
that leadership can make a difference. ... So I'm trying to
think differently, not stay stuck in the past,'' he said. 

The frantic negotiations for the nuclear pact, coupled with
protests planned throughout Bush's stay, reflected India's mixed
feelings about the visit by the leader of the United States - a
country seen as a loyal friend by some and a global bully by
others. 

Many business and government leaders of this nation of more than
1 billion people are eager to strengthen ties with the United
States. 

But for a second day Thursday, thousands of demonstrators
gathered in New Delhi to protest Bush's visit. Dozens of
politicians, mainly from leftist parties, stood on the steps of
the country's national parliament building chanting ``Bush go
back!'' and ``Down with Bush!'' 

``Our one slogan is: Bush go back!'' We're saying this because
he is the biggest killer of humanity in the 21st century. He has
killed in Afghanistan, he has killed Iraqis and now he is bent
on killing Iranians,'' said Hannan Mollah, a lawmaker from the
Communist Party of India (Marxist). ``The Indian government
should not get into any deal with the Americans. Bush has laid a
trap for India.'' 

Bush began more than 12 hours of events and meetings on Thursday
with a striking arrival ceremony in a sun-drenched plaza at
Rashtrapati Bhavan, the president's palace. 

From under a red canopy outside the massive sandstone-colored
building, the U.S. president was treated to the playing of the
American national anthem. He reviewed troops of the Indian armed
services outfitted in orange turbans and brown dress uniforms
with colorful sashes and marveled at a cavalry unit on horseback
that had earlier flanked his limousine. 

``I have been received in many capitals around the world but I
have never seen a reception as well-organized or as grand,''
Bush said. 

The president and his wife, Laura, then visited a memorial to
India's independence leader, M.K. Gandhi, standing in stocking
feet for a moment of silence and wreath-laying at the site where
he was cremated in 1948. Following tradition, the Bushes tossed
flower petals on the cremation platform - repeating the gesture
several times to make sure photographers could get the shot. 	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 25 [DU List] man loses depleted uranium action
 
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 19:13:45 -0800

<x-flowed>
Man loses depleted uranium action

A former defence worker who claimed that his life was
made a "living
hell"
by exposure to depleted uranium at a factory has lost
his High Court
action.

Richard David, 51, of Seaton, Devon, sued Normalair
Garrett - now owned
by Honeywell Aerospace - for compensation.

The company denied depleted uranium was ever used at
the plant in
Yeovil.

Mr Justice Walker sitting in London said that Mr David
had not shown
that
he was exposed to depleted uranium at the time he was
employed by the
firm.

Mr David, who left work through ill health in July
1995, claimed that
medical
tests had revealed mutations to his DNA and damage to
his chromosomes
which could only have been caused by ionising
radiation.

The former component fitter on fighter planes and
bombers said he now
suffered from respiratory problems, kidney defects,
bowel conditions
and
painful joints.

He alleged that radiation from the uranium isotope had
ruined his
health,
robbed him of the ability to earn a living and caused
the collapse of
his
marriage and family life.

"The last nine years has been a living hell
hand-to-mouth existence
marked
by many GP and hospital consultations for unusual and
even very serious
health problems," he said in court.

Mr Justice Walker however said he had failed to
establish that there
was or
had been any depleted uranium in his body, and had
been unable to
demonstrate that his illness must have been caused by
exposure to it.

"That being so, he has no basis on which to assert
that the defendant
used
DU in his workplace," he said.

"My conclusion that the claimant's case fails does not
involve any
aspersion
upon his honesty.

"It must also be recognised that the defendant, and
its senior
management,
have over a period of years had hanging over them a
charge that they
allowed a highly dangerous material to contaminate one
of their
workers.

"For the reasons I have given, after examining all
that can reasonably
be
said on behalf of the claimant, I conclude that on the
basis of the
evidence
before me the charge made by the claimant against the
defendant is
unjustified," he said.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/somerset/4766580.stm

Published: 2006/03/02 12:25:03 GMT


		
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Photos ­ NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a 
photo http://uk.photos.yahoo.com



*****************************************************************
 26 [NukeNet] Where is your coverage on Millstone?
 
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 19:14:12 -0800

<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

Hello,

Millstone Nuclear Power Station in Waterford, Ct is committing huge crimes 
against the community at large. You have been notified of the National News 
coverage that the Plant Security system is flawed.
A Whistleblower who exposed this has been retaliated against and fired for 
revealing this. He knew it was wrong and attempted to right the situation.

Please, put forth a notice to all concerned. This is a HUGE THREAT! ANYONE 
could enter the perimeter fence line with an intent of wrongful will and 
succeed creating any harmful actions to plant operations.

Please visit <http://www.mothballmillstone.org>www.mothballmillstone.org

Sincerely,
Cynthia
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 27 Brattleboro Reformer: Anger marks NRC meeting

March 02, 2006 Brattleboro, VT                                                                                 
 			 								 					
By KRISTI CECCAROSSI Reformer Staff

BRATTLEBORO -- It was more like an episode of "Jerry Springer"
than a government-sponsored meeting about the local nuclear
power plant.

 There were jeers, cheers and outbursts from a rowdy audience.
There were moments of tension diffused by an unflappable host.
There was a crew wielding spotlights, cameras and microphones to
document the event.

 And if the seats at the Latchis Theatre weren't bolted to the
floor, it's possible one of them might have been hurled across
the main theater there, which was full on Wednesday night with
staff from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and many unhappy
people.

 The NRC was in town to discuss plans to extend Vermont Yankee's
operating license by 20 years.

 The meeting was billed as a way to educate the public on how
they might get involved with license renewal. The idea was that
staff from the federal agency would detail the process, local
people would listen and then ask relevant questions. 

But before NRC staff could finish a Power Point presentation,
there were dozens of hands raised in the audience.

 Chip Cameron, the evening's host or "NRC facilitator,"
responded to maybe half of them, though few of the eager
speakers stuck to the NRC's ground rules. When speakers did
offer questions, not just comments, the NRC response wasn't
adequate, people complained.

 The evening's theme, it seemed, was a lack of trust for the NRC
and a frustration that local concerns about Vermont Yankee have
been repeatedly ignored.

 "This meeting is a disingenuous attempt to make us think you're
giving us a chance at meaningful public participation," said Pat
Cavanaugh, of the watchdog group Nuclear Free Vermont. "How can
you look us in the eye and tell us to trust that you will do a
thorough job of protecting us?"

 Vermont Yankee is a 33-year-old reactor; it's one of the oldest
nuclear power plants in operation. In October 2004, Entergy
Nuclear, its Mississippi-based owners, announced it would try to
renew the plant's license, which expires in 2012. A 20-year
extension is the longest federal regulators allow.

 NRC staff explained their agenda Wednesday was to field
questions about license renewal. They said they would not
discuss other, recent activities surrounding Vermont Yankee --
like a plan to boost its power output by 20 percent, or a plan
to build concrete and steel waste containers on plant grounds.
NRC staff also declined to talk about emergency evacuation
plans, as they relate to license renewal.

 However, Johnny Eads, of the NRC, described some of those
issues as "today issues." He said emergency planning and the
lack of a permanent, federal nuclear waste site are problems
that need to be addressed immediately.

 But that only made people more upset.

 "Let's solve the 'today issues,' then I will sit down and talk
about a 20-year license extension," Brattleboro resident Andy
Davis said. His comment elicited a standing ovation from the
crowd.

 Two hours into the meeting, any sense of order vanished almost
completely.

 A woman standing in the back of the theater, who identified
herself only as "Savannah," asked the NRC to address failed
evacuation drills at Brattleboro Union High School.

 When the NRC didn't offer a direct response to her question,
she repeatedly urged the NRC to "think of the children," in an
affected southern accent.

 Joseph Peyton, a student at BUHS, also criticized the school's
evacuation drills when Chip Cameron, the event's host, gave him
a microphone.

 "How can you guarantee us the evacuation plan will work?"
Peyton asked.

 "Do you live here?" he questioned Johnny Eads, of the NRC. Eads
said no.

 "Then what care do you have if the plant blows up?"

 Peyton refused to relinquish the microphone. Cameron asked him
to let others have a chance to speak. Peyton said he spoke for
the crowd.

 "Do I speak for all of you?" he asked. There was a resounding
"yeah" from the audience.

 The NRC maintains authority over Vermont Yankee's operating
license, although the state's Public Service Board must also
approve any extended operation at the Vernon reactor. Right now,
state legislators are trying to find a way to participate in the
process, too.

 Fifty-three nuclear power plants, of the country's 103, have
applied for license extension. Thirty-nine have been granted,
two have been returned for more work and the other 12 are under
review.

 Those in favor of keeping Vermont Yankee operating past 2012
point to the fact that it makes up one-third of the state's
power supply. Those opposed say, among other arguments, that the
plant's aging components aren't safe.

 The review process for license renewal lasts about 30 months,
provided local people get a formal, public hearing to weigh in
on the issue. Nuclear watchdog groups, residents or state
officials can ask for a public hearing, but it's up to the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, a quasi-judicial branch of
the NRC, whether to grant a hearing.

 To pass muster with the board, would-be intervenors must show
they have serious concerns about the plant's extended operation.

 If comments made at Wednesday's meeting are any measure, local
people are skeptical their voices will be heard in Washington
D.C.

Copyright ©1999-2005 New England Newspapers, Inc., 
*****************************************************************
 28 Guardian Unlimited: Pa. Nuclear Plant Building Evacuated
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday March 2, 2006 6:01 AM

BERWICK, Pa. (AP) - The security control building at a nuclear
power plant was evacuated Wednesday night after a fire
protection system was activated. There was no fire. 

The building is in a non-nuclear area of PPL's Susquehanna
plant, and is located about 100 yards from the buildings housing
the plant's two nuclear reactors. 

One security officer was in the building at the time and no
other plant employees were affected, said Miriam Mylin,
spokesman for PPL Susquehanna. 

The company is investigating why the system activated and
released halon and carbon dioxide gas. 
		 	 	   



      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 29 NRC: NRC to Hold March 8th Public Meeting in Plymouth, Mass., on License Renewal
Application for Pilgrim Nuclear Plant

News Release - Region I - 2006-01 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 
COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-06-011                          
March 1, 2006 CONTACT:     Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. 
Sheehan (610) 337-5331                     E-mail:   

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a public information
session on Wednesday, March 8, in Plymouth, Mass., to discuss
how the agency will review an application for renewal of the
operating license for the Pilgrim nuclear power plant. The
facility is located in Plymouth and operated by Entergy. 

Scheduled to begin at 7 p.m., the meeting will take place at
Plymouth Memorial Hall, at 83 Court St. (Main Street/Route 3A)
in Plymouth. Directions are available on the halls web site at:
[exit icon] . The NRCs presentation will include information on
how the process works and how the public can participate.
Members of the public are invited to ask questions regarding the
agencys license renewal review process. 

Under NRC regulations, the original operating license for a
nuclear power plant has a duration of up to 40 years. The
license may be renewed for up to an additional 20 years if NRC
requirements are met. 

In late January, Entergy submitted an application seeking an
additional 20 years of operation for the Pilgrim plant. The
current operating license for the facility is set to expire on
June 8, 2012. 

The license renewal process requires that both a technical
review of safety issues and an environmental review be performed
for each application. The NRC staff is currently reviewing
Entergys application to determine whether it contains enough
information to begin a formal review. If the application has
sufficient information, the NRC will formally docket, or file,
the application and will announce an opportunity to request a
hearing. 

The Pilgrim application is posted on the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applicati
ons/pilgrim.html. It is also available for review at the NRCs
Public Document Room in Rockville, Md., which can be reached by
phone at 1-800-397-4209, and at the Pilgrim Public Library, at
132 South St. in Plymouth.   

Last revised Thursday, March 02, 2006      
*****************************************************************
 30 Australian Financial Review: Nuclear economics fail

  March 3 2006       

COMMENT &OPINION »  LETTERS » ARTICLE 

Martin Sevior believes that waste disposal and decommissioning
of nuclear power plants can be covered by either a charge of
US0.2¢ per kilowatt hour or US0.5¢ per KWh ("Nuclear power now
an affordable option, Opinion, March 1). It is not clear which
charge is considered adequate. 

I understand that the cost of decommissioning a reactor would be
greater than the cost of building it. The figures quoted would
be manifestly inadequate. Perhaps Sevior can inform us which
reactor has been decommissioned at the cost that he quotes and
where waste has been permanently disposed of within his budget. 

The economics don't stack up if future generations have to pay
for decommissioning and waste disposal. 

Reg Lawler, Dagun, Qld. 



*****************************************************************
 31 NRC: NRC Tracking ‘Alert’ at Susquehanna Nuclear Power Plant

News Release - Region I - 2006-012 - 

  NRC NEWS U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of 
Prussia, Pa. 19406 www.nrc.gov   

  No. I-06-012                          March 2, 2006 CONTACT:     
Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331                     
E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov  
  
Note: The "Alert" was terminated at 4:33 a.m. on Thursday, March
2nd. The NRC Region I Office is following up on the company’s
actions during the event.
 
NRC TRACKING ALERT AT SUSQUEHANNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
  
  The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is closely tracking an event
at the Susquehanna nuclear power plant that led to the
declaration of an Alert on Wednesday night. An Alert is the
second lowest of four levels of emergency classification. 

PPL declared the Alert at 9:27 p.m. Wednesday, after a
fire-protection system discharged a fire-suppression gas in a
security-related building at the site, resulting in its
evacuation. Despite the localized evacuation, security at the
plant, located in Berwick, Pa., and operated by PPL, was at no
point reduced or compromised. 

Early this morning, an assessment was still under way to
determine whether the activation of the fire-protection system
was spurious or caused by any actual smoke or fire. 

Both reactors at the twin-unit nuclear plant have remained in
operation throughout the event and have not been impacted. 

In response to the event, an NRC Resident Inspector stationed at
the plant has reported to the site to observe and evaluate the
companys response. In addition, the NRC is tracking developments
from the Incident Response Center at the agencys Region I Office
in King of Prussia, Pa.; has maintained continuous contact with
the company; and has communicated with the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania regarding the situation. 

We will continue to keep a close watch on the companys response
to the event, both immediately and longer term, NRC Region I
Administrator Samuel J. Collins said. However, its important to
note that the plant has remained safe and secure throughout this
event.   

 	Last revised Thursday, March 02, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 32 POAC: NRC board OKs group's request for safety hearing 

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, a separate branch of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC, which reviews license
renewal applications, ruled Monday that the group's concern that
corrosion could prevent the plant's steel drywell liner from
blocking the release of radiation in an accident merits further
scrutiny.

[PressofAtlanticCity.com]                                                                             

Ocean Twp. PBA disputes salary claims Barnegat fire ruled arson 
Removing the leash LBT ordinance would allow outdoor seating at 
restaurants Multi-town chase ends with Stafford arrest NRC board 
OKs group's request for safety hearing                                   
				 				 
By BERNARD VAUGHAN Staff Writer, (609) 978-2012 Published:

Wednesday, March 1, 2006 Updated: Wednesday, March 1, 2006 
                
A three-judge panel has granted an environmental coalition's
request for a hearing regarding safety concerns at the Oyster
Creek Generating Station in Lacey Township.

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, a separate branch of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or NRC, which reviews license
renewal applications, ruled Monday that the group's concern that
corrosion could prevent the plant's steel drywell liner from
blocking the release of radiation in an accident merits further
scrutiny.

â€œWe're thrilled about it,â€ Kelly McNicholas, conservation
coordinator of the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club, one of
six groups in the Stop the Renewal of Oyster Creek coalition,
said Wednesday. â€œWe were not convinced that AmerGen was going
to give correct information to the NRC, nor were we convinced
that the NRC was going to look at our safety concerns with the
same attention we would give them.â€

Exelon, the company that owns the plant, is seeking a 20-year
license renewal to continue operating the plant after April 9,
2009, when its current license expires. The plant is the oldest
in the United States. AmerGen Energy Co. operates the plant.

The board rejected three contentions filed by the state
Department of Environmental Protection. The DEP is debating
appealing the decision or holding independent public hearings,
said DEP spokeswoman Elaine Makatura. The board ruled the DEP's
contention that the plant is vulnerable to aircraft attacks was
beyond the scope of the license renewal process.

â€œThey seem to imply that it's not their job, that it's not
relevant,â€ Makatura said. â€œWe are not happy and we are
reviewing our options.â€

The DEP's contention regarding aircraft attack is not relevant
to the license renewal application, said NRC spokesman Neil
Sheehan. He said the plant has worked with numerous agencies,
including the North American Aerospace Defense Command and the
Department of Homeland Security, to improve safety at Oyster
Creek and other plants since Sept. 11, 2001.

â€œWe've said repeatedly that issues related to plant security
are more appropriately dealt with on an ongoing basis,â€
Sheehan said. â€œThese are issues which should not be dealt with
in the context of a license renewal application.â€ 

AmerGen also has 10 days to appeal the ruling. If it does
appeal, a five-member, presidentially appointed commission that
oversees the NRC will decide if the hearing is granted.

â€œTheir decision doesn't mean that the drywell liner is
deficient. It simply means that the contention meets the minimal
standards for admissibility in the NRC proceedings,â€ said
Rachelle Benson, a spokeswoman for Oyster Creek, on Wednesday.
â€œAmerGen remains confident that drywell will continue to meet
its design safety function through 2009.â€ 

The only other time the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
granted a hearing on such a contention was in 2002 during the
license renewal application for the Catawba and McGuire nuclear
power plants, in South Carolina and North Carolina,
respectively, according to Sheehan. But there was no hearing
because the five-member commission overturned the board's
ruling. 

To e-mail Bernard Vaughan at The Press:
BVaughan@pressofac.com   	 	 					 		 	 

*****************************************************************
 33 Platts: US nuclear refueling outages show effects of aging maintenance
 
London (Platts)--2Mar2006
 
US nuclear operators ran the median refueling outage in a record 
time of 735 hours in the last six months of 2005, seven hours 
better than the previous best in fall 2002, but the average time 
offline, at 934 hours, was well above the 752-hour average three 
years before, according to utility data.

     That meant virtually no change in the overall pattern of US 
refueling outages in the last three years. Longer outages were 
attributed largely to steam generator and reactor pressure vessel 
head replacements, which help ready power reactors to operate for 
extended lives.

     With only 23 of the 103 operating US nuclear units refueling 
in the last six months of 2005, outage times ranged from 17 to 79 
days. Outages in the first half of 2005 ran 17 to 99 days for the 
43 units that refueled then. In the first half, 81% of units 
refueled in less than 40 days of outage, while in the second 
half, only 65% did, the data showed.

     Two world records were claimed in the last half of 2005: one 
by AmerenUE for a four-loop steam generator replacement in under 
64 days at Callaway, and one by PSEG Nuclear for a 25-day outage 
that included a vessel head replacement.

     Five of the seven shortest outages were turned in at units 
operated by Exelon Nuclear or, in the Salem-1 case, an outage 
co-managed by Exelon. Shortest was Byron-2, at less than 17 days. 
The longest outage was Arkansas Nuclear One-1's replacement of 
its steam generators, at just under 79 days. Entergy said that 
outage included vessel head replacement as well, according to the 
data.

                                    ---Margaret Ryan, 
margaret_ryan@platts.com A full version of this story was 
published in Platts Nucleonics Week. Request a free trial at 
http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/
 
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill 
Companies]       
*****************************************************************
 34 NRC: NRC Staff Approves Power Uprate for Vermont Yankee
 
News Release - 2006-03
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs     
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001     E-mail: 
opa@nrc.gov No. 06-032     March 2, 2006   
  

Vermont Yankee by approximately 20 percent. The agencys review
required more than two years and more than 11,000 staff-hours of
effort. A related engineering inspection of the plant required
an additional 900 hours of work. This is the most extensive
uprate review conducted by the NRC to date. 

The NRC staff reviewed Entergys modifications to the plants
equipment and the companys analyses of the increase (or uprate),
and performed independent calculations and evaluations, before
determining Entergy could safely increase the reactors power
output. The NRCs approval includes several license conditions
Entergy must comply with. 

The power uprate for the unit, located in Vernon, Vt., will
increase its generating capacity by approximately 100 megawatts
electric. Under the conditions of the uprate, Entergy will
increase Vermont Yankees power level in small increments while
NRC staff closely monitor the process until the higher power
level is reached. The NRC staff will also continue to monitor
and evaluate Vermont Yankees performance in accordance with the
agencys Reactor Oversight Process. 

The staff at Headquarters, our Region I office in Pennsylvania
and the resident inspectors at the plant have thoroughly
examined this uprate request, said Jim Dyer, Director of the
NRCs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Weve taken great care
to identify and address technical concerns involved with safely
operating the plant at increased power. 

In July 2004, the NRC published a notice about the power uprate
application in the Federal Register, and issued a press release
on the notice, which provided the public an opportunity to
comment or request a hearing. The Vermont Department of Public
Service and the New England Coalition, a public interest group,
filed hearing requests, and the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board granted those requests in November 2004. The ASLB has not
set a hearing schedule yet, but the hearing is expected to start
this summer. 

On Jan. 11, 2006, the NRC issued a Federal Register notice
seeking public comment regarding the staffs proposed
determination that no significant safety considerations are
associated with amending Vermont Yankees license for the uprate.
After evaluating the comments received, the staff has finalized
that determination. Under NRC regulations, that determination
allows the staff to issue the license amendment prior to the
completion of any pending hearing. 

The NRC's safety evaluation of the plants proposed power uprate
focused on several areas, including nuclear steam supply
systems, instrumentation and control systems, electrical
systems, accident evaluations, radiological consequences,
operations, and technical specification changes. The staffs
safety evaluation will be available through the NRCs electronic
documents database, ADAMS, by entering accession number
ML060050028 at this Web page:
http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm.   



  


 	Last revised Thursday, March 02, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 35 Burlington Free Press.com: Vermont Yankee power increase approved

Burlington, Vermont 

Published: Thursday, March 2, 2006
 From staff reports
 
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved
Thursday the request of Entergy Nuclear to increase the
generating capacity of its Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in
Vermont by 20 percent, according to a news release. 

	The power increase will boost the Vernon-based plant’s capacity
by 100 megawatts to 635 megawatts. The plant began operation in
November 1972. 

	Under conditions of the approval, Entergy will increase Vermont
Yankee’s power in small amounts with NRC staffers monitoring
until the higher power is reached. 

	“The staff at headquarters, our Region I office in Pennsylvania
and the resident inspectors at the plant have thoroughly
examined” the power increase request, said Jim Dyer, director of
the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. “We’ve taken
great care to identify and address technical concerns involved
with safely operating the plant at increased power.” 

Copyright ©2006 Burlingtonfreepress.com All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 36 NRC: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 
 
                         FR Doc E6-2947 
[Federal Register: March 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 41)]
[Notices]               
[Page 10724-10727]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02mr06-98]                         
 
Related to Issuance of Amendment No. 4 to Materials License No.
Suc-
1565, the S.C. Holdings, Inc., Bay City, Mi Site (Tac L60510)
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant
impact.
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Nelson, Project Manager, 
Materials Decommissioning Section, Decommissioning Directorate, 
Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection,
Office of 
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC), Mail Stop T7E18, Washington, DC 20555.
 
Telephone: 301-415-6626; fax number: 301-415-5397; e-mail: .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
NRC is considering the issuance of a license amendment to
the S.C. 
Holdings, Inc. Material License, No. SUC-1565. The amendment
would 
incorporate the Decommissioning Plan (DP), the Quality Assurance 
Project Plan for Decommissioning Activities, and the Health and
Safety 
Plan for Site Decommissioning Activities into Materials License
SUC-
1565.
 
NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support
of 
this amendment request in accordance with the requirements of 10
CFR 
Part 51. Based on the EA, NRC concluded that a Finding of No 
Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate.
 
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
The S.C. Holdings site is a part of the former (now closed) 
industrial waste disposal area locally known as the Hartley &
Hartley 
Landfill. The landfill is a former waste disposal facility that 
accepted municipal and industrial waste from the 1950s until
1978. The 
facility is estimated to have received 18,000 barrels of spent 
solvents, oils, and other liquid and solid wastes for disposal
during 
the 1960's and early 1970's. During the period from 1970 to
1972, 
foundry slag containing radioactive thorium (Th) and progeny was 
disposed of in the Northwest Landfill, and in two small slag
piles 
outside of the Northwest Landfill (Slag Piles A and B). There
are no 
records of Th-bearing slag outside the Northwest Landfill and
the two 
slag piles. In 1995, the NRC issued Source Materials License No.
SUC-
1565 to SCA Services, Inc., for storage of radioactive Th and
uranium 
(U) in slag/waste at the Hartley & Hartley Landfill site. The
current 
owner of the property is S.C. Holdings, Inc., successor by
merger to 
SCA Services, Inc.
 
The Hartley & Hartley Landfill industrial disposal site has
been 
subdivided into two separate sites: the Michigan Department of
Natural 
Resources (MDNR) site and the S.C. Holdings, Inc. site. In a
formal 
land exchange concluded in 1973, the Hartleys conveyed land to
the 
State of Michigan that included approximately three acres where
waste 
disposal had previously occurred in return for lands bordering
their 
industrial waste disposal area. The 3-acre portion, now known as
the 
MDNR site, is part of the State of Michigan's Tobico Marsh State
Game 
Area. The remaining property comprises what is known as the S.C. 
Holdings, Inc. site.
Post-closure activities at the site included construction of
slurry 
walls, subsurface clay dikes, and compacted clay covers over the 
Northwest and East Landfills to contain the chemical wastes and 
preclude the potential migration of chemical (non-radioactive) 
contaminants beyond those areas already impacted by the disposal.
 
Wells and piping for a leachate collection and treatment
system 
(LCTS) will be installed within the Northwest Landfill. Wells
and 
piping have already been installed in the East Landfill and in
the 
adjacent MDNR waste cell. After piping is installed in the
Northwest 
Landfill, the LCTS will collect liquid (leachate) from the MDNR
cell, 
and the Northwest and East Landfills and pump the leachate to a
single 
collection tank located adjacent to the East Landfill. The LCTS
was 
designed to withdraw liquid contaminants (leachate) from the
waste cell 
and landfills to prevent hydrostatic pressure in the cell from
building 
to a point that chemical contaminants would leak out.
 
On November 26, 2003, S.C. Holdings, Inc. submitted a 
Decommissioning Plan (DP) for the site. The DP outlined
decommissioning 
activities including excavating and relocating of Slag Piles A
and B to 
the Northwest Landfill, installing LCTS wells and piping in the 
Northwest Landfill, and upgrading the existing cover over the
Northwest 
Landfill. Following these activities, the site would be released
for 
unrestricted use, as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402, and the
radioactive 
materials license would be terminated. On October 14, 2004, and
October 
28, 2005, the NRC staff transmitted letters to S.C. Holdings,
Inc. 
requesting additional information (RAI) related to the DP. In
letters 
dated May 9, 2005, and December 8, 2005, S.C. Holdings, Inc.
responded 
to the RAIs.
 
The Proposed Action
The proposed action is to amend Source Materials License No.
 
SUC-
1565 to incorporate the DP, the Quality Assurance Plan, and the
Health 
and Safety Plan into the license. The DP proposes excavating and 
relocating Slag Piles A and B to the Northwest Landfill,
installing 
LCTS wells and piping in the Northwest Landfill, and upgrading
the 
existing cover over Northwest Landfill. With regard to the
radiological 
materials, the site will be released for unrestricted use in
accordance 
with 10 CFR 20.1402.
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is to amend Source Materials License No.
 
SUC-
1565 to authorize activities on-site that would lead to the
release of 
the S.C. Holdings, Inc. site located at 2370 South Two Mile
Road, Bay 
City, Michigan, for unrestricted use. The licensee's proposed
action of 
relocating the Th-bearing slag from Slag Piles A and B into the 
Northwest Landfill and leaving all of the radioactive material
in place 
within the Landfill is one option that would conform with the
NRC 
regulation that the dose to the average member of the critical
group is 
below the requirements in 10 CFR Part 20 Subpart E for license 
termination and unrestricted release. The licensee needs the
license 
amendment incorporating the DP, the Quality Assurance Project
Plan, and 
the Health and Safety Plan into the license, to be able to
decommission 
the site. The NRC is fulfilling its responsibilities under the
Atomic 
Energy Act, as amended, to make a decision on a proposed license 
amendment for incorporation of a DP into the license and to
ensure 
adequate
 
[[Page 10725]]
protection of public health and safety and the environment.
 
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
S.C. Holdings, Inc. considered four alternatives to the
proposed 
decommissioning plan: (1) Completely removing Slag Piles A and B
and 
the contents of the East and Northwest Landfills (both
radiological and 
chemical materials); (2) removing only the radiological material
from 
the Piles and the Northwest Landfill; (3) relocating Slag Piles
A and B 
into the Northwest Landfill, installing a LCTS in the Northwest
and 
East Landfills, and enhancing the Northwest Landfill Cap; and
(4) 
taking no remedial action and retaining the site license (``No
Action 
Alternative''). The licensee's preferred alternative is
Alternative No. 
3, which is described, in detail, in the DP.
 
The S.C. Holdings, Inc. site contains both radiological and 
chemical materials. The chemical materials are regulated by the
State 
of Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) under
Part 201 
of Michigan regulations. The chemical materials are contained
within 
the East and Northwest Landfills both of which have slurry walls
and 
caps. The radiological materials are confined to the Northwest
Landfill 
and Slag Piles A and B. The Slag Piles are covered with clay
fill.
 
Alternatives 1 and 2 would cause the contents of the waste
cell to 
be open to the environment and disturbed, potentially leading to 
release of those contents into the surrounding environment. 
Specifically, excavation of the landfills would expose workers
and 
visitors to hazardous materials within the cell. Hazardous
materials 
could be released into the surrounding environment via
effluents, 
airborne particles and/or gases. Shipping the materials off-site
for 
disposal could also expose workers and others to the materials
before, 
during, and after shipment to a waste disposal site. The
environmental 
impact presented by these two alternatives could potentially put 
workers and the surrounding environment at risk, and therefore,
are not 
environmentally sound options.
 
Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative, because the
alternative 
has little, if any, impact on the environment. Once Piles A and
B have 
been relocated, all radiological materials will be confined to
the 
Northwest Landfill. Based on an independent dose assessment, the
NRC 
staff concluded that, if the radiological material is
consolidated into 
the Northwest Landfill and the LCTS is left in place, as
described in 
the DP, then no additional actions would be needed at the S.C.
Holdings 
site for it to be released for unrestricted use per 10 CFR
20.1402.
The impacts from the ``No Action Alternative'' (Alternative
4) are 
similar to the preferred alternative, in that, they would
present 
little if any risk to workers and/or the surrounding
environment. 
However, Alternative 4 is not acceptable, because retaining a
license 
would impose an unnecessary regulatory burden on S.C. Holding,
Inc. 
Since no additional actions would be needed at the site
following the 
proposed actions, described in the DP (Alternative 3), for it to
be 
released for unrestricted use per 10 CFR 20.1402, there would no
longer 
be any need for requiring that the licensee maintain site
security and/
or maintain the site's materials license.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The affected environment at the Site includes the Northwest 
Landfill bounded by a slurry wall covered with a cap, and two
piles of 
slag (Slag Piles A and B) located adjacent to the Northwest
Landfill. 
The slag in Slag Piles A and B will be excavated and relocated
into the 
Northwest Landfill through a small hole that will be cut into
the cap. 
The volume of material in Piles A and B is small in comparison
to the 
volume of the Landfill, therefore the physical placement of the 
material into the Landfill will have no significant adverse
effect on 
the materials already located in the Northwest Landfill.
 
The residual radioactivity at the site consists of foundry
waste 
containing U/Th slag in the Northwest Landfill and two small
areas of 
U/Th slag (Slag Piles A and B) located just outside the slurry
wall 
surrounding the Northwest Landfill.
 
Additional radiological contamination could result from the
primary 
source term at the site through the operation of the existing
Leachate 
Collection and Treatment System (LCTS). The LCTS could result in
the 
leakage of thorium and its daughter products on the cap surface.
 
Also, 
the storage of thorium and its daughter products in an above
ground 
leachate tank associated with the LCTS could result in gamma
radiation 
exposure to site workers. Radioactivity associated with the LCTS
and 
the leachate tank would originate from groundwater in contact
with the 
thorium-bearing slag in the waste cell.
 
The non-radiological contamination at this site is contained
within 
both the Northwest and East Landfills. The non-radiological 
contamination includes organic chemicals which are regulated by
the 
MDEQ, not by the NRC. The non-radiological contamination will be 
present after NRC terminates the license. Approval of the
proposed 
action does not absolve the licensee of any other
responsibilities it 
may have under Federal, State, or local statutes or regulations 
regarding the non-radiological contamination.
 
Much of the immediate area, except for the adjacent Bangor
Township 
Landfill, is marsh land of the Tobico Marsh State Game Area.
 
Also 
adjacent to the site is a separate facility known as MDNR Tobico
Marsh 
State Game Area Site, previously licensed by the NRC. There are
several 
ponds located on the site that had been excavated for sand as
part of a 
quarry operation prior to landfilling or had been excavated
during site 
activities for cell construction or cover material. The shallow 
groundwater on-site is non-potable.
 
The environmental impacts of the licensee's requested action
were 
evaluated by reviewing the results of S.C. Holdings, Inc. dose 
assessments for the Northwest Landfill and the slag piles. The 
licensee's assessments assume that the radiological contaminants
remain 
within the Northwest Landfill, and surface soil of the excavated
slag 
piles does not exceed the derived concentration guideline levels 
(DCGLs) of the DP. The licensee used the computer code, RESRAD
Version 
6.2, to demonstrate that doses from residual radioactivity do
not 
exceed the regulatory limit (25 millirem (mrem)/yr). The
licensee used 
the model to calculate the radiation dose expected to be
received by a 
hypothetical industrial worker beginning at the time of site
closure 
and extending into the future (i.e., 1000 years). The NRC staff 
performed independent analyses of the licensee's dose
assessments and 
NRC's results were in agreement with S.C. Holdings, Inc. methods
and 
procedures.
 
For the residual radioactivity in the Northwest Landfill,
the 
licensee assumed U and Th concentrations as measured by Oak
Ridge 
Associated University (ORAU) in 1985. ORAU determined that the 
concentrations of the individual radionuclides present in the
Northwest 
Landfill were: (1) Lead-210--0.61pCi/g, (2) Radium
(Ra)-226--0.61pCi/g, 
(3) Ra-228--18.67pCi/g, (4) Th-228--17.96pCi/g, (5)
Th-230--2.54pCi/g, 
(6) Th-232--18.67pCi/g, and (7) U-234--2.54pCi/g. The licensee's 
expected dose from to the material in the Northwest Landfill was
5 
mrem/yr and no DCGLs were reported for the Landfill.
 
For the residual soil surface radioactivity of the excavated
slag 
piles, the licensee derived DCGLs. The licensee did not take
into 
account
 
[[Page 10726]]
exposure from material in the Northwest Landfill in deriving the
DCGLs 
for the remediated slag piles, because the dose contribution
from the 
Northwest Landfill at the slag piles locations would not be 
distinquishable from background. These DCGLs reflect the
concentration 
of radionuclides that may be present outside of the Northwest
Landfill 
and result in a maximum dose of less than 25 mrem per year over 
background. The presence of these isotopes will be verified
after the 
remediation is completed and the final status survey is
implemented.
 
Micro Shield, Version 5.01, was used to determine the dose
from 
exposure to the leachate tank. S.C. Holdings assumed that the
15,000-
gallon leachate storage tank that is located on the site is used
to 
collect leachate for the Northwest Landfill. The modeled
scenario 
assumed that tank is always completely full and the presence of
thorium 
radioactivity in slag at the specific activity limit. The
exposure 
scenario involves a worker who hypothetically stands 1 meter
from the 
leachate storage tank. For leachate leakage from the LCTS, the
licensee 
used an analysis performed by MDNR. The annual dose for the
potential 
leaking of the LCTS determined by MDNR was less than 1 mrem/yr.
 
S.C. 
Holding's analysis for the gamma radiation exposure for a worker
within 
close proximity to the leachate tank was less than 2 mrem/yr.
 
The NRC staff evaluated the potential radiological exposure
to 
offsite receptors resulting from groundwater seepage through the
slurry 
walls. This potential radiological exposure is very low due to
the 
following reasons:
1. Any seepage of radiological contaminated groundwater
through the 
slurry walls will be dispersed and diluted as the groundwater
slowly 
travels to Saginaw Bay of Lake Huron.
 
2. The travel time for groundwater to reach Saginaw Bay from
the 
site is long (several thousand years) because of the distance
(2.24 
kilometers) between the two locations and because of the low
hydraulic 
gradient (0.0002 ft/ft) of the water table.
3. The solubility of Th in groundwater is very low.
4. The concentration of the radiological contaminated
groundwater 
will become highly diluted if it is discharged into the much
larger 
surface water volume of Saginaw Bay.
 
5. There are no receptors along the groundwater pathway
between the 
site and Saginaw Bay, and none are anticipated, in the future.
 
The NRC staff reviewed the potential Environmental Impacts
of the 
licensee's requested action to relocate the Slag Piles into the 
Northwest Landfill and leave the Northwest Landfill ``as is''
and 
release it for unrestricted use. Based on the staff's review of
the DP, 
the staff determined that the radiological environmental impacts 
associated with the licensee's proposed action are bounded by
the 
impacts evaluated in NUREG-1496, ``Generic Environmental Impact 
Statement of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License 
Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities.''
Agencies and Persons Consulted
This EA was prepared entirely by the NRC staff. The Michigan
State 
Historic Preservation Office and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service 
were contacted regarding this action and neither organization
had 
concerns regarding this licensing action. No remedial actions
are 
planned for the site. Therefore, the release of the S.C.
Holdings, Inc. 
site for unrestricted use would not affect historical or
cultural 
resources, nor will it affect threatened or endangered species.
 
No 
other sources of information were used beyond those referenced
in this 
EA.
 
The NRC provided a draft of this EA to the MDEQ for its
review on 
October 27, 2005. The MDEQ agreed with the conclusions in the EA.
Conclusions and Finding of No Significant Impact
Based on its review, the NRC staff concludes that the
proposed 
action complies with 10 CFR 20, Subpart E. NRC has prepared this
EA in 
support of the proposed license amendment to approve the DP. On
the 
basis of the EA, NRC has concluded that the environmental
impacts from 
the proposed action are expected to be insignificant and has
determined 
that preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is
not 
needed for the proposed action.
 
Sources Used
1. NRC License No. SUC-1565.
2. S.C. Holdings, Inc., Letter dated November 26, 2003,
``Submittal 
of the Decommissioning Plan SCA Hartley & Hartley Landfill Site, 
Kawkawlin Township, Michigan NRC Materials License No. SUC-1565,
Docket 
No. 40-9022.'' [ADAMS Accession No. ML033450337]
3. NRC, Letter dated October 14, 2004, ``The Nuclear
Regulatory 
Commission's Request for Additional Information (RAI) with
Regard to 
the Decommissioning Plan 1, for the S.C. Holdings, Inc. Hartley
and 
Hartley Landfill Site, Kawkawlin, Michigan.'' [ADAMS Accession
No. 
ML042670354]
4. S.C. Holdings, Inc., Letter dated May 9, 2005, ``Response
to RAI 
SCA Hartley & Hartley Landfill Site, Kawkawlin Township,
Michigan NRC 
Source License SUC-1565.'' [ADAMS Accession No. ML051380221]
5. S.C. Holdings, Inc., Letter dated December 8, 2005,
``Response 
to Second Request for Additional Information SCA Hartley &
Hartley 
Landfill Site, Kawkawlin Township, Michigan NRC Source License
SUC-
1565.'' [ADAMS Accession No. ML053480161]
6. S.C. Holdings, Inc., Letter dated September 15, 2005, 
``Submittal of the Quality Assurance Project Plan and the Health
and 
Safety Plan for Site Decommissioning SCA Hartley & Hartley
Landfill 
Site, Kawkawlin Township, Michigan NRC Source License
SUC-1565.'' 
[ADAMS Accession No. ML052640183]
7. NUREG-1748, Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing
Actions 
Associated with NMSS Programs, August 2003.
 
8. NUREG-1757, Volume 1, Rev 1, Consolidated NMSS
Decommissioning 
Guidance, Decommissioning Process for Materials Licensees, Final 
Report, September 2003.
 
9. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, 
``Radiological Criteria for License Termination.''
10. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51,
``Environmental 
Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related
Regulatory 
Functions.''
11. NUREG-1496, Generic Environmental Impact Statement of 
Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of
NRC-
Licensed Nuclear Facilities, July 1997.
 
12. MDNR, Response to RAI--Tobico Marsh State Game Area Site
and 
Submission of Additional Information Relative to the
Decommissioning 
Plan, August 27, 2004.
 
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon the analysis in this EA, NRC staff has concluded
that 
there will be no significant environmental impacts from the
proposed 
action and has determined not to prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement for the proposed action.
 
IV. Further Information
Documents related to this action, including the application
for 
amendment and supporting documentation, are available
electronically at 
NRC's Electronic Reading Room at 
 
[[Page 10727]]
reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can access NRC's
ADAMS, 
which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents.
 
The 
ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related to this notice
are: 
ML033450337 for the November 26, 2003, letter submitting the 
Decommissioning Project Plan; ML052640183 for the September 15,
2005, 
letter submitting the Quality Assurance Plan and the Health and
Safety 
Plan, and ML051380221 and ML053480161 for the May 9, 2005, and
December 
8, 2005, letters responding to NRC requests for additional
information. 
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems
accessing 
the documents located in ADAMS, contact NRC's Public Document
Room 
(PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by
email to .
 
These documents may also be viewed electronically on the
public 
computers located at NRC's PDR, O-1F21, One White Flint North,
11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction
contractor 
will copy documents for a fee.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 20th day of February 2006.
 
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Daniel M. Gillen,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste 
Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear
Material 
Safety and Safeguards.
 
[FR Doc. E6-2947 Filed 3-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 37 AFP: US, India clinch nuclear deal, call pact 'historic'

Thursday March 2, 7:51 PM
 
NEW DELHI (AFP) - The United States and India sealed a civilian
nuclear deal which their leaders described as historic. 

The pact, the highlight of US President George W. Bush's
three-day trip to India, commits Washington to seek approval
from the US Congress and countries of the Nuclear Suppliers
Group to lift curbs on sharing nuclear technology with India. 

"History was made today," India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
told a joint news conference. "I was particularly pleased we
have reached an understanding on the implementation of our
agreement on civil nuclear cooperation of July 18, 2005." 

"We concluded today an historic agreement on nuclear power ...
it is a necessary agreement, it will help both our peoples,"
added Bush. 

Critics charge the accord undermines non-proliferation goals.
But advocates say it will help energy-hungry India diversify its
sources of fuel to feed its booming economy and reduce overall
world demand for depleting fossil fuels. 

"Now it is for the US to go to Congress for the necessary
(legislation) amendments and it will approach the Nuclear
Supppliers Group," Singh said. 

The deal marks a turnaround for the US which for three decades
spearheaded a drive to deny India nuclear technology because New
Delhi developed nuclear weapons in violation of international
norms. Both India and nuclear-armed rival Pakistan have refused
to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. 

Thursday's agreement capped months of negotiations after Bush
and Singh agreed on the broad contours of a deal during the
Indian premier's visit to Washington last July. 

The two sides had been at odds since over how to ensure that
India's military facilities do not benefit from nuclear
technology transfers. 

Under last July's agreement, New Delhi offered to separate its
civilian and military nuclear programs and place the civilian
part under international supervision. But negotiations became
bogged down when Washington said India's civilian list was not
long enough. 

Singh said Thursday India had given a list of its civilian
reactors to the United States and added New Delhi would seek an
agreement with the Vienna-based atomic watchdog International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 

"I have conveyed to the (US) president that India has finalised
the identification of its civilian facilities to which we had
committed," Singh told reporters. 

"We will discuss with the International Atomic Energy Agency in
regard to fashioning an appropriate India-specific safeguard
agreement," Singh said, declining to elaborate. 

India has 15 nuclear reactors producing 3,300 megawatts of power
but only four of them are under IAEA safeguards. Another seven
are under construction, two of which would be placed under
supervision when completed. 

At the core of the debate was India's fast breeder program which
can process plutonium from spent fuel from India's heavy water
reactors. Plutonium can also be used to make nuclear weapons. 

Indian opponents of the deal had said putting the fast breeder
under international supervision would shackle Indian scientists,
make India reliant on imported uranium and cap its weapons
programme. 

Howeer, Bush said Thursday "reprocessing will help address
environmental concerns with nuclear power. There will be less
(toxic) material to dispose." 

Details of the agreement were not immediately available. 

But Bush said, "We have a good-faith gesture by the Indian
government that I can take to Congress." 

"I am confident we can show Congress this is on our interests,"
he added. 

"It is in our interest that India have access to nuclear power
to take pressure off the deamnd for energy," he said. 

"The less demand for fossil fuel, the better it is for the
American people so to the extent that we can reduce demand for
fossil fuels, the better it is for the American consumer," Bush
said. 

"This is what I will be telling our Congress."          

Copyright © 2005 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
 38 Vermont Guardian: NRC urges angry citizenry to participate in VY licensing

By Kathryn Casa | Vermont Guardian 

posted March 2, 2006 

BRATTLEBORO  The marquee at the Latchis cinema Wednesday night
read Match Point, New World, NRC  but inside, it was pure
political theater. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was back in town, this
time to talk to the public about a 20-year license renewal for
Vermont Yankee when the nuclear reactors current 40-year license
expires in 2012. 

Senior Project Manager Johnny Eads said the NRC was in town to
regain the public trust that has eroded during a three-year
regulatory odyssey in which area residents said federal
officials turned a deaf ear to their opposition of a 20 percent
power uprate at the Vernon reactor. The uprate is widely
expected to be approved by the NRC today when the agency issues
its final evaluation of the uprate proposal. 

On Wednesday, Eads said the issues were separate, and he refused
to talk about the power increase. Instead, he described the
upcoming 30-month long licensing procedure that will include an
environmental assessment and plant inspection, but will exclude
consideration of nuclear waste storage, emergency planning, and
existing problems at the aging reactor. 

Eads urged the public to become involved in the process. We
depend on your participation to establish a full and complete
record, he said, standing against a movie screen backdrop
displaying his toll-free number. 

Area residents scoffed at the notion that they would be heard,
charging that their concerns about Vermont Yankee have
consistently been ignored. 

It makes me think of what Gandhi said when he was asked about
Western civilization. He said it would be a good idea, said Jeff
Unsicker, a Brattleboro professor and member of Nuclear Free
Vermont. I think it would be a good idea if the NRC would allow
full and adequate citizen participation. 

Unsicker called for independent studies, conducted by a
nonprofit organization or a university, of the plant, health and
the environment, the emergency response plan, and the economic
impacts of nuclear power. 

What will happen to the state of Vermont should there be any
kind of nuclear accident, either from terrorism, or operational
error, or mechanical failure? Unsicker asked. Because Vermont is
dependent upon a green, organic image, the first small emission
will have a devastating impact not only on our local communities
but on our entire state. 

He also called for Entergy, the multibillion-dollar corporation
that owns Vermont Yankee, to finance groups that want to
intervene in the NRC regulatory process. This process you
describe is incredibly complex.  It takes lawyers, scientists.
And the groups concerned about this do not have those resources. 

Nearly 300 people turned out to boo, hiss, shout down and
otherwise inform federal regulators that they are not trusted,
and Vermont Yankee is not wanted. Not one person spoke in favor
of the plants continued operation during the three-hour meeting,
with many spoke passionately against it. 

The process sir, it smacks of expediency all up and down the
line; the plant is there, theres a large financial investment in
it, and it seems like thats whats being served by the NRC, said
Andy Davis, a Brattleboro music teacher. 

License extension, uprate, waste storage  these three things are
totally connected, and to have people come here again and again
and you tell us I cant respond to that; I can only talk about
license extension, is treating me like a tiny child. 

Eads outlined five major forums in which the public can
participate: residents can request a formal hearing on the
license extension, and they can participate in meetings to
outline the scope of the NRCs environmental assessment, respond
to the draft environmental study and to the NRCs safety review,
as well as a separate review by the Advisory Committee on
Reactor Safeguards (ACRS), a panel of experts that advises the
commissioners. 

Eads added that the public can also appeal to the NRC at any
time through a so-called 2.206 petition. 

But according to nuclear whistleblower Paul Blanche, less than
one percent of 2.206 petitions are ever accepted by the NRC. 

Blanche said both the ACRS and NRC staff refused to address
serious safety concerns that he raised at an ACRS meeting in
Brattleboro in October. 

When the ACRS issued the final recommendation for Vermont
Yankee, they totally ignored my transcribed concerns; I wrote
back to the chairman of ACRS and last week I got a response:
Thank you very much  but your concerns are the responsibility of
the staff. The staff says theyre the responsibility of the ACRS.
Its a merry-go-round.  The whole thing is a farce. 

Blanche echoed concerns raised by members of the areas three
largest anti-nuclear groups that the NRC appeals process takes
resources and money that they do not have. 

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board process  takes tens if not
hundreds of thousands of dollars. These people in Vermont dont
have that money to participate. For you to get up there and say
there is public participation in the process is a joke, he told
Eads and a cadre of NRC support staff. There is none. 

The NRC had more than a dozen staff members present, including
health physicist Trish Milligan, who spoke in response to
health-related concerns. Milligan cited a litany of federal and
international studies that she said had failed to find evidence
that radiation from nuclear reactors causes cancer or other ill
effects. 

One study of the Chernobyl meltdown in the Ukraine identified no
additional cancers except for thyroid cancers in children  and
if there had been proper interdiction of food supplies there
likely would have been little to no additional thyroid cancers
in that population, Milligan said, evoking hoots and shouts from
the audience. 

Radiation emissions at Vermont Yankee are expected to increase
by 26 to 30 percent as a result of the uprate. The issue has
been a concern to state officials after state readings measured
radiation levels in excess of Vermonts 20 millirem annual dose
limit in 2004, 2000 and 1998. 

The state is currently negotiating with Vermont Yankee and a
private consultant on how it measures radiation. A draft report
has been issued and is expected to be finalized next week,
William Irwin, the Health Departments chief radiological
officer, told the Vermont Guardian. 

There as been virtually no public input on that process thus
far. In a second letter in as many months, Windham Regional
Commission Executive Director Jim Matteau this week again
admonished state officials for failing to communicate with
residents living around the plant about the radiation issue, and
offered to set up local meetings. 

Some observers anticipate that the [Vermont Department of Health
and Vermont Department of Public Service], working with Entergy
and a consultant, will propose a new rule or announce an
improved methodology that would enable significantly increased
radiation without exceeding revised technical limits, Matteau
wrote to the heads of those departments. 

Acknowledging this to be speculation, I suggest that it seems a
likely scenario and one that should be expected to be
accompanied by significantly increased controversy and public
frustration if it is not preceded and accompanied by effective
public engagement. Therefore, I urge you to hold public meetings
in this area to inform the public and answer questions about
this issue; update the public as information continues to
develop; and ensure that the public is well-informed if and when
a change is proposed, he wrote. 

As of March 1, Matteau said he had received no response to the
Feb. 27 letter. 

State health officials have also failed to respond to repeated
requests from the Vermont Guardian for a copy of the draft
radiation measurement report. 

  | | Northern Vermont: PO Box 335, Winooski, VT 05404
 Southern Vermont: 139 Main Street, Suite 702, Brattleboro, VT
05301
 Contact: 802.861.4880 (ph) | 802.861.6388 (fax) | 877.231.5382

 ©2005 Vermont Guardian | 

Visit us: www.vermontguardian.com
www.vermontguardian.com/local/032006/NRCMeeting.shtml 
*****************************************************************
 39 IRNA: India agrees to open 14 out of 22 N-reactors to IAEA 

New Delhi, March 2, IRNA                                                                                                                 

India-Bush-Reactors 

India today agreed to open 14 of its 22 nuclear reactors to
international safeguards under a last minute deal clinched after
intense discussions between the visiting US President George W
Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

 High level sources said after talks between Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh and US President George W Bush that India has
made it clear that classification of nuclear reactors to be
built in the future will be its sole decision and there would be
no debate on it.

 Details of the separation plan as well as the assurances given
by the US under the deal will be outlined by the Prime Minister
in Parliament soon, the sources said.

 They said the separation of India's 22 nuclear reactors will be
undertaken in a phased manner and completed by 2014.

 During the negotiations, India insisted on removal of
ambiguities to ensure that whatever nuclear reactors built in
the future, would not come under question.

 The sources said India had no problem with having permanent
safeguards on its civilian nuclear reactors but wanted
perpetuity of supplies considering that there has been
unreliability in this regard in the past.

 They cited the case of Tarapur plant to which the US has not
supplied fuel arguing that it required change of American laws.

 The deal is an exception to India only, they said, adding the
agreement was a "win-win" situation for both New Delhi and
Washington.

 Referring to the India's specific safeguards to be worked out
with IAEA, about which the prime minister spoke, the sources
said that it stemmed from the fact that India's case was unique
and the safeguards should be such that are applicable to a
non-military nuclear power country.

 They explained that though India was a "de-facto" nuclear
military power, it was not recognized as such by the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) regime.

*****************************************************************
 40 Vermont Guardian: Citizen group makes last-ditch bid to stall VY uprate

By Kathryn Casa | Vermont Guardian 

posted March 2, 2006 

BRATTLEBORO  A Vermont citizens group has made an 11th hour
appeal to forestall the nations first contested power increase
at a commercial nuclear reactor. 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is expected to issue its
approval today for a 20 percent power uprate at the Vermont
Yankee reactor in Vernon. But in a letter to the commissioners
dated Feb. 27, the Brattleboro-based New England Coalition (NEC)
has formally asked them to withhold permission for the uprate
until the groups safety-related appeals are heard later this
year. 

Allowing the VY uprate to proceed would deny New England
Coalition effective redress and due process and subject New
England Coalition, its constituents and members living within
the emergency planning zone of Vermont Yankee Power Station to
irreparable harm of unnecessary increased risk of accident an
accident consequence, asserts the letter, which was written by
Ray Shadis, NECs technical advisor. 

NRC spokeswoman Diane Screnci acknowledged the commission had
received the letter. She had no further comment, except to add
that there had been no precedent for such a request. Vermont
Yankees is the first uprate to undergo the NRC hearing process.
None of the more than 100 uprates approved by the NRC has been
formally contested. 

Observers see the coalitions bid to stall implementation as a
long shot. Under NRC rules, the time to make such an appeal
would have been when the draft evaluation was issued. 

The New England Coalition is the first citizens group to be
granted intervenor status in an uprate before the NRC. With the
state of Vermont, the coalition is questioning whether the
33-year-old reactor is capable of withstanding the additional
pressure and stress of a 20 percent uprate, the maximum allowed
by the NRC. 

In his letter, Shadis reminded the commissioners of a Dec. 16,
2005, letter they had written to Vermont and Massachusetts
members of Congress, in which the commissioners stated that they
must remain impartial during the pendency of a case, whether it
is before a licensing board or an appeal to the commission. 

The New England Coalition has petitioned the Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board, the quasi-judicial arm of the NRC that reviews
safety concerns, to require Vermont Yankee to perform a
procedure called large transient testing before the uprate is
implemented. 

Shadis compared it to revving a car and then slamming on the
brakes to make sure they work. The purpose of large transient
testing is to see how the plant will respond under uprate
conditions, Shadis said. Allowing the uprate to proceed without
that test will expose people living around the plant to six
months of danger, he maintained. 

The coalitions contentions will be effectively bypassed and
mooted if the uprate proceeds, he argued in the letter. 

If the NRC approves the uprate today, as is widely expected, VY
operators are prepared to implement the power increase
immediately. Entergy, the corporation that owns the plant, has
made roughly $60 million in uprate-related modifications.
Vermont Yankee has passed an NRC inspection and the draft safety
evaluation found there were no significant hazards connected
with a power increase. 

 Southern Vermont: 139 Main Street, Suite 702, Brattleboro, VT 
05301 Contact: 802.861.4880 (ph) | 802.861.6388 (fax) | 
877.231.5382 (toll-free)

 ©2005 Vermont Guardian | 

Visit us: www.vermontguardian.com
 This document can be located online:
www.vermontguardian.com/local/032006/StallVYUprate.shtml 
*****************************************************************
 41 Vermont Guardian: NRC approves uprate; VY plans Saturday power boost

By Kathryn Casa | Vermont Guardian 

Posted March 2, 2006 

BRATTLEBORO  Entergy will begin power acceleration at Vermont
Yankee on Saturday after receiving the go-ahead today from
federal regulators. 

Entergy plans to bring the nuclear reactor to 120 percent
capacity within the next several weeks. 

The announcement comes before state regulators have clarified
their final approval of the uprate, and just hours after the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission sidelined broad public
opposition and the first formal uprate challenge. The NRC
decision clears the way for one of the nations oldest nuclear
reactors to increase power by 20 percent, the largest allowable. 

Contacted late Wednesday, officials at the Vermont Public
Service Board said they were working on an order as we speak,
but would not say when it would be released. 

In its cover letter announcing the decision, the NRC said
Vermont Yankee had undergone the most extensive uprate review
conducted by the NRC to date, including 11,000 staff hours and a
thorough engineering inspection. 

Federal regulators concluded that there is reasonable assurance
that the uprate can be conducted without endangering the health
and safety of the public, and  will not be inimical to the
common defense and security or to the health and safety of the
public, according to the NRCs amendment to the Vermont Yankee
license.
 
The NRC decision confirms that the power increase is safe and
consistent with its regulations, VY spokesman Rob Williams
declared in a written statement. 

Opponents said the move puts area residents in danger. 

The older a reactor gets, as it approaches the end of its design
life, the more dangerous it becomes, and VY basically tottering
on the brink of an accident, said Ray Shadis, technical advisor
to the New England Coalition, the citizens group that formally
opposed the uprate before state and federal regulators. Going to
extended power uprate is just going to increase that risk. 

Nuclear Free Vermont, another citizens group that opposed the
power boost, called on state Attorney General William Sorrell,
Gov. Jim Douglas, and the Public Service Board to halt Entergys
plans to immediately boost power until the boards order is
clarified. 

In its order of March 2004, the Vermont Public Service Board
asked federal regulators to conduct a specific engineering
inspection of the plant. The board also said it will retain
jurisdiction to modify this order based on the results of the
NRCs assessment. 

The board has since been silent on whether the NRCs inspection
complies with the states order. Critics say it does not. 

Thought it is not clear what conclusion the PSBs order will
draw, Entergys announcement, coupled with word from the NRC that
the uprate would begin on Saturday, signaled that the company
was confident of a decision in its favor. 

The NRCs approval comes at the conclusion of a very thorough
evaluation process at the state and federal level. In fact, the
NRC has stated that this is the most comprehensive uprate review
ever conducted, said Public Service Department Commissioner
David OBrien in a statement released through the governors
office. 

OBrien said his department sought to advance the interests of
the state in each phase of the regulatory review. In the
hearings before the Public Service Board we made sure that
consumers could be assured that VY would remain a safe and
reliable source of power that would benefit the state as a
whole. 

The uprate approval precedes the resolution of a series of
safety-related concerns pending before a quasi-judicial panel of
the NRC, including issues raised by the department as well as by
the New England Coalition. Both are challenging the safety of
the uprate before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which
is not expected to hear their contentions until July, or
possibly as late as the fall. 

In a letter to the NRC commissioners on Feb. 27, the New England
Coalition argued that implementation of the uprate would render
its contentions moot, and formally asked the commissioners to
withhold approval until the issues are addressed. 

The coalition reminded commissioners that in a Dec. 16, 2005,
letter to Vermont and Massachusetts members of Congress, the
commissioners had declared an appellant role and policy of
non-interference with parties seeking administrative remedies
through NRCs hearing process. 

Vermont Yankees is the first contested uprate in the country,
and thus it is the first case to go through the NRC hearing
process. 

In a joint statement, Vermont Sens. Patrick Leahy and James
Jeffords said they were concerned that the ASLB had not yet set
a hearing date to resolve the safety questions. The outcome of
the hearings has the potential to affect the terms and
conditions of the uprate, and Vermonters have a right to the due
process they deserve, they said. 

The NRC staff reviewed Entergys modifications to the plants
equipment and the companys analyses of the increase (or uprate),
and performed independent calculations and evaluations, before
determining Entergy could safely increase the reactors power
output, according to the statement. 

The regulatory approval clears the way for Vermont Yankee to
begin producing an additional 110 megawatts of base load power
available around the clock every day according to Williams.
Entergy has spent about $60 million on improvements to the
33-year-old boiling water reactor in preparation for the
proposed power boost, and stands to net about $20 million
annually from the new power sales, according to state estimates. 

The company has formally petitioned the NRC for an extension of
VYs 40-year license when it expires in 2012. NRC held its first
meeting on that issue in Brattleboro on Wednesday night. 

The NRCs approval includes a list of license conditions
stipulating that Entergy is to increase VYs power level
incrementally while NRC staff inspectors monitor the process. 

Operators must hold the power level for 24 hours at 105 percent,
110 percent and 115 percent to enable inspectors to determine
whether the uprate is over-stressing several questionable
components, including the plants cracked steam dryer. 

In addition, they may not increase power above each hold point
until 96 hours after the NRC project manager confirms receipt of
the monitoring data, according to the federal order. 

The steam dryer, which has been welded to reinforce more than 40
hairline cracks, is a considered a non-safety component.
However, watchdogs worry that broken dryer parts could break
lose and jam key valves that could compromise safety. 

The NRC also stipulates that during three scheduled refueling
outages beginning in spring 2007, all accessible, susceptible
locations of the steam dryer, including flaws left as is and
modifications must be visually inspected. 

Several Windham County lawmakers expressed disappointment, but
not surprise, in the NRCs decision. 

I didnt really expect otherwise, but of course I was always
holding out hope that they would really be the guard dog for
public safety that they are supposed to be, said Rep. Steve
Darrow, D-Putney. Its unfortunate that they approved it before
the whole process is complete. It shows that they are not
serving the public good but appear to be serving the nuclear
industry. 

State Sen. Rod Gander, D-Windham, called the move unwise. 

The plant was designed for a 40-year life at a certain operating
capacity. Increasing that capacity makes no sense other than
economic sense for the energy company, said Gander. If we look
at other plants, the very few that have uprates of some
magnitude have had some problems  the kind of problems we dont
need here. 

I have been against the uprate since it was first proposed; I am
against it now, state Rep. Sarah Edwards, P-Brattleboro, who
likened the NRC regulatory process to standing in front of a
steamroller which your feet in cement. There is no place for
meaningful public input. 
 
  | | Northern Vermont: PO Box 335, Winooski, VT 05404
 Southern Vermont: 139 Main Street, Suite 702, Brattleboro, VT
05301
 Contact: 802.861.4880 (ph) | 802.861.6388 (fax) | 877.231.5382

 ©2005 Vermont Guardian | 

Visit us: www.vermontguardian.com
 This document can be located online:
www.vermontguardian.com/local/032006/VYApproval.shtml 
*****************************************************************
 42 [du-list] Nibby lost his High Court action (BBC News)
 
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 19:13:25 -0800

<x-flowed>
Man loses depleted uranium action

A former defence worker who claimed that his life was made a "living hell"
by exposure to depleted uranium at a factory has lost his High Court action.

Richard David, 51, of Seaton, Devon, sued Normalair Garrett - now owned
by Honeywell Aerospace - for compensation.

The company denied depleted uranium was ever used at the plant in Yeovil.

Mr Justice Walker sitting in London said that Mr David had not shown that
he was exposed to depleted uranium at the time he was employed by the
firm.

Mr David, who left work through ill health in July 1995, claimed that medical
tests had revealed mutations to his DNA and damage to his chromosomes
which could only have been caused by ionising radiation.

The former component fitter on fighter planes and bombers said he now
suffered from respiratory problems, kidney defects, bowel conditions and
painful joints.

He alleged that radiation from the uranium isotope had ruined his health,
robbed him of the ability to earn a living and caused the collapse of his
marriage and family life.

"The last nine years has been a living hell hand-to-mouth existence marked
by many GP and hospital consultations for unusual and even very serious
health problems," he said in court.

Mr Justice Walker however said he had failed to establish that there was or
had been any depleted uranium in his body, and had been unable to
demonstrate that his illness must have been caused by exposure to it.

"That being so, he has no basis on which to assert that the defendant used
DU in his workplace," he said.

"My conclusion that the claimant's case fails does not involve any aspersion
upon his honesty.

"It must also be recognised that the defendant, and its senior management,
have over a period of years had hanging over them a charge that they
allowed a highly dangerous material to contaminate one of their workers.

"For the reasons I have given, after examining all that can reasonably be
said on behalf of the claimant, I conclude that on the basis of the evidence
before me the charge made by the claimant against the defendant is
unjustified," he said.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/somerset/4766580.stm

Published: 2006/03/02 12:25:03 GMT

© BBC MMVI

----------------------------------------------------------------------
stichting Laka                                         Laka foundation
documentatie en onderzoeks-                 documentation and research
centrum kernenergie                           centre on nuclear energy
Ketelhuisplein 43                                    Ketelhuisplein 43
1054 RD Amsterdam                                 NL-1054 RD Amsterdam
tel: 020-6168294                                           Netherlands
fax: 020-6892179                                   tel: +31-20-6168294
                                                    fax: +31-20-6892179
                             www.laka.org


                         laka@antenna.nl
----------------------------------------------------------------------





To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 43 BBC: Man loses depleted uranium action
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 2 March 2006
 
[Richard David]                                 

Mr David's claim has been found to be unjustified                                                               

A former defence worker who claimed that his life was made a 
"living hell" by exposure to depleted uranium at a factory has 
lost his High Court action. 

Richard David, 51, of Seaton, Devon, sued Normalair Garrett - now 
owned by Honeywell Aerospace - for compensation. 

The company denied depleted uranium was ever used at the plant in 
Yeovil. 

Mr Justice Walker sitting in London said that Mr David had not 
shown that he was exposed to depleted uranium at the time he was 
employed by the firm. 

Mr David, who left work through ill health in July 1995, claimed 
that medical tests had revealed mutations to his DNA and damage 
to his chromosomes which could only have been caused by ionising 
radiation. 

My conclusion that t claimant's case fails does not involve any 
aspersion upon his honesty Mr Justice Walker       

The former component fitter on fighter planes and bombers said he 
now suffered from respiratory problems, kidney defects, bowel 
conditions and painful joints. 

He alleged that radiation from the uranium isotope had ruined his 
health, robbed him of the ability to earn a living and caused the 
collapse of his marriage and family life. 

"The last nine years has been a living hell hand-to-mouth 
existence marked by many GP and hospital consultations for 
unusual and even very serious health problems," he said in court. 

Mr Justice Walker however said he had failed to establish that 
there was or had been any depleted uranium in his body, and had 
been unable to demonstrate that his illness must have been caused 
by exposure to it. 

"That being so, he has no basis on which to assert that the 
defendant used DU in his workplace," he said. 

"My conclusion that the claimant's case fails does not involve 
any aspersion upon his honesty. 

"It must also be recognised that the defendant, and its senior 
management, have over a period of years had hanging over them a 
charge that they allowed a highly dangerous material to 
contaminate one of their workers. 

"For the reasons I have given, after examining all that can 
reasonably be said on behalf of the claimant, I conclude that on 
the basis of the evidence before me the charge made by the 
claimant against the defendant is unjustified," he said. 

		 	 		 	 	 



*****************************************************************
 44 UPI: Nuclear union demands workers' comp
     
   United Press International - Energy - 

3/2/2006 1:57:00 PM -0500

DIMONA, Israel, March 2 (UPI) -- The Israel Atomic Energy
Commission worker's union demanded damages in a high court on
Wednesday, saying the commission does not follow safety
regulations. 

The union said its members are exposed daily to dangerous
materials, chemicals and radiation, according to a report in the
Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz. 

The case in the National Labor Court is an appeal of a regional
court decision that "the union's claim concerning the dangerous
environment to which workers are subjected is theoretical,
because no one on the job has contracted cancer," the newspaper
said. 

In its petition, the nuclear workers' union countered, "It's
unacceptable that a worker should have to suffer harm to one's
body for the gates of the labor court to open up before him,"
according to the report. 

The union aims not only to win damages for the workers it says
have already suffered from their exposure to the hazardous
materials, but also to compel the Israel Atomic Energy
Commission to better protect workers in the future, the
newspaper said. 

The commission was formed in 1952, and Israel's nuclear reactor
in Dimona has been online since the 1960s.

© Copyright 2006 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 45 Disinformation: Why Has Our Military Refused To Show This Training Video 

Beyond The Bleep

 The definitive unauthorized guide to WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!? 
explores and explains the phenomenon, illuminates the 
personalities and teachings of the physicists, neurologists, 
anesthesiologists, physicians, spiritual teachers, mystics and 
scholars in the film, sheds light on the social forces at work 
behind the film’s production, and more!
   
  Thursday, March 02   

 on Mar 02, 2006 - 04:51 AM   
  
'Between October and December 1995, the U.S. Army's Depleted
Uranium (DU) Project completed a series of training videos and
manuals about depleted uranium munitions. This training regimen
was developed as the result of recommendations made in the
January 1993 General Accounting Office (GAO) report, "Army Not
Adequately Prepared to Deal with Depleted Uranium Contamination."

'Throughout 1996, these videos sat on a shelf, while U.S.
soldiers continued to use and work with depleted uranium
munitions. In June 1997, Bernard Rostker, The Department of
Defense (DoD) principle spokesperson for their investigation of
Gulf War hazardous exposures, stated that the depleted uranium
safety training program would begin to be shared by a limited
number of servicemen and women in July 1997.' (Information
Clearinghouse article).

© 1997-2006 The Disinformation Company Ltd. All rights reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 46 The Raw Story: U.S. signs $38 million deal for depleted uranium
tank shells

John Byrne

Published: March 2, 2006

The U.S. Army quietly placed an order for $38 million in
depleted uranium rounds last week, bringing the total order from
a West-Virginia based company to $77 million for fiscal year 
2006, RAW STORY has learned. 

The munition is highly controversial. While the Pentagon has
been ambiguous about its health toll, leftover rounds from the
first Gulf War are believed to have caused a significant
increase in cancer and birth defects in Iraq. According to a
detailed article by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in 2002,
"Many researchers outside Iraq, and several U.S. veterans
organizations, agree; they also suspect depleted uranium of
playing a role in Gulf War Syndrome, the still-unexplained
malady that has plagued hundreds of thousands of Gulf War
veterans." 

The new $38 million order was placed with Alliant Techsystems
for 120-mm ammunition. Once the new pact is completed the firm
will have produced 35,000 rounds for the U.S. military.

The Pentagon uses depleted uranium in its rounds because they
say it is extremely effective in penetrating heavy armor. 

Depleted uranium remains radioactive for 4.5 billion years. The
byproduct of manufacturing nuclear weapons or reactors, the
rounds contaminate water and soil. Along some highways in Iraq
where the weapon was used during in the first Gulf War,
radiation levels register 1,000 times normal background
radiation levels. Cancer levels in Iraq are attributed to the
shells. 

A destroyed Iraqi tank in Basra destroyed by the U.S. weapon
registered 2,500 timesnormal background radiation. 

Read more on depleted uranium in the Guardian here, and from the
Post Intelligencer here. 

In a release, the firm making the weapon said, "Its
state-of-the-art composite sabot, propellant, and penetrator
technologies give it outstanding accuracy and lethality." UPI
first reported on the deal Feb. 20. 

*****************************************************************
 47 Las Vegas SUN: EPA: Yucca radiation standards to be completed by year's end 

March 01, 2006 

By ERICA WERNER ASSOCIATED PRESS 

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Environmental Protection Agency will issue
a final rule by the end of the year on how much radiation can be
released from the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump, an agency
official told senators at a hearing Wednesday. 

William Wehrum, acting assistant administrator of EPA's office
of air and radiation, defended the agency's proposed rule
against criticism from Nevada lawmakers and a Democratic senator
from California who said it wouldn't adequately protect human
health. 

"Our job at EPA is to set standards for the Yucca Mountain
repository that are fully protective of human health and
safety," Wehrum said at a Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee hearing. 

He received strong support from the committee's chairman,
Republican Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, who asked whether the
rule might be "too conservative" compared with approaches taken
in Europe. Wehrum said the standard was consistent with
international approaches. 

Inhofe also said after the hearing that he'd be open to voting
to increase the storage capacity of Yucca Mountain, which by law
is supposed to hold 77,000 tons of radioactive waste. Because of
waste already waiting at reactor sites nationwide, the
repository will be full soon after it opens. 

The EPA in August proposed limiting radiation exposure near the
planned dump 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas to 15 millirems a
year for 10,000 years, then increasing the allowable level to
350 millirems a year for up to 1 million years. 

That higher level is more than three times what is allowed from
nuclear facilities today by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A
standard chest X-ray is about 10 millirems. 

The EPA issued the rule under consideration after a federal
court said the agency's first standard was inadequate because it
didn't establish exposure limits beyond 10,000 years. A public
comment period for the rule ended Nov. 21, and the agency is
reviewing comments and will finalize the rule by year's end,
Wehrum said. 

Nevada Sens. Harry Reid and John Ensign criticized the standard
in testimony. Ensign, a Republican, called it "a farce." 

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., cited a study that she said showed
cancer risks at the 350 millirem level increasing to one in four
for women and one in five for men. 

"This is such a nightmare that we're abandoning ... what we
consider to be an acceptable cancer risk," Boxer said. 

But a scientist who testified before the committee, Dade
Moeller, former president of the Health Physics Society, said
his estimates show a smaller increase of cancer risk under the
proposed rules - perhaps 1 percent or less. Moeller's company
has done contract work for the Energy Department. 

The radiation issue and other problems with the project have
caused a series of delays. The Energy Department originally was
supposed to submit its application for a license to operate the
dump to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by December 2004. 

Paul Golan, acting director of the department's Office of
Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, couldn't provide senators
a new date but said the department would release a schedule this
summer. 

--- 

On the Net: Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 48 Deseret News: Yucca fight could bring work to PFS 

Thursday, March 2, 2006 

By Suzanne Struglinski 

Deseret Morning News 

WASHINGTON — Nevada on Wednesday continued the fight in the U.S. 
Senate against its own potential nuclear waste storage site, a 
battle Utah's delegation has become involved in. 

The progress and status of the government's Yucca Mountain 
project in Nevada is important for Utah because utilities need a 
place to store their waste. If Yucca continues to face more 
delays, utilities may opt to put their waste at Private Fuel 
Storage, a private nuclear waste storage site planned for Tooele 
County's Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation, until Yucca 
opens. The consortium of utilities received its license from the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission last month, with a notice in 
Tuesday's Federal Register finalizing the process. 

Nuclear waste continues to be hot topic in Congress as 
the Energy Department continues its push to store nuclear waste 
at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, and the 
nuclear power industry wants nothing more than for the 
government to take its waste from power plants as was promised 
two decades ago. 

Paul Golan, the acting Yucca chief, said before the 
Senate Environment and Public Works committee Wednesday that the 
department is working on a new design for the repository and 
hopes to have a new schedule for the license application by the 
end of the summer. 

But Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., 
reiterated the need for Congress to rethink storing nuclear 
waste at Yucca and look at other options — including storing 
waste at the power plants themselves. 

"It should be clear to everyone that the proposed Yucca 
Mountain project is not going anywhere," Reid said. "We've spent 
$10 billion and we have nothing. We have nothing to show for 
this." 

All five members of Utah's congressional delegation 
joined with Nevada's late last year in sponsoring a bill that 
would allow utilities to use money now earmarked to move waste 
to Yucca to transfer waste to dry storage. The Energy Department 
would take responsibility for the waste once stored in the dry 
cask, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would have to create 
rules on how to transfer the waste. The bill is still pending. 
Only Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, still supports the Yucca Mountain 
project, while the rest of the delegation has come out against 
it. 

The administration is preparing its own bill that would 
alter several components of the Yucca project to help move it 
along, although which lawmakers will introduce it or when is 
still not clear. 

Utilities created the idea of PFS because Yucca was 
taking too long to complete. Four of the initial eight utilities 
that invested in the project said in December that they will no 
longer finance the project, citing progress on Yucca and the 
administration's refocusing on nuclear waste reprocessing among 
other reasons, but others could come on in the future. 

Xcel Energy spokeswoman Mary Sandok said the company is 
not relying on a specific opening date for Yucca but several 
aspects on the government's plan for nuclear waste. Xcel is one 
of the companies that sent a letter to Hatch in December saying 
it would withhold its future financial investments. It holds the 
largest percentage of the consortium. Sandok said the company is 
planning to build dry-cask storage in the meantime before Yucca 
would open. 

Now that it has its license in hand, PFS will continue to 
market itself to utilities as a storage option and will need 
more investors to go on to the construction phase. 

Steven Kraft, senior director of used fuel management for 
the Nuclear Energy Institute, said PFS is properly looking at 
its facility as something that utilities can buy services from 
but that no utility would be looking just at the Utah option. He 
said it would be up to the individual companies to decide 
whether paying to move it to Utah would be wise. 

"It truly is a business decision," Kraft said. 

E-mail: suzanne@desnews.com			 		 		 

© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company 	 		 		 			 		 		 		 		 [ 
*****************************************************************
 49 Guardian Unlimited: Serco recruits US partner to bid for nuclear clean-up
                                                                 
Mark Milner

Thursday March 2, 2006
The Guardian 		
 		
The support-services group Serco is assembling a consortium, 
including a US partner, to bid for work on what it estimates as 
Britain's £2bn-a-year market for nuclear decommissioning.

Serco, which runs services in health, education, defence and 
transport, said nuclear clean-up had strong growth potential.

Yesterday Serco said full-year pre-tax profits surged 21.7% to 
£77.9m on revenues up 38% to £2.26bn.

Its forward-order book topped £13bn and it was winning 90% of 
re-bids and more than 50% of new bids.

Kevin Beeston, executive chairman, said: "2005 was an outstanding 
year."
 	

[UP] 

      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 50 RGJ: EPA could be nearing mine site security solution

Reno Gazette-Journal]  [Reno
Gazette-Journal]  March 02, 2006 Reno, Nevada, USA  775-788-6200

EPA could be nearing mine site security solution 

Patrick AbanathyMVN

Land ownership at the complex Anaconda Mine west of town is
touted as one of the biggest obstacles in erecting better
security measures around the hazardous site; however, the gears
have not yet stopped turning. 

During last week’s (Feb. 22) meeting of the mine site
stakeholders, Jim Sickles, remedial project manager for EPA
Region 9, said the subject, although yet to be resolved, is
nearing a solution.

He said the concern was first raised in late 2004 before a need
was addressed in the unilateral administrative order to site
managers Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) in early 2005. 

Site security has been an ongoing concern at the mine, which has
been deemed both a chemical and physical hazard to any and all
unauthorized individuals within its boundaries. Yerington
Community Action Group Contact Peggy Pauly has brought up the
issue of site security several times at several meetings and has
displayed recent pictures taken of local youth trespassing and
playing on-site. 

Sickles said a letter was sent to ARCO Feb. 14 urging them to
put better security measures in place. 

solution/from A1

“We’re hoping to resolve this as quick as possible,” Sickles
said. 

He said at least one obstacle is site ownership. The abandoned
copper mine is owned via several owners including both private
and federal. Technically, ARCO does not own the property and
would have difficulty in simply placing a fence around the site. 

Sickles added ARCO would not be responsible under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA), as the law addresses a need to prevent
exposure to chemical hazard more so than physical hazard. It has
been noted previously, the site is more of a physical threat
than a chemical one. 

In any case, as with several aspects of site cleanup, if ARCO is
unable to provide adequate security at the site, EPA could step
up to the task and seek reimbursement later. 

Regarding ongoing air monitoring for airborne contaminants, Mark
Evans, of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry,
reiterated the need for more accurate data as it pertains to
high wind/dust events. It was reiterated the monitoring units
have not been running during high wind events and, although data
collected so far has shown no significant cause for health risk
concern, several believe an inaccurate picture of airborne
contamination is being presented.

Sickles said the national air monitoring schedule for the
monitoring units (24 consecutive hours every sixth day) could be
shifted to a different schedule, which would increase the number
of sampling days. 

The ATSDR’s recent health consultation, which deemed the site a
physical health hazard and indeterminable health hazard
regarding dust blown off-site, was originally set to end its
public comment period March 10; however last Wednesday’s meeting
saw a likely scenario of this deadline being pushed back to
allow for more time. 

Residents are encouraged to make comments and may review the
report at the Yerington branch of the Lyon County Library
located at 20 Nevin Way or at the Yerington Paiute Tribal Office
at 171 Campbell Lane north of town. 

Comments should be mailed to: ATSDR Records Center, 1600 Clifton
Road, N.E. (MS E-60), Atlanta, GA 30333. Also, comments may be
provided via email at: ATSDRRecordsCenter@cdc.gov with the
“subject” being: YAM Site HC. 

More information regarding the consultation may be obtained via
telephone from Youlanda Outin at 1-888-422-8737 or via Regional
ATSDR Representative Libby Vianu at (415) 947-4319.

Of course prevention of dust from blowing off-site in any wind
event is the goal. With this, a temporary cap for dust-prone
areas is scheduled to go forward in April when weather permits.
Sickles said the spray-on soil sealant would be an approximately
two-year fix, in areas such as the sulfide tailings, while
further testing for radiological and other contaminants takes
place. 

If a more permanent cap, such as gravel, is put in place,
assessment/removal of contaminants would see a substantial
increase in price, he added. Also, if gravel were placed over
what might later be determined as radiological contamination,
said gravel would become part of the contaminated material.

Aside from larger areas, such as the evaporation ponds and
sulfide tailings, Sickles said smaller dust-prone areas, such as
the process area, could see temporary capping measures. 

This touches on another reason for holding off until April,
which is to give time to assess all data from air monitoring
efforts and determine appropriate areas to apply the sealant. It
was noted the fourth quarter air monitoring data is not yet
available.

Overall, Sickles said the temporary cap might not decrease dust
plumes from the site 100 percent, but it would hopefully reduce
the number and intensity of dust events. 

Regarding radiological assessment, Sickles said several work
plans are being developed to further assess any and all
contamination. One of the bigger problems is lack of ambient, or
background, levels in the valley. 

For this, he said further on and offsite sampling efforts are
being planned to look at these levels. The idea is to see
whether levels found onsite are actually elevated above
naturally occurring levels when compared to other parts of the
valley. 

With groundwater monitoring wells (installed north of the mine
last year), a report could be ready on the first sampling effort
as early as last April. The purpose of the wells is to determine
what, if any, onsite contaminants have made their way off-site
and north of the mine. 

Concerns first arose in late 2003 when elevated levels of
uranium were found in domestic wells north of the mine in the
Sunset Hills and Campbell Ranch areas. 

Other items addressed at Wednesday’s meeting included removal of
PCB containers the site, which was scheduled to begin as early
as this week and continue for approximately three weeks. 

*****************************************************************
 51 Bradenton Herald: Tallevast residents cite discrepancies in offer

Posted on Thu, Mar. 02, 2006 

 DONNA WRIGHT Herald Staff Writer 

TALLEVAST - Lockheed Martin Corp. has offered Tallevast property
owners who have operational water wells $10,000 to permanently
close off those water supplies. 

But Tallevast leaders say Lockheed is sending mixed signals on
what the $10,000 will cover. 

The question revolves around future water bills. 

The "well closure agreements" - which were approved by
Lockheed's attorneys and the legal teams representing Tallevast
residents in two separate lawsuits against the company - state
that the "$10,000 payment is intended to fully compensate the
owner for future water bills and any plumbing and hook-up costs
associated with owner's use of public water." 

Residents not involved in lawsuits against Lockheed received one
version of a well closure agreement. Those involved in lawsuits
received a longer agreement that stated signing the paper did
not waive or release any claims the owner may have against
Lockheed Martin, including claims for property damage or
personal injury. 

The $10,000 figure was calculated to cover 40 years or more of
water bills, according to Tina Armstrong, Lockheed's project
manager for the Tallevast clean-up. 

But Laura Ward and Wanda Washington, leaders of the resident
advocacy group FOCUS, said cover letters sent with the
agreements differ in terms. 

Ward furnished The Herald with a copy of the cover letter that
came with her well closure agreement. Her cover letter, signed
by Armstrong, states, "We will compensate you for the access to
your property as well as for any plumbing changes that may be
required as the result of your not being able to use the well
and for future water bills." 

No figure is stated in Armstrong's letter. 

Ward and Washington said they understood from past community and
county commission meetings that Lockheed would pay all future
water bills, plus plumbing and hook up-costs above the $10,000
figure. 

A county utilities official last week estimated it would cost a
Tallevast homeowner $3,655 in connection and other fees - or
more than a third of what Lockheed is offering - to hook up to
the county water system, according to an e-mail. That is in
addition to monthly bills for water and sewer service. 

Lockheed spokeswoman Gail Rymer could not be reached late
Wednesday for comment on claims made by FOCUS. 

But Rymer had sent The Herald an e-mail earlier in the day
stating that attorneys representing Tallevast residents in two
lawsuits had agreed to the offer. 

Ed Cottingham, of the South Carolina law firm Motley Rice and
lead attorney for 250 Tallevast residents in a suit against
Lockheed Martin, confirmed his legal team approved the well
closure agreements, but not the cover letter. Cottingham said he
had no comment on the discrepancies cited by FOCUS. 

Sarasota attorney E. Keith DuBose, representing another group of
Tallevast residents suing Lockheed, could not be reached. 

Ward and Washington said Tallevast residents are skeptical of
Lockheed's terms because residents have received different
versions of the cover letter. 

Moreover, FOCUS claims that some letters and closure agreements
were sent to deceased residents while others misidentified
current property owners. 

The number of versions is not known, but The Herald did review
two cover letters - the Ward letter and one to Louise Sloan -
that differed in wording. Neither mentioned a figure, but agreed
on what would be covered by Lockheed. 

Ward and Washington said they had discussed residents'
skepticism over the well closure offer agreements with Manatee
County Administrator Ernie Padgett and his staff last week. 

Padgett could not be reached for comment, but Dan Schlandt, who
works in the county administrator's office, said he had seen a
cover letter and the well closure agreements and could
understand residents' confusion. 

Sealing the wells is paramount to protecting the community from
exposure to toxic underground waste spreading from a leak at the
former Loral American Beryllium Co. plant, Lockheed says. 

In her e-mail, Rymer said the well closures have been endorsed
by the state of Florida and Manatee County. 

*****************************************************************
 52 Deseret News: Vetoed environmental measure dead 

[deseretnews.com] 

Thursday, March 2, 2006 

By Joe Bauman Deseret Morning News 

The 2006 Legislature drew to a close Wednesday with the 
Legislature failing to override the governor's veto of one of the
most controversial environmental bills this session. 

The Senate voted late in the day to override, 21-8, the veto that
Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. had slapped on SB70, the bill to remove his
authority to single-handedly torpedo the establishment of a new 
low-level nuclear waste disposal site or the expansion of the 
existing one. 

But House Speaker Greg Curtis, R-Sandy, cast doubt on the 
likelihood of the override passing the House with the required 
two-thirds majority, which is 50 votes. 

"We didn't have 50 votes when it went up and passed" the 
first time the House voted on it, he said. "And if we don't have 
50 votes now, why spend time debating it?" He added that he was 
not really passionate about the measure. 

The bill also applies to hazardous waste and 
non-hazardous solid waste but not to highly radioactive spent 
fuel rods. But nearly all of the debate has focused on the 
low-level waste issue. 

After the Senate voted Wednesday afternoon, Sen. Howard 
Stephenson, R-Draper, the measure's sponsor, said he was pleased 
the Senate had upheld the Legislature's constitutional 
prerogatives. "It's ironic that it took an override" to do that, 
he added. 

On Tuesday, when Huntsman vetoed SB70, he wrote to Senate 
President John Valentine, R-Orem, andCurtis, notifying them of 
his action. The measure would "incrementally weaken the 
governor's authority to protect Utah's image and environment, as 
well as the health and safety of its 2.5 million residents," he 
wrote. 

When the House came into session at 7 p.m., after the 
Senate's action, it did not immediately place SB70 on its 
priority list. Instead, it began debating less-controversial 
issues. 

If the House failed to override the veto by midnight, a 
law would remain in effect that was passed in the early 1990s, 
requiring concurrence by the Legislature, governor and state 
regulators before such a change could take place. 

Substitute HB100, sponsored by Rep. Aaron Tilton, 
R-Springville, passed the House earlier and the Senate on 
Wednesday. It requires entities that do business in the state to 
file a bond with the Division Corporations and Commercial Code 
when it begins the environmental litigation. 

However, the fate of two other environmental bills 
launched by Tilton remained unclear as the night wore on. Also 
involving bonding for environmental actions, they are substitute 
measures HB335 and HB259. Both passed the House and were 
awaiting action in the Senate. 

Water project bills — potentially with a $1 billion price 
tag — had smooth sailing. 

SB27, the Lake Powell Pipeline Development Act, passed 
both chambers and awaits Huntsman's signature. It authorizes the 
Utah Board of Water Resources to construct the Lake Powell 
Pipeline Project, delivering water from that reservoir to 
booming southwestern Utah. 

During legislative action, Sen. Tom Hatch, R-Panguitch, 
emphasized that the act does not appropriate any money but 
authorizes the project as a state effort. Ultimately, its costs 
would be paid by water users. 

A companion bill, HB45, the Bear River Development Act, 
sponsored by Rep. Stuart Adams, R-Layton, also awaits the 
governor's approval. It allows funds to be spent on 
preconstruction activities such as acquiring land and carrying 
out environmental studies. 

However, an earlier bill does not allow construction of 
facilities like a dam or pipeline until project backers sell 70 
percent of the expected water. 

Another bill in the series that also passed, substitute 
HB47, helps fund the pipeline and Bear River work by raising the 
cap on the state's water development fund. With this action, 
money available in the state's general fund could be reduced by 
$8.6 million in fiscal 2007 and by $8.9 million the next year, 
according to a fiscal note on the bill. 

"There would be a corresponding increase in restricted 
revenue," it adds, referring to money set aside for the projects.

E-mail: bau@desnews.com 

© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company 	 		 		 [ /] 
*****************************************************************
 53 ForUm: President wants to store used nuclear fuel in Ukraine
 
 2 March 2006 | 22:36   
 
At today’s meeting on urgent measures to reform Ukraine’s
municipal economy, Victor Yushchenko remarked that “the nation
that consumes nuclear energy must know how to store used nuclear
fuel and understand some controversial aspects of how power
plants function,” President's press office reported.
 
He said Ukraine should formulate a atomic energy concept. Our
country has four nuclear power plants with fifteen units but we
do not know what to do with used nuclear fuel. According to
international agreements, it is transported to the Russian
Federation but the price we pay for these services constantly
grows. Over the past three years, it increased from USD 245 to
720. This year, the country will have to spend USD 120 mln.
However, this fuel has to be returned to Ukraine by 2012. We
must solve the problem by that time, he said. 

The Head of State added that it was really important to
distinguish between used nuclear fuel and nuclear waste. Waste
can no longer be used, while fuel contains uranium and
plutonium, which can be reused for nuclear reactors. 
  
Comments Ivanovich (00:00 | 03 March,2006) 

Given the fact that Ukraine has ALREADY suffered the negative 
effects of nuclear mis-management and contamination, it ought to 
be a national priority to develop much needed nuclear clean-up 
and rehabilitation technology. This would have to include the 
sort of storage, and reprocessing technologies that Yuschenko is 
talking about. Ukraine is uniquely positioned to pioneer this 
sort of research, and ought to actively engage international 
experts in the field. Igor (00:20 | 03 March,2006) Ukraine will 
increase the amount it pays Russia to store nuclear waste by 80% 
to $720 per kilo, the Ukrainian president said Thursday 
http://en.rian.ru/world/20060302/43877901.html Add new comment 
Name:
 
News 2 March 2006 23:42 

Yushchenko met with U.S. Under Secretary of State 23:04 
Yushchenko met with Benita Ferrero-Waldner 22:36 President wants 
to store used nuclear fuel in Ukraine 17:48 Ukraine and the EU 
negotiate on repatriation of illegal migrants 16:47 Victor 
Yanukovich met US Ambassador to OSCE 15:53 Slovakian Ambassador 
on Ukraine-Slovakia ties 14:46 US-Ukraine formal deal to give 
boost to WTO membership 14:26 Ukrainian municipal economy needs 
reforms 14:06 President of Ukraine attends requiem 13:46 The EU 
to cooperate with any Ukrainian government after the election 
13:13 UNO: SBU unlawfully alleged Uzbeks to be terrorists 12:42 
CEC registers international observers 12:02 Analysis of Ukrainian 
agrarian import 11:45 Chernobyl is destined to be ecologically 
safe system 11:00 The Cabinet held a meeting All news   

 All rights are reserved by © LTD. Inter-Media,
 ForUm 2001-2006       
*****************************************************************
 54 RIA Novosti: Ukraine to up nuclear waste storage payments - Yushchenko
 
02/ 03/ 2006                                  

KIEV, March 2 (RIA Novosti) - Ukraine will increase the amount
it pays Russia to store nuclear waste by 80% to $720 per kilo,
the Ukrainian president said Thursday.

 President Viktor Yushchenko said nuclear waste being stored in
Russia would be returned to Ukraine starting in 2012.

 "In such a situation no one thinks about storing other
countries' nuclear waste," Yushchenko said. "I would like to
hear a professional discussion about the construction of
facilities for nuclear waste storage in Ukraine."

 The country must learn how to store its own nuclear waste, he
added.

 Yushchenko said Ukraine has four nuclear power plants and 15
nuclear power units. None of the plants can deal with their own
spent fuel.

 In 2005, Ukraine paid Russia $400 per kilo of nuclear fuel
stored.

© 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 55 Las Vegas SUN: Yucca plays D.C. 

Today: March 02, 2006 at 7:44:54 PST 

By Benjamin Grove <> Las Vegas Sun

 WASHINGTON - Every so often all of the major players in the
long-running saga of Yucca Mountain gather in one spot in the
nation's capital, and the result is Washington theater: nuclear
waste policy as a two-hour stage production. 

Broadway this ain't, although the shows typically offer a few
chuckles and a moment or two of drama. The hearings also offer a
glimpse at the complex issues and perspectives that have shaped
the Yucca story. 

The actors assembled in a wood-paneled Senate hearing room
Wednesday for a "status" hearing on the proposed nuclear waste
repository program. 

Among the players: 


+ The Project Manager. The Energy Department's acting Yucca
Director Paul Golan has one of the toughest jobs in the federal
bureaucracy - shepherding the project long plagued by delays,
lawsuits and budget cuts. 

Golan has been acting Yucca chief since May. At the Senate
Environment and Public Works Committee hearing Wednesday, Golan
briefly described the marching orders he got in mid-September
from Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman: " 'Make it simpler and
safer.' " 

Critics have ripped the Energy Department for essentially giving
up on setting a timeline and budget estimate for the project,
which is more than two decades old. Golan said he planned to
unveil a project schedule sometime this summer. 

Speculation continued to swirl in the room among Yucca observers
about the legislation being dubbed the "Fix Yucca" bill, which
Golan's department plans to send to Congress, probably within
days. That bill is expected to include a number of provisions,
some likely to be highly controversial, designed to speed
completion of the repository. But Golan wouldn't say much about
the bill. 

At one point, under questioning about faulty quality-assurance
procedures at Yucca, Golan played the role of tough-talking
reformer, vowing to make changes. 

"I have a stack of reports from the GAO (General Accountability
Office), the IG (inspector general) and various other people
inside and outside the department that looked at the quality of
Yucca Mountain," Golan said. "I've read all those reports, and
they're missing one thing: They're missing accountability. So
I'm going to hold folks accountable." 


+ The Nevadans. State officials have waged a battle against the
proposed repository since its inception. 

They don't have many new lines. 

But as a courtesy, the committee allowed Senate Minority Leader
Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., to put their
gripes on the record again. 

"It should be clear to everyone that the proposed Yucca Mountain
project is not going anywhere," Reid said. "It will never open." 

Ensign hit his mark despite being winded from hustling to the
meeting a few minutes late. He had enough breath left to call
Yucca "junk science" and to suggest that the Bush
administration's recent proposal to develop a controversial
waste-recycling technology was "quickly emerging as a viable
alternative" to Yucca. 

Toward the end of the hearing, the panel's chairman - Sen. James
Inhofe, R-Okla., a vocal Yucca advocate - introduced Nevada's
top Yucca watchdog, Bob Loux, mispronouncing his name. 

Loux corrected him. He later told Inhofe the two men agreed on
one thing - that scientific study at Yucca should finally come
to an end. Loux thinks the research proves the site unsuitable -
Inhofe believes it proves Yucca safe. 


+ The Lawmakers. Congress has long wrestled with Yucca, and
politics is a big part of the repository's history. Most
lawmakers took up sides long ago. A leading Yucca advocate and a
feisty Yucca critic were in the spotlight Wednesday. 

Inhofe released a 25-page report concluding that it was time to
stop researching and start developing Yucca. 

Its title reflected the long-simmering frustration among many
Yucca advocates in Congress: "Yucca Mountain: The Most Studied
Real Estate on the Planet." 

Inhofe then stole Reid's line Â­- a version of the Democratic
Party's new slogan - when he said, "We owe it to the American
people to do better." 

Inhofe also asserted that nuclear power is the nation's
"cleanest and safest" source of electricity, despite the subject
of his hearing - nuclear's dirty and dangerous waste. Inhofe is
one of the committee's 10 Republican members - nine of whom took
campaign money in the past two years from the Nuclear Energy
Institute, a leading pro-Yucca lobbying group. 

Reid has not always been able to corral Democrats in opposition
to Yucca, but he has a vocal ally in Sen. Barbara Boxer,
D-Calif., who on Wednesday chewed up witness William Wehrum of
the Environmental Protection Agency. Wehrum was there to explain
how the EPA's controversial new radiation-release standard for
Yucca will protect future generations. 

He began his testimony by mispronouncing Nevada. 

Boxer and other critics say the standard is too lax. She quoted
a nuclear physicist who suggested the EPA standard could
increase cancer rates among people living near Yucca to 1 in 5 -
or even 1 in 4 for women. She repeatedly demanded a yes or no
response from Wehrum on whether that was acceptable. 

Wehrum would say only that he was confident the new standard
would protect human health and safety. 

"I'm asking you if you think that is unacceptable, and you won't
answer it," Boxer said. "You won't answer it - and I think that
speaks volumes to the people of Nevada." 


+ The Regulators. The EPA last year faced one of its toughest
assignments ever - proposing a radiation standard for Yucca that
would protect Nevadans for 1 million years. 

"No other rules in the U.S. for any risks have ever attempted to
regulate for such a long period of time," Wehrum said. 

Wehrum seemed to wither several moments under Boxer's
questioning, but he asserted that the standard was strict
enough. 

"Our proposal requires the Department of Energy to show that
Yucca Mountain can safely contain wastes, even considering the
effects of earthquakes, volcanic activity, climate change, and
container corrosion over 1 million years," he said. 


+ The Experts. The committee heard from several Yucca observers,
including Dade Moeller, representing the Health Physics Society,
who delighted Boxer when he said a 1-in-4 cancer rate was
unacceptable. But Moeller promptly added that he believed that
estimate was inflated. 

A Massachusetts Institute of Technology researcher, Allison
MacFarlane, testified that geologic storage is the best solution
for the nation's waste. But MacFarlane has long asserted that
Yucca is a bad site. 

She drew chuckles when she quoted Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld, who famously outlined his fear that there are unknown
unknowns - "the ones we don't know we don't know." 

At Yucca, MacFarlane said, "Those are the things I'm worried
about." 

Benjamin Grove can be reached at (202) 662-7436 or at
grove@lasvegassun.com. 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 56 reviewjournal.com: Yucca Mountain backers get assurance
 
Mar. 02, 2006

DOE official says new research no distraction    

By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
	
Bob Loux

 Nevada nuclear official focuses on EPA's new radiation standard
for Yucca Mountain
 	   
WASHINGTON -- The Energy Department does not plan to divert
money from Yucca Mountain to research other forms of nuclear
waste disposal, a DOE official told senators at a hearing
Wednesday. 

The Bush administration has linked the proposed Nevada
repository to development of new reprocessing technologies for
nuclear spent fuel, but acting repository chief Paul Golan said
money for the initiatives will remain separate. 

Golan responded to a concern by Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla.,
chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. 

Inhofe, a repository supporter, said he wanted assurance that a
new administration reprocessing effort, the Global Nuclear
Energy Partnership, "should not deter the forward progress of
Yucca Mountain." 

The idea that the reprocessing proposal might tap into the
nuclear waste fund set aside for Yucca Mountain has been raised.
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., has speculated about the
possibility. 

Also this week, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., a repository
supporter, said he was worried that the proposal would "divert
managerial attention" from Yucca Mountain and money that utility
ratepayers have been setting aside for repository construction,
more than $20 billion. 

The hearing before Inhofe's committee gave Yucca Mountain
critics a new chance to cite flaws in the repository project,
while Inhofe and other supporters urged DOE to keep the project
moving forward. 

Critics, including both Nevada senators and the state's nuclear
waste director, focused on radiation safety rules being
developed by the Environmental Protection Agency. 

The proposed EPA standard would allow somebody living on the
outskirts of Yucca Mountain to be exposed to 350 millirem of
radiation annually, increasing the odds of contracting cancer,
said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. 

"Let's face it, this is such a nightmare," Boxer said, adding
health standards for other radioactive materials are not as
lenient. "We are changing our tradition and our history of how
we view cancer risks." 

Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said EPA "was forced to create this
ridiculous standard to make Yucca Mountain scientifically
feasible on paper." 

William Wehrum, EPA acting assistant administrator for air and
radiation, defended the agency's work. He said the action would
limit radiation doses for a period up to 1 million years. 

The 350-millirem level is no higher than people living in other
parts of the country are exposed to from "natural levels" of
radiation, Wehrum said. 

The level would take effect only after the first 10,000 years of
repository operations, he said. Before then, an annual dose
limit of 15 millirem would be in effect. 

EPA officials have said that a routine chest X-ray emits 10
millirem and that a mammogram emits 30 millirem. 

Bob Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear
Projects, said the Yucca Mountain program has been delayed for
so long that the EPA would have time to formulate a new
radiation safety standard. 

Ensign and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., promoted their bill that
would require DOE to shelve the Yucca Mountain project and keep
spent fuel stored in dry casks at reactor sites. 

Yucca Mountain "is fraught with scientific, technical and
geological problems," Reid said. "Our bill guarantees all
Americans that our nation's nuclear waste will be stored in the
safest way possible." 

But Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., questioned the safety of keeping
nuclear waste at power plants and said such storage "is a
perfect dirty-bomb site." 

"We do need to look into our choices," DeMint said. "We assume
we can leave things the same and be safer rather than moving
ahead like we have been trying to do for a number of years." 	   

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
 57 RGJ.com: Yucca Mountain proponents call for facility to move ahead
 
Reno, Nevada, USA  775-788-6200    March 02, 2006 RGJ.com                         

DOUG ABRAHMS DABRAHMS@GNS.GANNETT.COM 

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Sen. James Inhofe called Yucca Mountain the
most studied mountain in the world and urged Energy Department
officials to move forward with building the nuclear waste
repository in Nevada so the United States could build more
nuclear power plants.

"After personally visiting this site, I strongly support the
storage of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain," said Inhofe,
R-Okla., at a Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee
hearing Wednesday. "How can we not support this site ... with
over 20 years and $8 billion worth of scientific, environmental
and engineering field work?"

Proponents of increasing nuclear power to lower natural gas
prices and reduce air pollution have become frustrated that the
project has stalled.

Paul Golan, who heads the Energy Department agency overseeing
the proposed nuclear waste site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas,
couldn't tell the Senate panel when Yucca Mountain would open or
how much it would cost. In the past, the department has
estimated the cost at $58 billion. The project was halted in
2004 by a federal appeals court ruling that said the radiation
standard set to protect area residents wasn't strict enough.

Nevada U.S. Sens. Harry Reid and John Ensign and Bob Loux, who
heads the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, spoke against
Yucca Mountain and said nuclear waste could be stored at
commercial reactor sites safely for 100 years until a better
alternative is developed.

"I am convinced the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump
will never be built," said Reid, Senate Democratic leader,
"because the project is mired in scientific, safety and
technical problems."

Even some past supporters of the project are voicing concerns,
especially since Yucca Mountain was originally scheduled to open
in 1998. The Energy Department has yet to submit a license
application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and a
best-case scenario has Yucca Mountain beginning in 2015.

"I supported the Yucca Mountain proposal in the past, in the
belief that it would solve the problem" of nuclear waste, said
Sen. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt., "However, the truth is that Yucca
Mountain will not provide this solution, and the project faces
many challenges."

But Golan said the Energy Department continues to push forward
and hopes to release a timetable for licensing and building
Yucca Mountain this summer.

The department has reconfigured its design of the project to
make it less expensive and easier to license, he said.

"There is limited temporary storage of (nuclear) waste at 122
sites in 39 states across our nation," Golan said. "There is a
clear national need for Yucca Mountain." 

 Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a
Gannett Co. Inc.Newspaper.
*****************************************************************
 58 Kyiv Post: U.S. businessman to discuss construction of nuclear waste 
storage facility in Ukraine
 
Mar 02 2006, 19:47 

(AP) The head of a U.S. enterprise is expected in Ukraine next
week to discuss the construction of a storage facility for spent
nuclear fuel, the state-run atomic energy company chief said
Thursday, amid criticism of the project from local politicians. 

Energoatom chief Yuriy Nedashkovskiy said that Kris Singh,
president of Marlton, New Jersey-based Holtec International,
will discuss the US$152 million (-125 million) project for a
facility where spent nuclear fuel rods from Ukrainian nuclear
power plants will be stored for reprocessing. 

Currently, Ukraine pays Russia some US$100 million (-125
million) annually for storage and reprocessing. Energoatom
signed a contract with Holtec International in December but it
still needs to be approved by Ukraine's government and
parliament. 

Last month, former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko
severely criticized the deal, saying that it threatened national
energy security. She claimed that the deal foresees the
construction of an "international burial ground" for nuclear
waste from many countries. 

Nedashkovskiy denied her accusations. 

"Firstly, it will not be a burial ground, but a storage
facility; secondly, this is not waste, but spent nuclear fuel
rods; thirdly, not international, but from Ukraine's nuclear
power plants," Nedashkovskiy said. 

Ukraine was the site of the world's worst nuclear accident when
a reactor in the Chernobyl nuclear plant exploded in 1986,
spewing radiation over much of northern Europe. Chernobyl's
reactors were shut down for good in 2000, and Ukraine has
pledged to improve the safety of its operational nuclear plants. 

© 2004 - 2006, SputnikMedia.net.
*****************************************************************
 59 MSNBC.com: Nuclear waste storage radiates controversy - Environment -
           
EPA in hot seat over nuclear storage radiation

Some senators resist proposal, Nevada Republican calls it a
'farce'
  
  [IMAGE: YUCCA MOUNTAIN WASTE SITE]   

  Joe Cavaretta / AP file
If the project gets final approval, nuclear waste from across
the nation would enter the Yucca Mountain repository through
this tunnel in the Nevada desert.

WASHINGTON - The Environmental Protection Agency will issue a
final rule by the end of the year on how much radiation can be
released from the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump, an agency
official told senators at a hearing Wednesday.

William Wehrum, acting assistant administrator of EPA's office
of air and radiation, defended the agency's proposed rule
against criticism from Nevada lawmakers and a Democratic senator
from California who said it wouldn't adequately protect human
health.

"Our job at EPA is to set standards for the Yucca Mountain
repository that are fully protective of human health and
safety," Wehrum said at a Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee hearing.

He received strong support from the committee's chairman,
Republican Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, who asked whether the
rule might be "too conservative" compared with approaches taken
in Europe. Wehrum said the standard was consistent with
international approaches.

2002 Special report: Dealing with our nuclear waste  

Store more there?

Inhofe also said after the hearing that he'd be open to voting
to increase the storage capacity of Yucca Mountain, which by law
is supposed to hold 77,000 tons of radioactive waste. Because of
waste already waiting at reactor sites nationwide, the
repository will be full soon after it opens.

Spent fuel from U.S. nuclear plants - which supply about 20
percent of U.S. electricity - is piling up. More than 50,000
tons of it is stored at over 100 temporary locations in 39
states.

The EPA in August proposed limiting radiation exposure near the
planned dump 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas to 15 millirems a
year for 10,000 years, then increasing the allowable level to
350 millirems a year for up to 1 million years.

That higher level is more than three times what is allowed from
nuclear facilities today by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A
standard chest X-ray is about 10 millirems.

The EPA issued the rule under consideration after a federal
court said the agency's first standard was inadequate because it
didn't establish exposure limits beyond 10,000 years. A public
comment period for the rule ended Nov. 21, and the agency is
reviewing comments and will finalize the rule by year's end,
Wehrum said.

Weighing radiation risks
Nevada Sens. Harry Reid and John Ensign criticized the standard.
Ensign, a Republican, called it "a farce."

Reid and Ensign have instead proposed handling nuclear waste
through "dry cask storage," a process that would allow nuclear
reactors to store waste on-site. 

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., cited a study that she said showed
cancer risks at the 350 millirem level increasing to one in four
for women and one in five for men.

"This is such a nightmare that we're abandoning ... what we
consider to be an acceptable cancer risk," Boxer said.

But a scientist who testified before the committee, Dade
Moeller, former president of the Health Physics Society, said
his estimates show a smaller increase of cancer risk under the
proposed rules - perhaps 1 percent or less. Moeller's company
has done contract work for the Energy Department.

The radiation issue and other problems with the project have
caused a series of delays. The Energy Department originally was
supposed to submit its application for a license to operate the
dump to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by December 2004.

Paul Golan, acting director of the department's Office of
Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, couldn't provide senators
a new date but said the department would release a schedule this
summer.The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this
report.

&Conditions | © 2006 MSNBC.com  
*****************************************************************
 60 cbs2chicago.com: Bill Would Require Disclosure Of Radioactive Leaks

Mar 2, 2006 7:44 am US/Central 

(AP) BRAIDWOOD, Ill. Illinois regulators have sent Exelon
Corporation a second violation notice for radioactive leaks at
its nuclear power plant in Braidwood.

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency's notice stems from
its investigation into radioactive tritium spills at the plant
southwest of Chicago.

The state EPA issued its first violation notice in December. The
latest notice is for violations in another area of the facility.

Exelon recently disclosed that four leaks occurred at the
Braidwood plant between 1996 and 2003.

US Senators Barack Obama and Richard Durbin said yesterday that
they'll introduce a bill requiring nuclear power companies to
inform local authorities of radioactive leaks as soon as they're
discovered. 

(© 2006 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material
may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.) 
	 
© MMVI, CBS Broadcasting, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [ /] [ /] [
*****************************************************************
 61 Morris Daily Herald: The Politics of Tritium

Greater Grundy County Area
     	
  3/2/2006 3:59:00

Weller: Exelon should pay whole water bill
 
Herald Writer

 WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Jerry Weller believes Exelon
Nuclear should foot the entire bill for a new water system for
the village of Godley.

In a letter to Exelon Chairman John Rowe of Chicago, Weller said
he did not believe the public-private partnership the utility is
suggesting is the preferred means to advance the water project.

“I believe Exelon bears the sole responsibility, both logistical
and financial, to ensure local residents have a clean and
reliable drinking water source,” the Morris Republican wrote
Tuesday to Rowe.

“I was somewhat dismayed to learn Exelon pledged only to cover
costs not paid for by federal, state, and local governments, as
if those funds are to be a given.”

Weller noted taxpayers should not be forced to pay for what he
said was Exelon’s errors.

“I therefore hope you find a way to fund a Godley-Reed Township
water project in full,” he wrote.

Weller spokesman Chris Kennedy said Wednesday Weller believes no
public funding should go into the project.

“No public funding at all,” said Kennedy. “He believes it should
be funded entirely by Exelon.”

Kennedy said it is clear Weller does not intend to obtain
federal funding for the new system.

“He thinks Exelon should step up and do it,” Kennedy concluded.

Exelon Nuclear owns all nuclear generating stations in Illinois.
The utility is dealing with tritium-laced underground water
leaks at Braidwood Generating Station in 1996, 1998, and 2000,
which have since spread north beyond the plant site at
Braceville.

Exelon made the incident public in December of last year.
Similar leaks have since been reported at Exelon’s Dresden and
Byron plants as well.

Tom O’Neal, Exelon vice president of legal affairs, said in
Godley Monday during a special meeting of the Will County Board’
Health Committee, that although tritium levels had moved outside
the utility’s boundaries, the isotope has not been seen in water
in Godley, located south of Braidwood Station.

The village of less than 1,000 residents obtains water for
drinking and cooking from private shallow-point wells 12 to 15
feet deep. 

O’Neal committed Exelon to assisting the village in obtaining
state and federal grants to get the quality of water the village
needs, and financially assisting with the project on a
cost-share basis.

“We are forming a public and private partnership tonight to that
end,” he said. 

Weller said in the letter to Rowe the cost of Godley water
project is about $12 million. But, the project would go a long
way in restoring public trust and confidence, he wrote.

An option would be for Exelon to foot the bill to connect Godley
and Reed Township to a nearby municipal water system, Weller
suggested.

“The overall cost will be dramatically less ... and will
reliably provide a stable source of clean drinking water,” he
wrote.

Godley Village Board President Michael Valeriano said Monday,
prior to the Health Committee meeting, that he was interested in
seeing what Exelon would do to remediate the situation.

“To make things right for the village,” he said. “People want
answers, and Exelon’s going to see what proper channels to go to
give us those answers — see what they’re going to do to help us
out.”

Others interviewed at Mon-days’ meeting included Judith Caldwell
of Braidwood, who wanted more information to make an intelligent
conclusion. 

“I keep reading in the paper different things,” she said. “The
husband of a friend of mine does work at Exelon, and he keeps
reassuring me, but I’d like more input.”

Norma Thauchen, also of Braidwood, wondered whether the lakes
and underground water table were being monitored for tritium.

“I live by Shadow Lake, and we know we’re sitting on a sponge —
a little series of lakes — so, what’s backwashing into our
lake?” she asked.

“Monitoring wells, at least, would be one alternative. The
monitoring wells are all out on the plume (underground tritium
spread). Where is the plume really, and where is it backwashing?”

Junior Zilm, mayor of Braceville, said there were no problems
with tritium-tainted water in his community.

“I always thought a leak like this would soak into the ground,
but I don’t know if it does or not,” he said. “I’m attending the
meeting to learn stuff.”

Zilm also attended Tuesday’s public Community Information Night
by Exelon Nuclear at the Braidwood Station Training Building.

Tim Nystrom of Braidwood went to learn more about the issue.

“To figure out what’s going on,” he said. 

“I get it as much as I can on the news, and also that’s why I’m
here. I believe what they’re saying so far that nobody’s been
hurt by it. I’m here to get all the information I can, and go
over it myself.”

Braidwood motel owner Vinod Patel wanted answers should
potential guests ask him about the incidents.

“I wanted to check into how often you guys have those outages
here, how long they last, and stuff like that, so I can answer
questions for people to stay in the motel more,” he noted.

Coal City resident Bob Hamilton said one question brought him to
the Community Night.

“And that is, how do we get to the point where we are today
where we have a roomful of people explaining it away — not away,
but explaining the problem? Some kind of action should be taken
by someone sooner than this,” he said.

“What I’m really interested in is this — a solution to the
problem to make us never have more problems. Seems like all
there is in the news lately is the same problem in every power
plant they own.”

Hamilton said he wanted to hear about the next step.

“I haven’t heard the solution. I’ve heard two proposed
solutions, but it seems like somebody was trying to keep it
close to the vest, and that’s not really a good way for Exelon
to present itself,” he said.

“We’ve been neighbors for years. They’ve hired a lot of people
in the community and done a lot of good things, but I think this
is going to take a lot of the trust of the people from them.”

“If they have this problem, what else do they have they think is
kind of OK, and they’re going to tell us later,” he added. “I’m
just concerned that they get on top of the problem, and let’s
just move on, and let’s assure everybody that everything’s fine.”

Larry Agner of Bolingbrook came to observe.

“I don’t know enough yet to give an opinion,” he noted. “It’s an
issue, and has to be taken care of.”

   Morris Daily Herald • 1804 N. Division St. • Morris, Illinois 
60450 (815) 942-3221 • (800) 215-9778 
*****************************************************************
 62 Nevada Appeal: Yucca Project Under Stop-Work Order Following Disclosure Of More 
Discrepancies

Vol. 3, No. 9                            

March 1, 2006 Nevada's Online State News Journal             

This Following A DOE Report Saying Project Is Continuing Under 
"Good Science"

On February 17 the Department of Energy (DOE) offered what they 
called a "Technical Report" in which it was alleged that the 
operation at Yucca Mountain was operating with "technical 
soundness of infiltration modeling work performed by the U.S. 
Geological Survey (USGS) employees." Nevada's congressional 
delegation immediately responded in the most bitter of language. 
Within days of the first announcement that praised work that has 
been alleged to have been falsified, it was disclosed that a 
stop-work order had been placed on the Yucca project by the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

Regarding the "Technical Report" Nevada Congressman Jim Gibbons 
(R) said, "This report is an insult to the people of Nevada. This 
report just shows that the DOE has no credibility when it comes 
to sound science." Regarding the allegedly falsified documents, 
Gibbons said, "The e-mails sent between federal workers indicated 
disturbing flaws and pressure to make their science match a 
desired outcome, namely proving the safety of Yucca Mountain." 
Gibbons said the report does not even address "this apparent 
breach of scientific integrity."

Nevada Congressman Jon Porter (R) joined the chorus in mocking 
the DOE report. "Today's report should come as a surprise to no 
one, as it's been proven time and time again that the DOE will do 
anything and everything to justify the Yucca Mountain Project." 
Porter has been in a long-term fight with DOE to get 
documentation on his investigation of the alleged falsified 
e-mails.

"My investigation into the Yucca Mountain Project as Chairman of 
the Federal Workforce and Agency Organization Subcommittee has 
yielded significant evidence which points to a severely flawed 
quality assurance process." Porter's investigation hinges on 
water infiltration studies and the documents from the USGS seem 
to indicate that one set of books were set up for quality 
assurance while a second set of books were the actual findings. 
It is this alleged falsification of information that is at the 
heart of DOE's so-called quality assurance assurances. It is the 
quality assurance program that DOE is touting in the "Technical 
Report."

A press release dated February 17, 2006 says in part, "Although 
the report's findings indicate that the infiltration rate 
estimates are corroborated and consistent with other 
independently derived work, (DOE) will replace or supplement the 
infiltration modeling work as needed and review or verify the 
supporting documentation."

Just one week later, reports out of Washington indicated that the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) had found other possibly 
falsified or at least flawed reports were issued dealing with 
humidity and its effects on the canisters holding the high level 
nuclear waste. It appears that when the testing was done the 
agency was using non-calibrated gauges. The stop-work order was 
issued on January 30, but just now made public.

Water mitigation was at the heart of the alleged falsified USGS 
documents, and now DOE tells us that humidity testing was done 
with non-calibrated instruments. Nevada Nuclear Projects Director 
Bob Loux said, "This strikes right in the heart of the whole 
corrosion issue. If some of the data is suspect, it's huge." He 
went on to indicate that if this very sensitive part of the 
quality assurance program was inept, does that mean that many 
more parts of the program have either been falsified or doctored, 
or have other procedures been committed with less than "good 
science?"

It was determined not too long ago that the casks holding the 
nuclear waste would be most apt to fail because of water 
mitigation after between 40,000 years and 80,000 years. What 
hasn't been answered following this latest disclosure that has 
led to a stop-work order, was that determined through flawed 
science using non-calibrated instruments? Scientists have said 
that water mitigation during the first several thousand years 
would be converted to steam or at least dense humidity by the 
heat generated from the stored nuclear waste. Now, NRC tells us 
that the instruments used to test the casks for humidity failure 
were not calibrated to do the testing.

There are two questions as pointed out by the Nevada Nuclear 
Projects Agency. What really is the corrosion rate of the casks 
since the USGS e-mails that indicate falsification of records and 
what will the affect of long-term humidity be on those casks? 
Loux has questioned the repository design in the past and says 
these latest failures by DOE back up his thoughts.

Porter said, "Based on these flaws, considering any part of the 
project's justification as 'sound science' is absurd and an 
affront to Nevadans." He went on to say, "Their best course of 
action would be to scrap the entire Yucca Mountain Project."

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), the group representing the 
nuclear power industry is calling for increases in storage 
capacity at Yucca Mountain. They are saying that the storage 
limit is an artificial limit imposed by Congress and needs to be 
increased to meet the needs of the industry. More high level 
nuclear waste is developed yearly. NEI says as nuclear energy 
production increases, the waste factor will increase as well, and 
there won't be storage capacity.

It is the contract between the federal government and nuclear 
energy producers signed in 1982 that creates the concept of the 
Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository. The federal government 
made itself responsible for storage of the industry waste. There 
is a bill before congress now that would nullify that contract 
and calls for the nuclear waste to be stored at the production 
sites. A part of the legislation also calls for the waste to be 
reprocessed and the resultant product to be reused. Many in 
congress are coming to the conclusion that Yucca Mountain was ill 
conceived to begin with, and is not the answer to nuclear waste 
storage.

The DOE has yet to submit its licensing request and is already 
years behind schedule and billions of dollars over the original 
budget.    
*****************************************************************
 63 Ensign: ENSIGN TESTIFIES ABOUT â€œJUNK SCIENCEâ€ AT YUCCA MOUNTAIN

United States Senator John Ensign
 
: 03/01/2006
 				 				 
Ensign, during testimony today before the Senate Environment and
Public Works Committee, criticized the Environmental Protection
Agency for the agencyâ€™s efforts to establish safety standards
for Yucca Mountain. Senator Ensignâ€™s statement to the
committee is below: 

Mr. Chairman, 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the second proposed
rule concerning Yucca Mountain radiation standards. This rule,
on its face, does not make sense. And the closer one looks, the
worse it appears. 

The EPA found itself in a difficult position. The original EPA
Yucca rule had been thrown out by a federal court, which found
its 10,000 year compliance period was not consistent with
recommendations by the National Academy of Sciences. 

The EPA could have simply modified its rule by extending it to
cover the time of peak radiation exposure as required by the
Court. We know why the EPA did not do this. It didnâ€™t do it
because Yucca Mountain could not be engineered to meet that
standard. Yucca Mountain could not be built. 

So instead of putting forth a common sense solution, the EPA
proposed the weakest peak dose standard in the world, a proposal
opposed by the National Council of Radiation Protection. Again,
when it comes to Yucca Mountain, sound science has been
rejected. 

There are those who believe Congress should ignore
recommendations by the National Academy of Sciences and simply
lower the safety standards for the storage of the planetâ€™s
most deadly material. Senator Reid and I are committed to making
sure that doesnâ€™t happen. 

Mr. Chairman, Yucca Mountain continues to be plagued with
problems and delays. The Department of Energy no longer even
pretends to know when Yucca could open or how much it will cost.
DOE once again has stopped work at Yucca Mountain after an NRC
audit revealed that several years of data collection was done
with equipment that had not been calibrated. This data is
critical to health and safety because it relates to how water
could enter the repository and cause corrosion of the nuclear
waste storage casks. 

We need to find another solution to our countryâ€™s nuclear
waste problem. We need to amend the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of
1982 to require the DOE to take title of all spent nuclear fuel.
And we need to invest in new technologies at our national labs
to recycle the waste without producing weapons-grade plutonium
as a byproduct. Transmutation technology, which transforms
radioactive products into less dangerous materials and produces
electricity as a result, is quickly emerging as a viable
alternative. 

Mr. Chairman, this new proposed radiation standard, like so much
of the so-called science at Yucca Mountain, is a farce. The EPA
was forced to create this ridiculous standard to make Yucca
Mountain look scientifically feasible on paper. It is not. It is
a dangerous, misguided project fraught with junk science and
fraudulent data. 

*****************************************************************
 64 KLASTV.com: Committee Reviews Yucca Mountain

The future of the Yucca Mountain nuclear storage project is
being discussed by the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works. 

The committee heard from Nevada's two senators on Wednesday.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and Republican Senator John
Ensign both discussed the problems of falsified data and
mismanagement at the site just 100 miles outside Las Vegas.

They also pushed an alternative to Yucca Mountain that would
store nuclear waste in dry casks around the United States.

"We've spent upwards of 10 billion dollars on nothing. We have
nothing for this and I would respectfully submit, that this is
not a game saying we have winners and losers. Let's leave it on
site, dry cask storage is the way to go, it will be safe for at
least 50 years, Sen. Harry Reid, (D) Nevada. 

The Environment and Public Works Committee will now take the
testimony into consideration before making a decision on the
Yucca Mountain Project.   

  
.gif">    All content © Copyright 2000 - 2006 WorldNow and KLAS.
All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 65 Comments Needed: PressZoom.com: Management of low level radioactive waste   

Global News Service - 

Today is March 2, 2006   

  Low level radioactive waste includes paper, plastics, and scrap 
metal mainly from the operation of nuclear facilities. Smaller 
amounts are also produced by a range of non-nuclear industries 
such as hospitals, research and educational facilities and the 
oil and gas industries.     

(PressZoom) - Proposals have been published today for the
long-term management of solid low-level radioactive waste.

Low level radioactive waste includes paper, plastics, and scrap
metal mainly from the operation of nuclear facilities. Smaller
amounts are also produced by a range of non-nuclear industries
such as hospitals, research and educational facilities and the
oil and gas industries.

Most of these wastes are currently sent to the national low
level waste disposal facility near Drigg in Cumbria.

The review of low level radioactive waste policy will examine
options to:

minimise waste
manage very low level wastes more appropriately
reduce transport of low level waste
Environment Minister Ross Finnie said:

"We are committed to managing safely the legacy of Scotland's
nuclear industry and the low level radioactive wastes that are
generated from other users of radioactivity.

"We would encourage all those with an interest to respond to
this consultation."

The consultation period runs until May 31, 2006

The consultation proposals have been prepared jointly by the UK
Government, the Scottish Executive, The Welsh Assembly
Government and the Northern Ireland Department of the
Environment.

Most LLW has been sent to the national LLW disposal facility
located close to Drigg in Cumbria. The national facility is
filling up and new options for the long term management of these
wastes are needed.

The latest United Kingdom Radioactive Waste Inventory, published
last month, estimates that some 21 thousand cubic metres of low
level radioactive waste ( LLW ), about 31 thousand tonnes, are
awaiting disposal. A further two million cubic metres, about 2.8
million tonnes, of low level waste, such as soil, building
rubble and items such as ducting, piping and reinforcement, will
arise from decommissioning activities on nuclear sites.

Although most waste will come from nuclear sites, Government is
commissioning a study on the extent and geographical
distribution of waste from non-nuclear industry producers.

Some LLW, which is at the lower end of the activity
concentration range, has been disposed of at its point of
arising and, in small amounts, to some specified landfill sites.
Very low activity LLW ( VLLW ) has been disposed to conventional
landfills where the waste is diluted by significant quantities
of other non-radioactive wastes. Incineration is also used for
some combustible waste, particularly clinical waste from
hospitals. A decision to stop plans to move low level
radioactive waste from Dounreay to Cumbria was announced in May
2005.

Scottish Ministers directed SEPA to refuse an application from
UKAEA for authorisation to dispose of solid waste to the
National Low Level Waste Facility near Drigg. The decision
reflected a widespread view that the best practicable
environmental option for this LLW was that it should be dealt
with at Dounreay, where it is produced. Further information is
available at: 

The NDA is a cross-border public authority, set up under the
Energy Act 2004. The Scottish Ministers have a key role in
approving its Strategies and Plans as they affect Scotland. The
NDA is responsible for the National LLW facility near Drigg and
most of the UK's LLW arising from decommissioningof nuclear
sites. Further information is available at: 

Copies of the consultation are available at:

Copies of the consultation are available at: online or can be
requested from John Howley, Radioactive Substances Division,
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 3/G25
Ashdown House, 123 Victoria Street, London SW1E 6DE or
john.howley@defra.gsi.gov.uk


  Submitted by Scottish Executive   
  
  Release Date   

  This news item was released on 2006-03-02. Please make sure to
visit the official company or organization web site to learn
more about the original release date. See our disclaimer for
more information.   

*****************************************************************
 66 TownOnline.com: Letter: Perchlorate response

Opinion &Letters: 

Tewksbury Advocate  >  Opinion &Letters  >  RSS Feed

Thursday, March 2, 2006 

Id like to respond to the recent letter on perchlorate submitted
by Betsey Hodges of the Council on Water Quality, (Feb. 23) a
public relations operation financed by aerospace industries.

    In regards to the linkage between perchlorate and thyroid
cancer, I would like to clarify that the concentration of
thyroid cancer in my hometown of Rancho Cordova, California
corresponds to a dual exposure to both perchlorate from solid
rockets (the identified issue in Tewksbury) and
nitrosodimethylamine from liquid rockets (the identified issue
in Wilmington).

    The synergistic effect between goitrogens like perchlorate
and methylating agents like nitrosamines is well-documented in
Japanese thyroid cancer experiments conducted on rats. As for
the human population, proof or disproof of causation between
environmental perchlorate and thyroid cancer awaits evaluation
of the toxic releases into the San Fernando Valley from the
now-closed Rockefeller-Marquardt liquid rocket plant and
Lockheed Missile Systems solid rocket operations at Van Nuys
airport. Macks Cancer in the Urban Environment, an atlas of the
Los Angeles County cancer registry, documents a thyroid cancer
cluster surrounding the airport, the Sepulveda Basin into which
the effluent from the factories drained, and the community of
Encino on the hillsides on the south edge of the basin.

    If perchlorate contributed to these thyroid cancers, it was
not the 2 ppb that raised the alarm in Tewksbury recently, but
exposures hundreds or thousands of times higher than that in
conjunction with other chemicals. There are other reasons to be
concerned about perchlorate in the environment in addition to
the patterns of thyroid cancer and altered brain structure of
exposed rat pups that have been in the news. Perchlorate in
doses relevant to occupational and high-end environmental
exposures opens calcium channels in some cells, an effect that
promotes the progress of tumors of nerve sheaths (neurolemomas,
related to the more common schwannomas and meningiomas) found to
be elevated around a rocket plant in Santa Clarita. Persons with
a slight tendency to acidity or low bicarbonate in their blood
such as diabetics, premature infants, or infants with diarrhea
may have a diminished capacity to excrete perchlorate, and thus
be more vulnerable. Perchlorate also concentrates in the lining
of the throat and lungs where it has the potential to compromise
the innate immune system at a vital portal into the body.

Lastly, perchlorate accumulates in the skin where the innate 
immune system is important as well, but there is the added risk 
of ultraviolet light energizing the perchlorate into a reactive 
state. In almost all cases the characterization of perchlorate as 
"rocket fuel" likely to blow up at the slightest provocation is 
rhetorical hyperbole -- the possible exception, however, is in 
the skin on a very sunny day. These unpublicized questions about 
perchlorate toxicity have been around for several years. The 
reason these toxicological issues remain unresolved is because 
the aerospace industry that finances almost all perchlorate 
research has taken the toxicological equivalent of the Fifth 
Amendment: they finance feel-good public relations operations 
like the Council on Water Quality rather than fund credible 
science.

    Larry Ladd

    http://www.perchlorate.org

© Copyright of CNC and Herald Interactive Advertising Systems, 
Inc
*****************************************************************
 67 KIFI: Most Are Happy with Idaho National Lab

www.localnews8.com   
      
 March 2, 2006

 The Idaho National Laboratory is touting a new survey that says
most Idahoans are happy with the lab.

Here are some of the results from the Boise State University
survey.

Out of the 502 Idahoans who were interviewed, 69 percent had a
general awareness of the INL. Of those, 71 percent had a
favorable impression.

But only 49 percent of people said they are satisfied with the
level of information they receive from the lab.

John Walsh of the INL says one way to improve the INLâ€™s image
is to just keep the same name.

â€œI think 20 years from now Idaho National Laboratory will be
the name everyone knows us by. By keeping that name, finally
it's going to help us promote ourselves,â€ said Walsh.

The survey questioned people from the entire state of Idaho.
Sixty percent say they support the INLâ€™s nuclear research
mission.
 
*****************************************************************
 68 DOE: U.S. and India Reach Historic Agreement on FutureGen Project

  March 2, 2006
 
India becomes the first nation to accept U.S. invitation to 
participate in new clean coal project 

WASHINGTON, DC  President George W. Bush announced today that
India will become the first country to participate on the
government steering committee for the U.S. Department of
Energys FutureGen project  an initiative to build and operate
the worlds first coal-based power plant that removes and
sequesters carbon dioxide (CO2) while it produces electricity
and hydrogen.  As a partner, the Indian government will
contribute $10 million to the FutureGen Initiative and Indian
companies will also be invited to participate in the private
sector segment. 

We welcome India in to our effort to build the first
zero-emissions coal power plant, Secretary of Energy Samuel W.
Bodman said.  The success of the FutureGen Initiative will lead
to the effective and environmentally clean use of coal to power
economies around the globe. 

FutureGen will use coal  a low-cost, abundant, and
geographically diverse energy resource  to globally supply
clean energy.  The FutureGen Initiative is a 10-year effort
announced by President Bush in 2003 to integrate advanced coal
gasification technology, hydrogen from coal, power generation,
carbon dioxide capture, and geologic storage.  

Secretary Bodman has invited government leaders of the
multi-national Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum (CSLF) to
become active participants in the FutureGen project.  The CSLF
is a voluntary climate initiative that includes 20 nations and
the European Commission.  CSLF members are engaged in
cooperative technology development aimed at enabling the early
reduction and steady elimination of carbon dioxide.  India is
the first CSLF member to participate in FutureGen, and it builds
upon the U.S.India Energy Dialogue, launched in May 2005.  That
agreement aims to increase U.S.India trade and investment in
the Indian energy sector by bringing together public agencies
and private industries to develop secure, clean, reliable and
affordable sources of energy.  

FutureGen is scheduled to begin operations around 2012 and will
be the first plant in the world to produce both electricity and
commercial-grade hydrogen from coal simultaneously.  Virtually
every aspect of the 275 megawatt prototype plant will be based
on cutting-edge technology.  Technologies planned for testing at
the prototype plant could ultimately lead to power plants that
are fuel-flexible and capable of multi-product output. 
Eventually, the technologies could provide electric power
generation with no emissions, including carbon dioxide, at a
market competitive cost.  FutureGen will emit virtually no
airborne pollutants; no wastewater will be discharged; solid
wastes will be converted to commercially valuable,
environmentally benign products and carbon gases will be
captured before they escape into the atmosphere. 

DOEs recently released FY 2007 budget request supports the key
technologies needed for FutureGen.  These include carbon
sequestration, membrane technologies for oxygen and hydrogen
separation, advanced turbines, fuel cells, coal-to-hydrogen
conversion gasifier related technologies, and other
technologies. 

FutureGen is a public-private partnership involving DOE and a
broad, open consortium of industrial coal producers and electric
utilities (the FutureGen Industrial Alliance), as well as state
governments and international participants.  The FutureGen
project will be supported by the leading U.S. sources of
technology and innovation: universities, national laboratories,
and industry. 

Media contact(s):
 Craig Stevens, 202/586-4940     [ ]   

  U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585
 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 | 
*****************************************************************
 69 DOE: North American Energy Work Group Releases Updated Trilateral 
Energy Report
 
  March 2, 2006
 
WASHINGTON , D.C.  U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman today
released a report entitled North America  The Energy Picture
II, which continues to show that North America is one of the
worlds most important regions for energy  producing about
one-fourth of that global energy supply and consuming about
one-third of the worlds commercial energy. The report was
created as a joint effort under the North American Energy
Working Group (NAEWG) of the trilateral Security and Prosperity
Partnership (SPP) represented by the three countries.      

This impressive report demonstrates the strength and vitality of 
the North American energy system, Secretary Bodman said.  I 
look forward to meeting with Minister Lunn and Secretary Canales 
this summer to discuss and review our progress to secure North 
Americas energy future.             

The latest edition of North America  The Energy Picture II is a 
result of the ongoing participation of the three countries in the 
NAEWG.  The NAEWG, established in 2001, seeks to foster 
communication and cooperation among the governments and the 
energy sectors on energy-related matters of common interest, and 
to enhance North American energy trade and interconnections.  

In 2005 NAEWG became part of the SPP.   

The SPPs energy work plan reflects a range of other issues for 
cooperation and collaboration, including electricity, oil sands, 
natural gas, science and technology, nuclear, energy efficiency, 
regulatory cooperation, and hydrocarbons.  The SPP strengthens 
North Americas energy markets by working together, according to 
our respective legal frameworks, to increase reliable energy 
supplies for the regions needs and development, by facilitating 
investment in energy infrastructure, technology improvements, 
production and reliable delivery of energy, by enhancing 
cooperation to identify and utilize best practices; and to 
streamline and update regulations by promoting energy efficiency, 
conservation, and technologies like clean coal.   

This follow-up report to the 2002 edition, updates and expands 
upon previous information, presenting economic overviews, energy 
data and descriptions of planned infrastructure and new laws, 
regulations and policies and includes new information on the 
continents expanding liquefied natural gas sector.  

The first report, titled North America  The Energy Picture, 
combined energy data from all three countries in to one report 
for the first time.   North America  The Energy Picture II 
reflects a joint perspective of the national energy departments 
of Canada, Mexico and the United States and serves as a reference 
document for use by government, business and the public.  
Information on each country contained in this document has been 
provided through the relevant countrys national energy 
department, which retains sole responsibility for the information 
on its country.     

North America  The Energy Picture II is available at: 
http://www.pi.energy.gov/pdf/library/NorthAmericaEnergyPictureII. 
pdf

Media contact(s):
 Dan Morales, 202/586-4940     [ ]   

  U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585
 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 | 
*****************************************************************
 70 Idaho Statesman: State presses for nuclear cleanup

03-02-2006       
 
Attorneys say DOE agreed to rid INL of waste
 
Christopher Smith The Associated Press
 
Edition Date: 03-02-2006

State attorneys have asked a federal judge to keep the U.S.
Department of Energy from weaseling out of a 1995 deal to clean
up buried nuclear waste at the Idaho National Laboratory
compound, claiming the agency is guilty of "duplicitous conduct."

The state filed closing arguments late Monday with U.S. District
Judge Edward Lodge, asking him to declare that the agreement to
settle a long-standing legal battle between Idaho and the Energy
Department means what state leaders thought it meant: that DOE
must remove all "transuranic" waste  rags, gloves and dirt
contaminated with radioactive material like plutonium  from the
eastern Idaho nuclear research compound by 2018.

DOE argues that the agreement it signed with the state 11 years
ago only covered transuranic waste that was stored in barrels on
asphalt pads above ground since 1970, not the toxic transuranics
that were put into drums and cardboard boxes and dumped into
pits and trenches for burial between 1954 and 1970.

The federal government will now file its written rebuttal to the
state's closing arguments within the next week. Lodge is
expected to rule by the end of March.

The state has sued DOE over its potential plan to leave tons of
the buried radioactive waste over the Snake River aquifer, which
provides drinking and irrigation water for much of southern
Idaho. DOE argued in court documents that leaving the buried
waste where it is may be safer than trying to exhume it, since
some toxic materials can explode when they come into contact
with oxygen.

Earlier this month, Lodge presided over a five-day bench trial
with more than a dozen witnesses, including former Idaho Govs.
Cecil Andrus and Phil Batt and former Idaho Attorney General
Alan Lance. Lodge ruled in favor of the state in the same case
in 2003, ordering DOE to remove all the transuranics  included
buried waste  stored at INL by 2018. The Bush administration
appealed, and in 2004 the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
overturned Lodge, finding he should have heard more evidence
from both the state and DOE before deciding in favor of the
state.

In their closing arguments, state attorneys told Lodge that
"DOE's claim that the agreement was never intended to cover
buried waste and its attempts to show Idaho knew this (were)
rendered completely implausible by the testimony of DOE's own
witnesses."

The bitter legal showdown over INL cleanup comes as the
Department of Energy has ramped up its processing of nuclear
waste for shipment out of Idaho to an underground dump in New
Mexico and is planning to release a survey that shows most Idaho
residents have a positive attitude toward the nuclear research
compound.

Today, Boise State University and INL will release results of a
statewide survey that measures citizens' perceptions of
activities at the DOE facility near Idaho Falls. INL hired BSU's
Social Science Research Center to conduct the survey.   

*****************************************************************
 71 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Savannah 
 
                         FR Doc E6-2952 
[Federal Register: March 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 41)] 
[Notices] [Page 10663] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02mr06-40]                         
 
River AGENCY: Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
 
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Savannah River. 
The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 Stat. 
770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in 
the Federal Register.
 
 
DATES: Monday, March 27, 2006, 1 p.m.-5:15 p.m., Tuesday, March 
28, 2006, 8:30 a.m.-4 p.m.
 
ADDRESSES: Columbia Marriott, 1200 Hampton Street, Columbia, SC 
29201.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerri Flemming, Closure Project 
Office, Department of Energy Savannah River Operations Office, 
P.O. Box A, Aiken, SC, 29802; Phone: (803) 952-7886.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management, and related 
activities.
 
Tentative Agenda Monday, March 27, 2006: 1 p.m.--Combined 
Committee Session 5:15 p.m.--Adjourn Tuesday, March 28, 2006: 
8:30 a.m.--Approval of Minutes, Agency Updates 9 a.m.--Public 
Comment Session 9:15 a.m.--Chair and Facilitator Update 9:45 
a.m.--Nuclear Materials Committee Report 10:45 a.m.--Strategic 
and Legacy Management Committee Report 11:45 a.m.--Public Comment 
Session 12 p.m.--Lunch Break 1 p.m.--Administrative Committee 
Report. Bylaws Amendment Proposal 1:30 p.m.--Waste Management 
Committee Report 2:30 p.m.--Facility Disposition and Site 
Remediation Committee Report 3:30 p.m.--Public Comment Session 4 
p.m.--Adjourn If needed, time will be allotted after public 
comments for items added to the agenda and administrative 
details. A final agenda will be available at the meeting Monday, 
March 27, 2006.
 
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
 
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or 
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements 
pertaining to agenda items should contact Gerri Flemming's office 
at the address or telephone listed above. Requests must be 
received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision 
will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The 
Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the 
meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of 
business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be 
provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
 
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of 
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes 
will also be available by writing to Gerri Flemming, Department 
of Energy Savannah River Operations Office, P.O. Box A, Aiken, SC 
29802, or by calling her at (803) 952-7886.
 
Issued at Washington, DC, on February 24, 2006.
 
Carol Matthews, Acting Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-2952 Filed 3-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 72 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho 
 
                         FR Doc E6-2953 
[Federal Register: March 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 41)] 
[Notices] [Page 10663-10664] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02mr06-41]                         
 
National Laboratory AGENCY: Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice of open meeting and retreat.
 
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Idaho National 
Laboratory. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 
86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be 
announced in the Federal Register.
 
 
DATES: Monday, March 20, 2006, 4 p.m.-7 p.m. Tuesday, March 21, 
2006, 8 a.m.-6 p.m. Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. 
Opportunities for public participation will be held Tuesday, 
March 21, from 12:15 to 12:30 p.m. and 5:45 to 6 p.m.; and 
Wednesday, March 22, from 11:45 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 4 to 4:15 
p.m. Additional time may be made available for public comment 
during the presentations.
 
These times are subject to change as the meeting progresses, 
depending on the extent of comment offered.
 
 
ADDRESSES: Shilo Inn, 1586 Blue Lakes Boulevard North, Twin 
Falls, ID 83301.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon A. Brennan, Federal 
Coordinator, Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, 1955 
Fremont Avenue, MS-1216, Idaho Falls, ID 83415. Phone (208) 
526-3993; Fax (208) 526-1926 or e-mail:  or visit the Board's 
Internet home page at: .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
 
[[Page 10664]] Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is 
to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental 
restoration, waste management, and related activities.
 
Tentative Topics (agenda topics may change up to the day of the 
meeting; please contact Shannon A. Brennan for the most current 
agenda): Board Retreat, Monday, March 20, 2006.
 
Open Meeting, Tuesday, March 21, 2006 and Wednesday, March 22, 
2006.
 
Idaho Cleanup Project Environmental Management Cleanup Status 
Report.
 
Fiscal Year 2007 Budget.
 
Long-Term Plans for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management.
 
Radioactive Waste Management Complex Stakeholder Involvement 
Discussion.
 
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
 
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or 
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral 
presentations pertaining to agenda items should contact Shannon 
A. Brennan at the address or telephone number listed above. The 
request must be received five days prior to the meeting and 
reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in 
the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to 
conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly 
conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment 
will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their 
comments.
 
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of 
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, between 9 a.m. 
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. 
Minutes will also be available by writing to Shannon A. Brennan, 
Federal Coordinator, at the address and phone number listed 
above.
 
Issued at Washington, DC on February 24, 2006.
 
Carol Matthews, Acting Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-2953 Filed 3-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 73 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah
 
                         FR Doc E6-2954 
[Federal Register: March 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 41)] 
[Notices] [Page 10664] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr02mr06-42]                         
 
AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE).
 
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
 
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EMSSAB), Paducah. The 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) 
requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the 
Federal Register.
 
 
DATES: Thursday, March 16, 2006; 5:30 p.m.-9 p.m.
 
ADDRESSES: 111 Memorial Drive, Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky 
42001.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William E. Murphie, Deputy 
Designated Federal Officer, Department of Energy 
Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office, 1017 Majestic Drive, Suite 
200, Lexington, Kentucky 40513, (859) 219-4001.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management and related 
activities.
 
Tentative Agenda 5:30 p.m.                          Informal 
Discussion 6 p.m.                             Call to Order 
Introductions Review of Agenda Approval of February Minutes 6:15 
p.m.                          Deputy Designated Federal Officer's 
Comments 6:35 p.m.                          Federal Coordinator's 
Comments 6:40 p.m.                          Ex-officios' Comments 
6:50 p.m.                          Public Comments and Questions 
7 p.m.                             Task Forces/Presentations 
Wildlife Management Area-- Tim Kreher Water Disposition/Water 
Quality Task Force--End State Maps 8 p.m.                             
Public Comments and Questions 8:10 p.m.                          
Break 8:20 p.m.                          Administrative Issues 
Preparation for April Presentation Budget Review Review of 
Workplan Review Next Agenda 8:30 p.m.                          
Review of Action Items 8:35 p.m.                          
Subcommittee Report Executive Committee 8:50 p.m.                          
Final Comments 9 p.m.                             Adjourn Public 
Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
 
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or 
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements 
pertaining to agenda items should contact David Dollins at the 
address listed below or by telephone at (270) 441-6819. Requests 
must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable 
provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. 
The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the 
meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of 
business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be 
provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
 
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of 
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 
4 p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will also 
be available at the Department of Energy's Environmental 
Information Center and Reading Room at 115 Memorial Drive, 
Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., on 
Monday through Friday or by writing to David Dollins, Department 
of Energy, Paducah Site Office, Post Office Box 1410, MS-103, 
Paducah, Kentucky 42001 or by calling him at (270) 441-6819.
 
Issued at Washington, DC, on February 23, 2006.
 
Carol Matthews, Acting Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-2954 Filed 3-1-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 74 KTVB.COM: Survey of local perceptions of INL to be released

Boise Idaho News, 

11:17 AM MST on Thursday, March 2, 2006 

Associated Press 

BOISE -- Officials with Boise State University and the Idaho
National Laboratory are expected to release a survey today that
measures Idaho residents' perceptions of the federal nuclear
research facility. 

The Department of Energy facility near Idaho Falls is at the
center of a conflict between the state and the federal
government over the cleanup of buried nuclear waste. 

Some of the work being done at the Idaho National Laboratory
includes a program known as the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative,
an effort to develop new ways to reprocess high-level nuclear
waste into less hazardous materials. 

©2006 KTVB-TV   
    
*****************************************************************
 75 UPI: D.C. school teaches A-bomb construction

United Press International - NewsTrack - 

3/2/2006 2:12:00 PM -

WASHINGTON, March 2 (UPI) -- White House officials were startled
to learn Georgetown University in Washington offers a course on
how to build a nuclear weapon. 

The "How to Build a Nuclear Bomb" class at the university's
Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service is taught by Charles
Ferguson, a physicist, former naval officer and scholar who
worked at the State Department's non-proliferation bureau and at
Los Alamos National Laboratory. 

The class is geared to students pursuing careers in the
intelligence community, the foreign service or specializing in
non-proliferation issues, The Washington Post reported. 

However, an unidentified White House official was startled to
hear of the course. 

"It definitely sounds like there's a proliferation concern
there," the official said. 

Ferguson said while his course gets technical, it stops short of
precise details on a bomb's construction. 

"I'm not giving away the family secrets or the crown jewels.
What I've learned is through open sources," he said.

© Copyright 2006 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************